Small ball

[Chinook]

So small ball is technically just a style of play as opposed to it referring to the size of the players on the court? Can a traditional lineup play "small"? I'm a little confused here.

Small-ball is a style of play more than anything else. I don't know that a traditional lineup can play small, but a lineup with undersized players can play traditionally, which is why guys like Green, Hayes, Rodman and Barkley fit. However, there are multiple types of small-ball, like 2PG, 3-guard, four perimeter players and two power-forwards. That's one of the reasons why the second question in your OP is kind of weird. What lineup they'll use is (should be) based on their roster's strengths, not a desire to be GS.

[Chinook]

Draymond got to the league as a SF, tbh. So that idea of "Warriors don't play small ball a lot. They just have an undersized PF" is highly arguable.

It's more arguable that Green was playing out of position as a wing. Not that this is a point to debate about, really. Being able to play SF doesn't take away from the fact that Dray can and does play PF against every four in the league and that he's excelled in that spot. He plays there because that's his position, not because the Warriors are trying to chess-match against their opponents. When he plays the five, then that's a different story.

Either way, SF or PF, what matters is to have the number 4 position covered with a guy that is a threat from 3, and feels comfortable defending the perimeter. The days of two slow footed bigmen that play with their back to the basket are long gone. That's why Aldridge needs to either play center or get the out.

Aldridge was fine as a PF, though I've wanted him at C for a year or more now. His issues is that he's not being assertive enough on O and not getting the ball where he should. If he were pounding inside and scoring, the fact that he's not a natural on the perimeter would be a lot less important.

[daslicer]

Don't believe going small is the way to go to beat the Warriors. It's going to take some out of the box thinking to beat this team but to try to beat them at their style will be suicide. Spurs were overwhelming them with their size up until Kawhi got hurt. My bold prediction is the team that beats the Warriors will beat them by playing a different style of basketball.

[Chinook]

but i do think that your question begs another question which is whether or not the era of posting up a big is on the verge of extinction.

It's not. What is endangered is the Spurs-style post-ups where the big is expected to get their own shot after catching the ball in a bad position. A post-up in transition or after a duck-in would still work, but the Spurs had no creativity in their sets this season. Pop totally dropped the ball with Aldridge, and LMA hasn't helped much either.

[GSH]

Awesome, should be easy to find.

Heh. Yeah, that's sort of the point.

Look, I don't know if you're trying to discuss or just screwing with people. But I'll throw in my two cents. IMO, the single reason why small ball is so much more prevalent is that the league has (unofficially) encouraged it by changing the way the game is called. That's not tinfoil hat conspiracy theory. They are selling a product, and the wide-open game produces a lot more highlight reel plays, gets higher ratings, and brings in more revenue.

The disappearance of travelling/carrying calls is pretty obvious. But the bigger thing that encourages small ball may be the contact that they allow off the ball, in and around the paint. A big man trying to get and hold position in and near the paint can be grabbed, shoved with both arms, and generally mugged. And that lets him be "guarded" by a much smaller player, and moves his average shot distance out several feet. The third thing is the ticky-tack fouls they hand out, and the fact that "continuation" no longer means that the player was going into a shooting motion when he was fouled. Now, if a guy gets fouled on the floor, but can throw the all in the direction of the basket within two steps, he gets shots.

Put that all together, and the points per possession for playing small are higher than for playing a traditional lineup and style. If the style gives you an advantage, you'd be a damn fool not to take advantage of it. The caveat to all of that is that if the league has a renaissance of exciting big men, and eventually it will, they pendulum will swing the other way again.

[sasaint]

Dennis, Scottie, Mike, Deng, and Pau. That was a good unit

[coachmac87]

It's not. What is endangered is the Spurs-style post-ups where the big is expected to get their own shot after catching the ball in a bad position. A post-up in transition or after a duck-in would still work, but the Spurs had no creativity in their sets this season. Pop totally dropped the ball with Aldridge, and LMA hasn't helped much either.

But they had to do that due to lack of elite PG play..

[rastaspur]

This was the ultimate "small ball" team that the Twinks are trying to emulate:



Note that no one there is particularly small and exploitable on defence.

Yep. Thats a versatile group right there.

Rodman would neuter draymond. I still think that bulls team would beat the warriors.

[Chinook]

But they had to do that due to lack of elite PG play..

You don't need a PG to run a set play. If anything, you want someone like Pau making the seal pass, not a PG. Getting a top PG would only further limit the number of sets the Spurs run.

