Why can't we have offense like that?

[TheNorthCydeRises]

You didn't understand anything I said, but its hopeless. I didn't say him taking 3 pointers is a strength. I said that comparing the effectiveness of the 3 pointer vs the 2 pointer is the strength of eFG% as a statistic. And, again, he doesn't take that many 3s by design. It's not in the game plan:

http://celticshub.com/2009/11/19/doc-to-sheed-cut-the-3s/

They live with his 3 point shooting because he is the best Dwight Howard defender in the league.

That article was from November. I guess you missed that though. And guess what? Sheed is still jacking up threes. LOL . . matter of fact, the night after that blog article was posted, Sheed jacked up 8 threes . . and missed every single one of them. And he's been jacking up 3s ever since.

As a coach, don't you think he can tweak his scheme to not have Sheed out on the perimeter so much? It isn't hard to do. KG isn't all the way out to the 3 point line, so why is Sheed?

at rim . . . 61% FG . . 1.2 attempts

< 10 ft . . .52% FG . . 1.3 att

10 - 15 . . 52% FG . . 1.1 att

With those types of shooting percentages from within 15 feet, why hasn't Doc adjusted his "system" for Sheed to take more of those types of shots? Instead, you see this:

3pt: . . . 30% FG ( 45% eFG ) . . 4.8 attempts

Doc knows that if he give Sheed too much grief, that he may start pouting and not play well overall. So he lets Sheed do whatever he wants to do. And that hurts the team. But Doc doesn't adjust his scheme to prevent Sheed shooting him out of a game?

Hawks fan love what everybody else does, even if what we do still makes us a very good team, and more efficient ( because our efficiency rating is higher than theirs ).

The grass ain't always greener on the other side folks.

Edited February 5, 2010 by northcyde

[dlpin]

Again, how many touches Perkins gets is irrelevant. I was not talking about the total number of turnovers, but the turnover percentage. The reason the celtics have so many turnovers is because of personnel, not scheme, and evidence of that is that players in the same position have different turnover percentages. Perkins is a beast of a defender, but on offense he is clueless. And the point is that while Doc is far from being a perfect coach, in general the offensive schemes the celtics run do a better job against good defenses than the hawks schemes.

In fact, the main criticism celtics fans have of Doc is that he will often do the iso Pierce plays. If you look at the last few minutes of the lakers and the magic games, the celtics lost because they couldn't score after Doc went to the "iso Pierce" offense.

Isolation plays might work very well against poor defensive teams. But unless you have a Lebron or a Kobe on your team, good defensive teams will usually have no problems against iso defenses.

[dlpin]

That article was from November. I guess you missed that though. And guess what? Sheed is still jacking up threes. LOL . . matter of fact, the night after that blog article was posted, Sheed jacked up 8 threes . . and missed every single one of them. And he's been jacking up 3s ever since.

As a coach, don't you think he can tweak his scheme to not have Sheed out on the perimeter so much? It isn't hard to do. KG isn't all the way out to the 3 point line, so why is Sheed?

at rim . . . 61% FG . . 1.2 attempts

< 10 ft . . .52% FG . . 1.3 att

10 - 15 . . 52% FG . . 1.1 att

With those types of shooting percentages from within 15 feet, why hasn't Doc adjusted his "system" for Sheed to take more of those types of shots? Instead, you see this:

3pt: . . . 30% FG ( 45% eFG ) . . 4.8 attempts

Doc knows that if he give Sheed too much grief, that he may start pouting and not play well overall. So he lets Sheed do whatever he wants to do. And that hurts the team. But Doc doesn't adjust his scheme to prevent Sheed shooting him out of a game?

Hawks fan love what everybody else does, even if what we do still makes us a very good team, and more efficient ( because our efficiency rating is higher than theirs ).

The grass ain't always greener on the other side folks.

Except that the scheme is the same, it is a matter of Sheed adjusting to it. And he has started to adjust to it:

3 point shots per 36 minutes, by month:

October: 11.07

November: 9.15

December:5.9

January: 6.3

February: 4.18

So, as clear as day, the more he plays with the celtics the fewer 3 pointers he attempts, which proves without any doubt that him taking 3 pointers is NOT part of the offensive scheme.

