SB Nation User Blog: JMoon

Interesting article with funny Andre Miller reference

JMoon — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:18:33 -0000

Interesting article with funny Andre Miller reference

Maybe some of the mathletes out there can parse this for us.

Alpha, Beta & Offense

JMoon — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:50:41 -0000

"Every Halloween the trees are filled with underwear, every spring the toilets explode." This was Dean Wormer talking about the Beta's and their love of chaos. Beta is a qualitative measure of volatility in investments with higher Beta reflecting more risk. Beta is also used to describe the second brightest star in a constellation, an exploratory technology design, and an obsolete video player. All but one of these definitions nicely describe one of the two truly dynamic offensive players on our team. Rudy profits from creating chaos, and will take risks on defense to make this happen. He also benefits from more player and ball movement on the offensive end, which also entails risk, since each additional pass means one more possiblility of turnover.

By contrast, Brandon is Alpha. To be Alpha is to be dominant, the brightest star in the constellation. There's also a financial corollary, but its boring and didn't advance the analogy I'm attempting to make. In any case, Brandon creates order out of chaos, and its that calmness under fire that lets him so consistently nail last second shots. How many times have we seen the shot or game clock ticking down with Brandon holding the ball at the top of the key and then victimizing his defender.

Both are great players we're lucky to have, and most of us would like to see them on the floor at the same time. But here's the problem to be solved (and I assume it will be). I would argue that the two players symbolize two different offensive styles that we'll have to choose between or blend together. The different styles they play reflect their backgrounds and skill set. Rudy is much more active without the ball, and naturally plays the international style of penetrate and kick with every body moving. Both Sergio and Batum seem to gravitate to this style as well. Brandon thrives in iso's and the pick and roll with little movement required of the 3 or 4 other guys on the court.

IMO the contrast between our foreign and local guys has much to do with the shot clock. A motion offense, like that in which the euros thrive takes time to gain momentum in any offense set. With the extra time on the shot clock in the euro leagues there is greater time to use screens to gain an advantage on the defender and less pressure to score quickly.

In the NBA, the 24 second clock does not allow a great deal of time to use multiple screens and passes to get an open look. As a result many teams use the iso's and 2-man games. A lot of US players who are used to this system have gotten out of the habit of moving well without the ball. Additionally, point guards can be slow initiating the offense with the knowledge that once they get into the half court, it will only take 5 or 6 seconds for the relatively simple iso or pick and roll to result in a shot. Brandon exemplifies this very controlled moderate pace. Additionally, because he is so good at breaking down his defender and getting a shot for himself (or somebody else) without any help, he has a tendency to hold the ball in the offense to look over his options. This is detrimental to Rudy's and probably Batum's offensive games (what little I know of Batum's anyway). Brandon also is slow advancing the ball after a make or miss, which eats up clock and reduces the opportunity for more motion in the offense to develop.

Judging from posts and comments in the last week, a lot of us would prefer to see more ball movement. However, this is useless if two passes into the offense, Brandon or Travis decide to hold the ball and stare down their options. As soon as this happens, some of the guys (the Euros and Web when he comes back) who can't create their own shots, but who are good with screens and ball movement lose their advantage.

A lot of negativity has been focused on Travis lately, for allegedly killing offensive continuity in the first unit (as well as for his defense which I won't defend). I would argue that there is no continuity to kill (see Blazin's question to Dave in the Game I recap). I think that Travis fits well with the first unit, or at least doesn't hurt anything while Brandon is in iso, or LMA is in the extended post. Additionally, Boom Boom is a good fit with Rudy and Sergio, because his free flowing offensive game and generally good quick decisions in the open court are compatible with theirs. Also, with their ability to get steals, this group gets out into the open court better which maximizes their offensive skill set.

Nate has also come under criticism for a lack of offensive creativity throughout his career (see Blzrfan's posts on the topic - Our offense is offensive).

Ultimately, I'm ready for more Beta in transition and early in the shot clock. Ironically, our best player may be the one who will most have to change his offensive style, if we are to acheive some motion in the offense. But that's okay. I think he is capable, and within each posession, if the motion doesn't result in a good shot in the first 18 seconds, we'll still have Brandon, with the ball at the top of the key, about to go Alpha on some hapless defender.

I purposely left LMA out of the discussion, not because he isn't an important offensive piece, but because his offensive style isn't distinctively open and fast paced (beta), or slow and static (alpha). GO also will require some accomodation when he returns. Going forward, I'd prefer to see all our handlers pushing the ball up the court (make or miss), not because we're likely to get a quick shot, but rather so that we have more time for motion in the offense.

What direction do you think the offense will take?

