In the second quarter, after hitting their first two shots not against the zone, the Suns started playing zone, and the Lakers went 0-for-3 from the field until Bynum was subbed out.
What question? I've already said: Bynum flashing out to the 3 point line was the consequence of Kobe's drive and absolutely the right play to do - fill the empty space.
I missed your answer: you do believe Pau Gasol doesn't know how to attack zones as well?! The same Pau Gasol who spent his formative years playing against zones?
Wow, this guy is amazing!!
Someone give this man a NBA head-coaching job!
edit: Bynum popped out BEFORE Kobe started his drive.What question? I've already said: Bynum flashing out to the 3 point line was the consequence of Kobe's drive and absolutely the right play to do - fill the empty space.
I missed your answer: you do believe Pau Gasol doesn't know how to attack zones as well?! The same Pau Gasol who spent his formative years playing against zones?
Wow, this guy is amazing!!
Someone give this man a NBA head-coaching job!
If you truly believe that Andrew Bynum knew what he was doing and where he was supposed to be and made absolutely the right play to pop out, I don't even know what to say. That's just plain dumb. He looked lost and had no idea what he was doing. It should be apparent to anyone who knows even very little about basketball.
Your question is moot. In the clip where you saying Bynum absolutely made the right play popping out, Gasol wasn't playing the post in that set. As you've pointed out, the Lakers have a 1 down and 4 perimeter in their zone offense. Gasol isn't playing the 1 down. Gasol was fine where he was at except for the fact that Artest overloaded that side and Andrew Bynum ran right in front of him as he was taking a jumpshot.
The ball moved side to side, going through the top of the key, and Gasol stays at the high post instead of dropping down low, as he'd have done if he had a clue about how to attack a zone! It's the middle, attack the middle and don't be lazy!!!! [/Jamstone]
Andrew Bynum absolutely knows what he's doing against the zone in the following clip /mogrovejo
Where does he pop out to the elbow like Bynum did?
I was actually wrong about Bynum going to the low block. That's in a high-low offensive set against the zone where there are two post players. I made a mistake because the Lakers run the 1 down 4 perimeter, not a high-low. Sorry. I apologize.
Pau is moving correctly in that clip. He should be running the free throw line right to left flashing to the side the ball is swung to. That's what Bynum should have been doing except the ball wasn't getting swung back and forth. It swung once and back to the top of the key. But still under no cir stances should he be popping out. Again, it wasn't a consequence to Kobe's drive because Bynum popped out before Kobe started his drive.
No kidding, Einstein?
You've been wrong this entire thread.
What the should he have done? For the 8433843th time. You keep saying he shouldn't have done what he did but you're still to explain what he should have done.
It's starting to look like you simply have no ing clue. Why dont' you just admit it?
I can admit when I am wrong. Why can't you?
Bynum should have done exactly what Pau did in the clip you showed. Stay in the free throw area high post, facing the ball and ready to flash to either side where the ball would be swung. Exactly what Pau was doing in the clip you should.
He should not pop out. Thank you for showing a clip of where Bynum was supposed to be, as opposed to not having any idea what to do and trying to pop out and then getting in Kobe's way and then running around like a two year old playing tag.
Sons, if I have an opinion about football, and Bill Belichick disagrees, I concede defeat.
If I have an opinion about money, and Warren Buffet disagrees, I concede defeat.
Similarly, if I have an opinion about basketball, and mogrovejo
This is amazing.
And for where would Kobe drive?
Is this your "the two players would be in the exact same spot" theory once again? I thought we were already over that.
After 3030 posts and 10 different theories, you're now saying that a player should stay at the free-throw line and move from the left corner to the right corner the entire possession. Does this make any sense? Is this your concept of flashing out to the high post you used so much?
So, now the player flashes out for the hight post from the high post. Then he should flash out to the high posts from the high post and his following action should be flashing out to the high posts. He then resets the action by flashing out to the high post and from the high post he moves to the high post. I mean, when the ball is at the top of the key, should he be at the right high post or left high post?