The idea that Doc could somehow magically make him stop shooting the 3 is insane, as is the idea that Doc actually wants him taking those 3 pointers.

The reason he still gets away with some 3 pointers is because Doc gives him some leeway because of what he brings to the table defensively.

The guy is second in the league in defensive rating. The guy held Dwight Howard to 5 points in their first meeting.

At this point, what are you arguing? If you are still convinced that iso JJ and iso Crawford are the way to go, where is the data that shows that? Why does woody's offense perform so poorly against top defensive teams?

Edited February 5, 2010 by dlpin

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Except that the scheme is the same, it is a matter of Sheed adjusting to it. And he has started to adjust to it:

3 point shots per 36 minutes, by month:

October: 11.07

November: 9.15

December:5.9

January: 6.3

February: 4.18

So, as clear as day, the more he plays with the celtics the fewer 3 pointers he attempts, which proves without any doubt that him taking 3 pointers is NOT part of the offensive scheme.

The idea that Doc could somehow magically make him stop shooting the 3 is insane, as is the idea that Doc actually wants him taking those 3 pointers.

The reason he still gets away with some 3 pointers is because Doc gives him some leeway because of what he brings to the table defensively.

The guy is second in the league in defensive rating. The guy held Dwight Howard to 5 points in their first meeting.

At this point, what are you arguing? If you are still convinced that iso JJ and iso Crawford are the way to go, where is the data that shows that? Why does woody's offense perform so poorly against top defensive teams?

So your argument with Sheed, is that instead of him taking an insane amount of threes, he's only taking a lot of threes, which proves that the three pointer by him really isn't part of their scheme? We're talking about a Power Forward here . . . not a guard or even a small foward. Doc can't design a scheme that keeps his power forward down on the blocks . . an area where he's actually more efficient at . . and prevent him from jacking up 5 threes a game?

Nah. . . not buying it. Doc may not want him taking that many threes, but he sure doesn't mind him taking them. And it's a detriment to the team because he shoots such a low percentage on that shot. If keeping him happy means that he allows Sheed to take threes, then yes, it is a part of Boston's scheme. People say that Josh Smith being out on the perimeter for the Hawks, is part of our scheme, so the same applies in Boston.

It's pretty obvious why the Hawks perform poorly against the top defensive teams at times. It's the same reason why the other top offensive teams tend to struggle against the top defensive teams. It's because that team has a problem scoring and rebounding against the defensive team's frontline. It's not a coincidence at all that teams like Phoenix, Toronto, and Denver ( the teams ahead of us in offensive efficiency ), have also struggled at times against the top 6 defensive teams

Phoenix: averages 110 ppg . . . but is 4 - 8 vs top 6 defensive teams ( 3 wins at home )

Toronto: averages 104.3 ppg . . . but is 4 - 8 vs top 6 defensive teams ( 3 wins at home )

Denver: averages 107 ppg . . . but they're the exception, 5 - 2 vs top 6 defensive teams ( all 5 wins @ home )

And each one of those teams have had some horrendous games vs some in the top 6.

Outside of the frontline issue, our other problem is jumpshot consistency, especially on the road. We've missed a ton of wide open jumpshots in a lot of those games in which the offense isn't clicking. I'm not even talking about the forced jumpers off of isolation. I'm talking about missing wide open looks, that our opponent will turn around and make. You just can't do that against good defensive teams, especially not on the road. The Cavs, Magic, Lakers, and Celtics aren't going to give you a lot of good looks on the inside, so you must make your open jumpers.

People also know that while JJ and Crawford can be great at times, they also can be highly inconsistent shooters. If both JJ and Crawford start out slow, we can and will get blown out because of the lack of offensive weapons in other areas on our team. Against a team like Orlando, JJ has to look to take over early. He has to look to be assertive early on the road, to see if he can get himself going first, instead of trying to get his teammates going. He's done just that in a few of our losses to those teams ( Cavs, Lakers, OKC ). In other games, he wasn't aggressive enough, and ended up shooting a bad percentage.