[DAF86]

Don't believe going small is the way to go to beat the Warriors. It's going to take some out of the box thinking to beat this team but to try to beat them at their style will be suicide. Spurs were overwhelming them with their size up until Kawhi got hurt. My bold prediction is the team that beats the Warriors will beat them by playing a different style of basketball.

The Cavs beat them last season by going small, OKC (outside a stint where they wnet with Kanter and Adams together) had them 3-1 with Ibaka at center and Durant at PF.

[GSH]

Aldridge was fine as a PF, though I've wanted him at C for a year or more now. His issues is that he's not being assertive enough on O and not getting the ball where he should. If he were pounding inside and scoring, the fact that he's not a natural on the perimeter would be a lot less important.

You want Aldridge to be a traditional C, and that would be nice. But that means he'd have to wrestle for position and he's either unwilling or unable to do that. I can't figure out which, but he doesn't do it.

He's also terrible at passing out of a double team. More to the point, he doesn't recognize the double is coming nearly early enough, and by the time he figures it out it's too late, and the "right" pass is cut off. Tim used to be a master at baiting in the double team, and then kicking the ball out as soon as they commit. LMA might learn to play more aggressively (although I doubt it), but I don't think he's going to learn court vision and decision making at his age.

LMA is big enough to play the C. And if he was catching the ball in the paint and making a quick move, he could put up 25 a night doing it. Just don't hold your breath waiting for him to do that.

[SAGirl]

Heh. Yeah, that's sort of the point.

Look, I don't know if you're trying to discuss or just screwing with people. But I'll throw in my two cents. IMO, the single reason why small ball is so much more prevalent is that the league has (unofficially) encouraged it by changing the way the game is called. That's not tinfoil hat conspiracy theory. They are selling a product, and the wide-open game produces a lot more highlight reel plays, gets higher ratings, and brings in more revenue.

The disappearance of travelling/carrying calls is pretty obvious. But the bigger thing that encourages small ball may be the contact that they allow off the ball, in and around the paint. A big man trying to get and hold position in and near the paint can be grabbed, shoved with both arms, and generally mugged. And that lets him be "guarded" by a much smaller player, and moves his average shot distance out several feet. The third thing is the ticky-tack fouls they hand out, and the fact that "continuation" no longer means that the player was going into a shooting motion when he was fouled. Now, if a guy gets fouled on the floor, but can throw the all in the direction of the basket within two steps, he gets shots.

Put that all together, and the points per possession for playing small are higher than for playing a traditional lineup and style. If the style gives you an advantage, you'd be a damn fool not to take advantage of it. The caveat to all of that is that if the league has a renaissance of exciting big men, and eventually it will, they pendulum will swing the other way again.

Intelligent post. I completely agree which is why you can't zag while the league zigs. It's not playing the system but rather playing against it. Lamarcus also wasn't good enough to be the offensive epicenter.

[coachmac87]

You don't need a PG to run a set play. If anything, you want someone like Pau making the seal pass, not a PG. Getting a top PG would only further limit the number of sets the Spurs run.

There wasn't any creativity because the point guard play isn't elite..

[DAF86]

It's more arguable that Green was playing out of position as a wing. Not that this is a point to debate about, really. Being able to play SF doesn't take away from the fact that Dray can and does play PF against every four in the league and that he's excelled in that spot. He plays there because that's his position, not because the Warriors are trying to chess-match against their opponents. When he plays the five, then that's a different story.



Aldridge was fine as a PF, though I've wanted him at C for a year or more now. His issues is that he's not being assertive enough on O and not getting the ball where he should. If he were pounding inside and scoring, the fact that he's not a natural on the perimeter would be a lot less important.

Aldridge just isn't that kind of player, expecting him to suddenly start doing that at age 30 something just isn't smart. One just has to deal with the fact that he is a mid-range shooter. That was his game in Portland and that is his game here. You either accept that kind of style and game plan around it or you move on and trade him. I prefer the second option.

[SAGirl]

It's not. What is endangered is the Spurs-style post-ups where the big is expected to get their own shot after catching the ball in a bad position. A post-up in transition or after a duck-in would still work, but the Spurs had no creativity in their sets this season. Pop totally dropped the ball with Aldridge, and LMA hasn't helped much either.

They had the entire season to figure things out, both player and coach, and they didn't. Aside from Kawhi it's uncertain Pop worked on improving LMA sets or plays called for him. He may just be past his prime and not good enough to play the way Pop wanted him to play.... or maybe he's lacking in the guts department. But all through the season Pop expressed disappointment with unnamed guys... (Lamarcus)...

[Chinook]

There wasn't any creativity because the point guard play isn't elite..

