Bynum clarifying: "When I said I did not know where to go, I really meant I wasn't familiar with the nuances of execution against this particular zone.
Also, when I told Nash during the game that he could "eat a , like your crackhead mom does for coke money", I really meant that he's a fierce compe or, and he's an example of makes the NBA so fun to watch."
lighten up, I know a girl who was sexually assaulted and she even makes jokes about it. It's not like Cobbler is the first person to call mogro out for his royally obnoxious superiority complex and how he sounds like a 16 year old using fancy words he learned while studying for the SATs.
Anyway, trolling aside, it's important to note that it's not enough to coach zones by just giving theoretical lectures to the players. Nobody can successfully install a good zone offense without actually coaching it in practices. I understand why Phil Jackson, like many other NBA coaches, don't want to lose much time with it, but a dependable zone offense is something that takes away work and time.
Never said it. I said the squinting eyes thing was an acceptable joke. Funny comming from someone who make light of child abuse no?
And besides, I can laugh at racial, handicap, sexual, religious, and all off color jokes. If you do not have the ability to know the difference with making light of something and reality... then so be it. I can.
How's your quitter boy VC doing?
Last edited by cobbler; 05-25-2010 at 12:14 AM.
Maybe HarlemHeat should attend a workshop about making light of things
mogrovejo early on in the discussion not knowing what is meant to have the big man attack the zone in the middle. Asking for explanation. And then consequently dismissing attacking the zone in the middle.
Subsequently, mogrovejo after contemplation acknowledging that attacking the middle "isn't incorrect" but just a "banality" or "generality" in an attempt to make it appear he knew what "attacking the middle of the zone" meant. And then a little pot shot insult to ensure he feels like he still has the upper hand in the debate power dynamic. He doesn't appreciate "pathetic re ness."
But then at the end questioning what "attacking the middle" means.
Finally coming to grips after getting a more detailed explanation what "attacking the middle of the zone" consists of, something he asked to be explained further, mogrovejo simply acting an ass and saying "every 14 year old kid who plays basketball knows that," despite the fact he initially didn't know what I meant when I said attack the middle of the zone.
And then mogrovejo reading Andrew Bynum's mind and translating his quote into some blah blah blah about execution...
While HarlemHeat may have said that Cobbler was making light of rape, what he really meant to say was that Cobbler did not execute the joke well.Maybe HarlemHeat should attend a workshop about making light of things
But he attended a workshop
Well in that case, maybe Cobbler should attend a workshop about executing jokes.
Here's my first paragraph in this post:
If it was that easy to get inside a zone, nobody would use them. Bigs can get position in the middle of it, but that de per se isn't enough to force a zone to collapse. I'm pretty sure Bynum knows where to go in a zone offense.
I mean, are you trying to troll or you really can't get what was the point of my questions? Honest question here, now I'm curious.
This one is perennially butthurt. No cure for him till the end of his days.
Bynum didn't know where to go against the zone. That's the point.
That's what is ridiculous. It was not about execution. Not about "when" to go where. He didn't know WHERE he was supposed to be.
Yeah I'm butt hurt. I should attend a workshop about not being butthurt
Btw, good use of the word "perennially", I had to study that one when I took the SATs!
Where he was supposed to be when? Do you think he should stay in the same spot the entire possession?
You don't know where he was supposed to be either, you've said he should flash into the high post.
http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/S...layoffs-052310
How the Lakers should break Phoenix' zone by Charley Rosen, Phil Jackson's butt buddy:
After trying to get early offense before the zone can set, Rosen even specifically states that this is the main way to break the zone and said it was the strategy used in the third quarter to break the zone in game 3. Rosen sucks of the Phil Jackson . He intimately knows what Phil Jackson does on offense and his basketball strategies. He says that's how the Lakers beat the zone.The Lakers’ failure to solve the zone got them frustrated and confused and negatively affected every aspect of their game — particularly their defense. Credit Alvin Gentry’s willingness (born of desperation) to gamble on the zone for limiting the defending champs to a mere 109 points after they’d averaged a colossal 126 during the first two games.