It's also no secret that defensive rebounding is a key to our offense, because it fuels our running game. When we don't get that, we're in trouble, because we don't have the consistent firepower on offense to keep pace.

The real problem though, is OUR defense . . not our offense. When you're not stopping teams and allowing 2nd chance possessions because you can't secure a defensive rebound, you're asking to lose games. We need to be a top 10 defensive squad. Us improving offensively is still not going to solve this problem with defensive rebounding and getting stops in general. Us improving offensively will simply have us be more like Phoenix . . more efficient offensively, but still lose games they shouldn't, because they can't secure rebounds and get key stops. Shore up the defense, and this team goes on another long win streak.

[dlpin]

You want to compare how the nuggets, raptors and suns do against good defenses?

Sure, 2 out of 3 have lost more than they've won against good defenses. But the numbers in those games once again support what I am saying.

PPG for and PPG against for the teams you selected, overall:

Raptors 104.4 105.2

Nuggets 106.8 101.8

Suns 110 107.6

Hawks 102.2 97.5

PPG for and against against the top 6 defensive teams:

Raptors 102 108.5

Nuggets 100.5 95.3

Suns 103.5 113.5

Hawks 93.3 98.5

In other words, the hawks have significantly more problems on offense against good defensive teams than other good offensive teams.

[Buzzard]

Perkins shooting:

at rim . . . .78% FG ( 4.2 attempts ) . . 78% assisted

< 10 ft . . . 52% FG ( 2.1 attempts ) . . 45% assisted

10 - 15 . . .16% FG ( 0.5 attempts ) . . 75% assisted

16 - 23 . . .38% FG ( 0.5 attempts ) . . 50% assisted

Horford shooting:

at rim . . . 71% FG ( 4.0 attempts ) . . 61% assisted

< 10 ft . . .50% FG ( 2.4 attempts ) . . 65% assisted

10 - 15 . . 40% FG ( 1.4 attempts ) . . 59% assisted

16 - 23 . . 47% FG ( 2.0 attempts ) . . 93% assisted

Perkins touches would go down, because he can't or doesn't shoot beyond 10 feet. Horford can score from more areas than Perkins. And like Horford, Perkins' post-up game isn't that reliable enough to just throw the ball down on the blocks to him, and look for him to score on his own. He needs to be set up by someone else, more often than not, to score.

You are assuming Woody would change his philosophy on offense for the five position because of what Perk cannot do from 10ft. I am sorry but that is no different than assuming it would change for Smoove because of what he cannot do from outside 15ft. For better or worse, Perk would get at least as many touches as he does right now with the Celtics; which is significantly less than what Horf gets. So it could be even worse for Perk in Woodys system.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

You want to compare how the nuggets, raptors and suns do against good defenses?

Sure, 2 out of 3 have lost more than they've won against good defenses. But the numbers in those games once again support what I am saying.

PPG for and PPG against for the teams you selected, overall:

Raptors 104.4 105.2

Nuggets 106.8 101.8

Suns 110 107.6

Hawks 102.2 97.5

PPG for and against against the top 6 defensive teams:

Raptors 102 108.5

Nuggets 100.5 95.3

Suns 103.5 113.5

Hawks 93.3 98.5

In other words, the hawks have significantly more problems on offense against good defensive teams than other good offensive teams.

Phoenix has been manhandled almost as much as we have by those squads, but they also have some nice wins. But we all know why the Hawks struggle, and mainly against who. We've split with Charlotte so far, and definitely played well enough @ Cleveland and @ Oklahoma City ( 2 games in which JJ was brilliant in ) to win games.

It's just that team down in Mickey Mouse lane, that we can't figure out yet.

It is nice to see that the defensive PPG numbers are virtually unchanged though, even though our bad matchup, Orlando, drives that point total up as well.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

You are assuming Woody would change his philosophy on offense for the five position because of what Perk cannot do from 10ft. I am sorry but that is no different than assuming it would change for Smoove because of what he cannot do from outside 15ft. For better or worse, Perk would get at least as many touches as he does right now with the Celtics; which is significantly less than what Horf gets. So it could be even worse for Perk in Woodys system.