Elite PGs don't determine set plays; that's how the Spurs' bench was so great with guys like Mills and Neal at the one. The Clippers had apparently the best PG in the league, and their offense was even less creative than the relative show Pop put out this year.

[DAF86]

Just a fad.

Pretty much this. The moment another Shaq or Duncan enters the league small ball is dead.

Not a fad at all when this style of play is being powered by the rule changes.

[daslicer]

The Cavs beat them last season by going small, OKC (outside a stint where they wnet with Kanter and Adams together) had them 3-1 with Ibaka at center and Durant at PF.

The Cavs win against them was fluky due to Draymond getting suspended and Bogut getting injured. OKC played small at times against them last year but they also went big with Kanter,Adams or a combo of those those two with Ibaka. This is not a team you can beat by going small full time. I'm convinced of that.

[Chinook]

They had the entire season to figure things out, both player and coach, and they didn't. Aside from Kawhi it's uncertain Pop worked on improving LMA sets or plays called for him. He may just be past his prime and not good enough to play the way Pop wanted him to play.... or maybe he's lacking in the guts department. But all through the season Pop expressed disappointment with unnamed guys... (Lamarcus)...

But that's Pop's fault. He picked the guys, and he made the offense. Trying to blame Aldridge when you kept calling no-movement, far-away post-ups makes him look foolish. I don't know how many times he kept going back to that pass to LMA or Leonard during games, but it was way, way too much. And he never used guys like Anderson and Pau in high post.

I don't think LMA can be excused for his inconsistent/terrible on-court style, but Pop didn't give his plan to take down the Warriors a chance. Totally feels like the worse year he's had coaching in a while.

[daslicer]

Not a fad at all when this style of play is being powered by the rule changes.

I disagree. It's successful mainly because there is no great dominant big like a Duncan or Shaq currently in the league. It will continue to work until the next great big comes out. At the rate things are going that could be while but we'll see.

[DAF86]

I disagree. It's successful mainly because there is no great dominant big like a Duncan or Shaq currently in the league. It will continue to work until the next great big comes out. At the rate things are going that could be while but we'll see.

With the old rules, bigs like Cousins, Davis, Porzingis, Embiid, Towns, etc. would be destroying the league.

Under these rules, a guy like Shaq wouldn't be anywhere near as dominant as he was during the no-zone, legal hand-checking era where he played.

[r0drig0lac]

Not a fad at all when this style of play is being powered by the rule changes.

agree

[daslicer]

With the old rules, bigs like Cousins, Davis, Porzingis, Embiid, Towns, etc. would be destroying the league.

Under these rules, a guy like Shaq wouldn't be anywhere near as dominant as he was during the no-zone, legal hand-checking era where he played.

Tim Duncan 2 years ago at the age of 39 was still able to play at an all-star level. At that point of time he relied heavily on post ups. I remember one game where he abused Draymond on multiple post ups and scored at will on him. I have a hard time believing Shaq would not have had the same type of success in this type of league.

The guys you have listed are all very young outside of Cousins. A few of them don't have the physical ability to post up such as Porzingis and Davis. Those 2 will never have the ability to play back to the basket. Demarcus can post up but is a basket case with a low basketball IQ which is a reason why he will never be a dominant player. Embiid has only played 30 some games in his career and is injury prone but prior to getting hurt he was showing great promise. Towns is only a second year player but he had dominant year. He averaged 25-12 on 55 percent shooting which is impressive. His team sucked at the start of the year but towards the end started winning games. He's young but will figure it out on how to win games.

[TheDoctor]

This was the ultimate "small ball" team that the Twinks are trying to emulate:



Note that no one there is particularly small and exploitable on defence.

Subs ute Kukoc with Kawhi... Damn

[SAGirl]

But that's Pop's fault. He picked the guys, and he made the offense. Trying to blame Aldridge when you kept calling no-movement, far-away post-ups makes him look foolish. I don't know how many times he kept going back to that pass to LMA or Leonard during games, but it was way, way too much. And he never used guys like Anderson and Pau in high post.

I don't think LMA can be excused for his inconsistent/terrible on-court style, but Pop didn't give his plan to take down the Warriors a chance. Totally feels like the worse year he's had coaching in a while.

I think Pop envisioned the duo of Pau and Lamarcus playing exactly as you say but the fact Pau could not play defense an he to be benched changed whatever he wanted to do. Dedmon is too limited and Lamarcus is the one who should have been playing out of the high post but he's such a mediocre or worse passer and offensive decision maker that not much can be channeled through him.

Pop underutilized Anderson, which is such an irony with him ending the season in a good note and Pops other favorites folding and giving up.