This makes no sense at all, you're certainly clever enough to see it and it's amazing that you simply refuse to admit it.
You tried to stay true to your stance of "ah, it's simple, I can explain where he should go in a couple of sentences using a few phrases I remember hearing from Hubbie Brown in a broadcast, ah, attack the middle, that was it, and pull a oh, these young players nowadays are so clueless and know no fundamentals". Don't you see it can't be done that way? That your approach to this is very static, that it doesn't work in real life, like I've been saying from the beginning?
I bet you understand that your new stance where the player doesn't flash high and out anymore but just stays there all the time is crazy but you now just don't want to admit that maybe Gasol was lost too - which would make you silly because it'd mean that Bynum was very probably right or that it's entirely possible to know the theory of how attacking a zone but still be lost during the actual action on the floor. Exactly what I've been trying to explain to you the entire thread and that for some silly reason ans stupid traumas ("oh, you used stats from a paid site to embarrass me, that isn't fair") you simply refuse to admit.
If a player in a zone just stays at the free-throw line the entire possession while the others swing the ball from side to side, it's going to be tough to disrupt the zone. I'd even say it's going to be impossible. Bynum doesn't move from there and no way Kobe's drive can be successful. Or maybe he moves and runs into Artest on the other elbow... Sometimes, a step or half a step makes a difference in basketball. I mean, whey they say stuff like they're defending "one step off the line", it's really "one step" and it matters.
The game is way more dynamic, hence much more complicated . That's why coaches use so many diagrams and films. That's why players like Bynum or Gasol can know the generalities you announced and more and still be lost and out of position on the court. The principles are indeed simple and can be announced in a couple of catch phrases as I did in my first paragraph. But the execution on the floor at the level of where a player should move in any instance, isn't easily reduced to the same catch phrases. Just like you can reduce the triangle offense philosophy to a few sentences but it takes hundreds of hours of practice for the players to know it and it's virtually impossible to describe in words "where the players should go".
So, you've already said lots of different things - depending on the last video you saw. When Gasol does something, it's prove that he knows where to be; when Bynum does the exact same thing, it's a fluke. We can probably find a film of Gasol flashing out to the wing to fill a space there and "under no cir stance" no more - you'd change your stance again.
I mean, if you, sitting comfortably at home, with all the time in the world to think out your positions, blessed with such a tremendous knowledge and mastery about zone offenses that you lecture others in the internet, have already changed your position so much, why is it so bizarre to you that the players, who have fraction of seconds to make their decisions and act, may also feel lost in spite of knowing the theory? Because to me it seems that you're no less lost in this thread than Bynum was on the floor of the US Airways Center.
I can elaborate more on this later, but at a very basic level, there are 3 type of offensive systems NBA/basketball coaches use:
- set plays (those plays reunited in a playbook, that the coach or the PG calls)
- patterned offenses (like the Iba hi/lo offense, the flex and the triangle - very rare to see NBA teams running a pure patterned offense)
- read-and-react offenses (like the motion, where the players actions aren't set aprioristically and are counter-moves to the defense moves)
When dealing with a zone defense, you can throw patterns and set plays out of the window.
And all this because Daddy took a 2x4 to Mutombo in the Philly Finals///Colangelo feared a 10 peat///feared O & infinity///convened a blue ribbon panel///decreed rules rendering Daddy extinct. Uh,
me.
it's also entirely possible to NOT know the theory of how to attack a zone and of course be lost during the actual action on the floor.
Which is what Drew told us. He had no idea where to go.
And regardless of all the complexities of the various zone defenses and contrary to mogros stance, they are quite simple to break and that is exactly why you rarely see them in the NBA. It takes a team effort as you have to "move as one" and if you have one player running around with his head up his ass he will mess the spacing up without a doubt.
You guys can go over two 15 second clips till the cows come home and its not going to tell the whole story or take away from the fact that drew said....
"I had no idea where the heck I was supposed to be at and i'm sure I wasn't the only one"
And mongro argues and says "what drew really meant was" because he just cannot admit that he was wrong. What a pompous ass.
end of story....
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