No . . .Woody wouldn't change up much. He'd get Perkins the ball down low on occasion, to see what he can do. 6 - 8 FGA sounds about right for him, if he got Horford type minutes. Maybe slightly more, if Perkins proved he could be a slightly better option than Horford down on the blocks. Perkins wouldn't be shooting 15 foot jumpers though, like Horford does.

[AHF]

No . . .Woody wouldn't change up much. He'd get Perkins the ball down low on occasion, to see what he can do. 6 - 8 FGA sounds about right for him, if he got Horford type minutes. Maybe slightly more, if Perkins proved he could be a slightly better option than Horford down on the blocks. Perkins wouldn't be shooting 15 foot jumpers though, like Horford does.

I see Perkins role on this team as cleaning up the iso jumpers that JJ and Crawford miss.

[dlpin]

Phoenix has been manhandled almost as much as we have by those squads, but they also have some nice wins. But we all know why the Hawks struggle, and mainly against who. We've split with Charlotte so far, and definitely played well enough @ Cleveland and @ Oklahoma City ( 2 games in which JJ was brilliant in ) to win games.

It's just that team down in Mickey Mouse lane, that we can't figure out yet.

It is nice to see that the defensive PPG numbers are virtually unchanged though, even though our bad matchup, Orlando, drives that point total up as well.

Hawks' matchup problems against the magic are more than made up in this comparison by their matchup advantages against the celtics. With the exception of a Gasol-less Lakers, the hawks are a significantly worse team against good defenses than other top offensive teams. 95 ppg against OKC, 92.5 ppg against the cavs, 93ppg against the bobcats.

The evidence is overwhelming that the hawks do better when they run and share the ball. The evidence is overwhelming that iso JJ and iso Crawford don't really work and are easily defended.

In fact, that is valid for pretty much everyone:

http://www.82games.com/assisted.htm

[spotatl]

THE HAWKS HAVE THE SIXTH HIGHEST ASSIST RATE IN THE LEAGUE. You are acting like the Hawks don't pass the ball at all. Just because the Hawks start the offense 1 on 1 does not mean that they don't pass. The nba makes 1 on 1 defense pretty much illegal- I simply don't get the resistance to taking advantage of that. Once the double comes then pass the ball to get the other people involved. Thats when I want Josh, Horford, Bibby, and marvin getting the ball- after the defense is already in motion.

Maybe you think its repetitive and ugly- but that doesn't mean its not effective. You can complain about Joe trying to score through the doubleteam instead of passing to the open guy- but to me on this roster that is absolutely the best offense for the Hawks to run. They ahve no post threat and bigmen who are better in transition than in half court. I think its remarkable the Hawks have a top 4 offense and people are still bitching because its not pretty enough. I seriously don't get how people think that the hawks SHOULD have the best offense in the league if they simply had an average coach.

Edited February 5, 2010 by spotatl

[AHF]

I think its remarkable the Hawks have a top 4 offense and people are still bitching because its not pretty enough.

No matter how many times you say that (that being that people just want something pretty), I continue to complain that we don't have a Plan B for when the isos aren't working. I love our efforts to start a fastbreak whenever possible off our defensive rebounds. That won't happen nearly as much in the playoffs, though. Consequently, we will be down to our one note iso halfcourt offense. I don't think you can be effective over a 7 game series against a good team without some variety in your halfcourt sets. If we have a Plan B that isn't pretty but is effective that is fine with me. I don't trust putting all my eggs into the iso basket, though - especially when it is iso-jumpshot.

Edited February 5, 2010 by AHF

[TheNorthCydeRises]

No matter how many times you say that (that being that people just want something pretty), I continue to complain that we don't have a Plan B for when the isos aren't working. I love our efforts to start a fastbreak whenever possible off our defensive rebounds. That won't happen nearly as much in the playoffs, though. Consequently, we will be down to our one note iso halfcourt offense. I don't think you can be effective over a 7 game series against a good team without some variety in your halfcourt sets. If we have a Plan B that isn't pretty but is effective that is fine with me. I don't trust putting all my eggs into the iso basket, though - especially when it is iso-jumpshot.

What do you suggest as a Plan B?