Correction Note: ClackPik points out that FIBA has been using a 24 second clock rather than 30 second clock (since 2000). Thus, my theory that the differences in style of play is due to clock time doesn't hold up. Please see Phizbin's explanation in the first comment, that probably better explains the reason for the differences.

Are we soft?

JMoon — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 01:13:49 -0000

I apologize if this topic has been covered better previously, but I've only been following BEdge for a short time. This is my first post here, and I love the winking homerism of the site. However, I,m curious if I'm the only one concerned about this topic. Portland was the 25th best rebounding team in the league last year.

http://www.nba.com/statistics/sortable_team_statistics/sortable1.html

Granted some of this is affected by pace of play (witness Seattle at #2) and rebound differential is probably a more important stat, to wit:


			RPG				BPG	SPG
	TEAM	GAMES		HME	OPP	DIFF
1	Cleveland	82		44.57	40.41	+4.15
2	Houston	82		44.64	40.67	+3.97
3	Boston	82		42.01	38.89	+3.12
4	Utah	82		40.87	37.80	+3.07
5	Dallas	82		43.00	40.25	+2.74
6	Philadelphia	82		41.91	39.22	+2.69
7	Detroit	82		41.42	39.13	+2.29
8	L.A. Lakers	82		44.14	42.79	+1.35
9	Atlanta	82		42.22	40.90	+1.31
10	New Orleans	82		41.84	40.82	+1.01
11	Milwaukee	82		41.68	40.68	+1.00
12	San Antonio	82		41.25	40.28	+0.97
13	Seattle	82		44.62	44.09	+0.52
14	Washington	82		41.59	41.19	+0.40
15	Chicago	82		43.02	42.63	+0.39
16	Orlando	82		42.01	41.69	+0.31
17	New Jersey	82		41.86	41.62	+0.24
18	New York	82		42.51	42.64	-0.13
19	Minnesota	82		41.36	41.65	-0.29
20	Portland	82		40.72	41.73	-1.01
21	Denver	82		44.09	45.39	-1.29
22	Toronto	82		40.07	41.62	-1.54
23	Sacramento	82		40.06	41.89	-1.82
24	Indiana	82		43.13	45.47	-2.34
25	Phoenix	82		41.50	43.89	-2.39
26	Memphis	82		41.64	44.54	-2.90
27	Charlotte	82		40.63	43.74	-3.11
28	L.A. Clippers	82		40.13	43.57	-3.43
29	Golden State	82		43.18	47.02	-3.84
30	Miami	82		37.62	43.08	-5.46

Diced this way we jump all the way up to number 20! Clearly rebounding was not a strong suit on this team last year. How many times did we watch the other team playing volleyball at the basket while cursing our lack of size/toughness. Its tempting to assume that the return of GO solves all problems in this regard, but does it? In order to get him on the floor we have to sit our best rebounder (Joel) at 8.4 boards per game in 23.6 minutes (0.356 boards per minute). GO and Joel will not be on the floor much at the same time.

The top rebounders in the league average 13 to 14 boards a game in 35-38 minutes (Howard, Kaman, Camby). GO probably won't get these kind of minutes coming off microfracture surgery, but lets go ahead and project him at 12 boards a game in 30 minutes (0.40 boards per minute) which is ahead of D Howard's rate. Thus we get some traction on the rest of the league, but how much?

Here's my concern. Our starting PF is a very tanlented finesse guy who rebounds at an average to low rate (0.218 rpm) and our back-up PF is similar (0.261 rpm) although less talented. These rates will likely decrease as GO sucks up some of the available boards. Both our PF's are long and shoot it well, but don't naturally mix it up in the paint . I'm not concerned about this team's ability to score, but rebounding and defense is unproven. I'd like to see Portland as a top rebounding and defensive team to go along with the offensive potential.

If you look at past champs they are invariably strong rebounding or defensive teams or both. The spectacle of Boston kicking sand in the Lakers faces in last years finals illustrates this well. It seems that Channing's offseason goal has been to drop weight and deepen his range. Recently we were treated to a description of LMA's "And One" moves in scrimmages. I admire these guys drive to broaden their game, and don't think LMA will try to play like Chris Paul, but is this what we need?

Most teams in the league play a 3 post rotation with a natural center and 2 PF's sharing time. Mainly this is due to the scarcity of centers with adequate skills to be on the floor. Thus, these teams get by with a physical PF playing center some minutes. This to me seems like a desirable goal for Portland, i.e., acquiring a physical 4 to add to the rotation. While I think Channing has value as a 4 who can shoot, that value may be more elsewhere than here, since you can probably only afford to have one soft/finesse post player out of a 3 post rotation.

Long term (3 years on), I think we are well positioned offensively to contend. I see Joel falling back to a more limited role as GO emerges from microfracture hangover. I also see a main 3 post rotation with LMA, GO and an enforcer PF to be named later.

Thoughts?