Here’s how to beat a 2-3 zone:
* The first plan of attack is to furiously push the ball over the timeline with the aim of creating good looks before the zone has a chance to get set. This is something that the Lakers really didn’t look to accomplish. Instead, they were overly cautious in running situations and were too eager to pull the ball out and organize their offense.
* Get the ball into a good-passing big man (like Pau Gasol) at, or near, the middle of the stripe. The idea is to put pressure on a specific interior defender to guard either the ball or the baseline. If the zoner under attack moves up and pressures the ball, a wingman can then take advantage of the vacated space by cutting behind the zone. Whatever success the Lakers did have against the 2-3 alignment usually resulted from this strategy.
* Delivering the ball to Kobe at an elbow-extended likewise compels the baseline zoners to commit themselves one way or the other.
* The gaps between the two top-most defenders, or between one top defender and the strong-side wing defender, are usually large enough for someone like Kobe to penetrate if the ball is quickly reversed to him.
* Moreover, screens can be set on the guards that, if properly executed, can create both shooting and penetrating lanes. The penetrations will likely be limited, but can still facilitate drive-and-kick opportunities.
* Overloading one side of the court and then quickly reversing the ball can also generate open looks, simply because the ball can be passed from point A to Point B faster than a defender can travel the same distance.
* The easy way to overcome zones is to routinely knock down outside jumpers. Even so, the ball must be rapidly moved from east-to-west as well as from north-to-south to open the best possible shots.
Give that er a Spur.
Basic half court set. One big stationed on the low block, the other big stationed around the high post. Ball swings on the perimeter. Once it gets to the extended elbow on whichever side, the big on the opposite low block flashes to the middle. If the pass doesn't go in, the bigs switch positions, ball gets swung to the other side, the other big flashes to the high post. It's basic high-low post action.
Bynum didn't flash to the high post. Remember, he didn't know where he was supposed to be.
This is actually more utilized by the Lakers when Pau and Odom are in the front court and Pau plays center. You often see that high-low post action where Pau gets the ball in the high post and Odom ends up cutting underneath for an easy basket.
Bynum didn't know "where" to be.
Rosen is basketball illiterate. But are you now saying that both Gasol and Bynum should be in the same spot? Wow, you're truly revolutionary with your thoughts about zone offense. Maybe you should write a book, I've never seen such a thing being argued - move two players to teh same spot of the floor. That's a radically different concept of spacing!
PF and C are interchangeable positions in this scenario. They exchange high-low post positions depending which side the ball is rotated to.
And as I mentioned in my subsequent post, Pau often is the big flashing to the post when Lamar Odom is in the game playing the 4-spot.
Rosen is a dip , but one thing he does actually know is how Phil Jackson coaches.
Yeah, it's a typical triangle set.
Neither did the other guys, they all sucked attacking the zone and Bynum was barely on court.
That's a typical offense against zone. Any team, high school, college, professional, even not running a triangle offense, uses that high-low set against a zone. It has triangle principles. It's not a typical Phil Jackson triangle.Yeah, it's a typical triangle set.
Which again begs the question why Andrew Bynum didn't know where to be.
That's why it's ridiculous that Bynum didn't know where he was supposed to be.
Neither did the other guys, they all sucked attacking the zone and Bynum was barely on court.
No one else said they didn't know where to go. Bynum was the only one. You tried to forced that Pau Gasol quote to fit that argument but it didn't. He merely said they weren't used to playing against the zone. He didn't say he didn't know where to be.
dogmatic
You're wrong. Re-watch the game. Bynum actually did what he wanted him to do. They just lacked execution as a team in most sets, they lacked purpose and certainty on where to go at, when to move, when to pass.
See Bynum doing the typical move to the elbow once the ball swing is done.
If it was as simple as re s believe, everything would be okay - he knew where he had to be.
But this was terrible zone offense.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