I'm not particularly worried about matching up with Cleveland and Boston in the playoffs. Honestly, we should've beaten Cleveland twice. We may not beat either team in a series, but I like how we match up and attack them.

Orlando is the main problem. I think Plan B against them, is to actually go ISO against them, seeng how JJ normally tries to be a facilitator against the Magic.

I don't know man. Just simply saying that we need to move the ball more against the Magic, is kind of a moot point, if the complimentary guys can't make open jumpers, and the post guys tense up challenging Dwight at the rim.

Would Plan B, be a lineup change, rather than an offensive scheme change? Like starting Crawford instead of Bibby or Marvin?

All I know, is that the next time we play Orlando, I want to see JJ take 25+ shots, whether it be within the flow of the offense, or it be ISO-JOE basketball.

Edited February 6, 2010 by northcyde

[dlpin]

THE HAWKS HAVE THE SIXTH HIGHEST ASSIST RATE IN THE LEAGUE. You are acting like the Hawks don't pass the ball at all. Just because the Hawks start the offense 1 on 1 does not mean that they don't pass. The nba makes 1 on 1 defense pretty much illegal- I simply don't get the resistance to taking advantage of that. Once the double comes then pass the ball to get the other people involved. Thats when I want Josh, Horford, Bibby, and marvin getting the ball- after the defense is already in motion.

Maybe you think its repetitive and ugly- but that doesn't mean its not effective. You can complain about Joe trying to score through the doubleteam instead of passing to the open guy- but to me on this roster that is absolutely the best offense for the Hawks to run. They ahve no post threat and bigmen who are better in transition than in half court. I think its remarkable the Hawks have a top 4 offense and people are still bitching because its not pretty enough. I seriously don't get how people think that the hawks SHOULD have the best offense in the league if they simply had an average coach.

And yet the Hawks average the second worst ppg against the magic (only the nets are worse, at 78.5 ppg), the 9th worst ppg against the bobcats, the 11th worst ppg against the cavs, and the fifth worst ppg against the heat. The hawks' sheer athleticism gives them an offensive rebounding advantage over teams like the celtics and the raptors, but when they can't rely on offensive rebounds, that offensive scheme doesn't work.

[AHF]

What do you suggest as a Plan B?

I'm not particularly worried about matching up with Cleveland and Boston in the playoffs. Honestly, we should've beaten Cleveland twice. We may not beat either team in a series, but I like how we match up and attack them.

Orlando is the main problem. I think Plan B against them, is to actually go ISO against them, seeng how JJ normally tries to be a facilitator against the Magic.

I don't know man. Just simply saying that we need to move the ball more against the Magic, is kind of a moot point, if the complimentary guys can't make open jumpers, and the post guys tense up challenging Dwight at the rim.

Would Plan B, be a lineup change, rather than an offensive scheme change? Like starting Crawford instead of Bibby or Marvin?

All I know, is that the next time we play Orlando, I want to see JJ take 25+ shots, whether it be within the flow of the offense, or it be ISO-JOE basketball.

Plan B could be any number of things. Pick and rolls are a common one used by NBA teams. I think that is viable. Going to the post is probably not viable but running some simple screens would be viable - screens either for jumpers for our guards or for penetration for our forwards, some crossing action, etc. If Teague was a part of the playing rotation you could think penetration and dishing, etc.

We need something to change things up in the halfcourt when the isos are not effective.

[spotatl]

The Hawks don't have a guy who can post up against good teams. They don't have a PG that can create against good teams. Marvin has never shown the ability to create. The lack of diversity in the offense is a roster problem, not a coaching problem. Josh, Horford, Marvin, and Bibby do WORLDS better when someone else creates space for them to work in.

The Hawks have built a roster where the bigmen are more suited to transition than the Halfcourt. Woodson has found a way to make this work for them and he should be applauded for that.

The biggest issue for the Hawks is when teams basically zone up inside and make the hawks do everything from the outside. With Horford and Josh both not able to draw their men outside or be a post up option I simply don't see what you think the options are. A Pick and roll doesn't solve that- the other team is perfectly happy to let the Hawks shoot midrange jumpers. What would help that is to get penetration from the outside and when the bigs go to help get the ball to Horford and Smith who can attack the basket like they are in transition. Or to get penetration from the outside and attack the rim and try and get to the line.

If the Hawks had a post player that could command a double team they would have more options. IF the Hawks had a big that could step outside and hurt the other team the Hawks would have more options. THe Hawks lack options because of how the roster is built.

Edited February 6, 2010 by spotatl

[Buzzard]

The Hawks don't have a guy who can post up against good teams. They don't have a PG that can create against good teams. Marvin has never shown the ability to create. The lack of diversity in the offense is a roster problem, not a coaching problem. Josh, Horford, Marvin, and Bibby do WORLDS better when someone else creates space for them to work in.

The Hawks have built a roster where the bigmen are more suited to transition than the Halfcourt. Woodson has found a way to make this work for them and he should be applauded for that.

The biggest issue for the Hawks is when teams basically zone up inside and make the hawks do everything from the outside. With Horford and Josh both not able to draw their men outside or be a post up option I simply don't see what you think the options are. A Pick and roll doesn't solve that- the other team is perfectly happy to let the Hawks shoot midrange jumpers. What would help that is to get penetration from the outside and when the bigs go to help get the ball to Horford and Smith who can attack the basket like they are in transition. Or to get penetration from the outside and attack the rim and try and get to the line.

If the Hawks had a post player that could command a double team they would have more options. IF the Hawks had a big that could step outside and hurt the other team the Hawks would have more options. THe Hawks lack options because of how the roster is built.

Crawford can create and he is our PG when Bibby is off the floor.

These are Horfs numbers from 10 ft and out; courtesy of northcyde.

10 - 15 . . 40% FG ( 1.4 attempts ) . . 59% assisted

16 - 23 . . 47% FG ( 2.0 attempts ) . . 93% assisted

Maybe this works with Horf dragging out to 18 ft and he hits some shots; then just maybe Craw can penetrate and create. Pick and rolls do work on occasion. Marvin and JJ can create at least one mismatch all night long against Carter and which ever one he picks up. My point is this, we have options that may work against Orlando and when you are getting blown out by 20 before the end of the 1st half, what is the harm in trying?

If we take the stance that it is not possible, we might as well forfeit the game and not risk injury....

[DJlaysitup]

Nobody in the league can stop Sheed from jacking up those 3s. He is a rebel in that sense. In his defense he did shoot 35% from there his previous 4 seasons but now too infatuated at this point in his career.

Well if he's shooting 35% on threes - and you factor in the extra point for the shot - that makes it 52.5%....efffectively. (scoring-wise) .....pretty good.

Edited February 6, 2010 by DJlaysitup

[DJlaysitup]

...The evidence is overwhelming that the hawks do better when they run and share the ball. The evidence is overwhelming that iso JJ and iso Crawford don't really work and are easily defended....

Yep dlpin...except for the part about JJ/Craw being easily defended (sometimes they make those silly shots). Last night's game was a perfect tutorial on the Hawks. We came out of the box passing and hustling and looked basically awesome. MVP said in the chatroom "wow...where's the ISO's?" I responded "give it time MVP". Sure enough we settled into our standard offense for the 2nd and 3rd quarters and were soundly beaten. Then we got up on the wheel again for the 4th and won.

Actually it worked out well - entertaining game for ESPN.

As Bobby Kennedy said "Most people see things as they are and ask why?...I see things that never were and ask...why not?"

Edited February 6, 2010 by DJlaysitup

[spotatl]

The conversation is about what options the Hawks have beyond Joe and Crawford.

The Magic are prefectly fine to let Horford shoot from there. Thats a shot that the defense wants him taking. If thats how you want the Hawks to "attack" the Magic then you can certainly try that but its certainly not the route I would go. The major complaint about the hawks against the magic is that they end up shooting too many jumpshots. And I simply don't think that Horford can make that shot enough to make the Magic fear him out there.

If the magic were shutting down Joe and Crawford 1 one 1 without helping then the offense would need to change. But to me the real issue is trying to figure out how to better exploit the Magic once the help comes.

Edited February 6, 2010 by spotatl