shadowgrin wrote:All I see are handchecks which wouldn't be allowed today.
shadowgrin wrote:Th defensive team wouldn't be able to keep up consistent pressure on the offense if they get whistled for handchecks and bodychecks, that's the point.
Dee4Three wrote:I think with discipline this defense absolutely could work in today's NBA, with less contact to limit the whistles. Full court press is still possible, it's just not utilized often.
So I disagree, I think they could keep up the pressure. However, I think it would cause the team doing the pressure to have to rotate players a bit more in and out of the lineup in order to get breathers.
Dee4Three wrote:I said I think it absolutely could work with less contact, so how is that answering my own question? Don't twist what I said Shadowgrin, you know as well as I do that this behavior is garbage.
Did I say coaches didn't think about it? No, I said I think it could work if teams did it more often.
I also stated it was fascinating to see it in an NBA game used that often, and that's why this topic was posted. You said it "More likely" to be unsuccessful now, which means you are open to the possibility that it could work if used more.
We don't see it enough, hardly ever, so we wouldn't know.
My opinion is, with the number of athletes in the league.. with the speed.... it could be used more often and work more often. And in regards to ball handlers of today, the pressure and trapping could still cause many issues if used appropriately in my opinion. And wait... have you seen some of the benches in today's NBA? the lack of talent on some of the teams benches? You are telling me that if an athletic, disciplined second unit put the full court press on the other teams second unit, that it wouldn't have a chance of being effective?
Dee4Three wrote:You said they would more than likely not be able to. So how is your logic any different? Your basis is no more relevant than mine, stop attempting to be a know it all, you sound silly.
Aww, is someone still bitter about something that happened a few months ago? You need thicker skin my friend, I expect more out of you considering you have been around so long
grow up
Dee4Three wrote:And you have no idea if it would or wouldn't work, you are just being a know it all. I'm fine with you having your own opinion on the matter, but don't act like my belief that it could work is not an acceptable belief, or that it's outlandish in any way. That's what makes you a know it all.
Oh, and you started off by saying "all I see is hand checking", there is so much in that video that is not hand checking that could be utilized in todays game defensively. Also, don't act like 0 contact is allowed, players body check eachother all the time in todays NBA (by body check, I mean lean on a player or stand directly next to them with a finger on them to know where they are).
I've been watching the game a long time as well, and we are both entitled to our opinions. But, when you act like a know it all and imply that another person's opinion is silly, you end up coming off like an ass.
I would love to see that defensive intensity, even in short spurts.
CarolusXCI wrote:There were no set plays to free up players. No screens at all. All I saw was random motion from the Bulls with a lot of ill-advised passes. For me it's clear that the full court press wasn't something that was on the scouting report for that game so they didn't know what to do when they faced it. Kukoc even inbounded the ball right beneath the basket a couple of times, which is a big no-no in those situations because it practically eliminates the long pass option. Maybe if this was implemented regularly in the way coach Pitino did there, other coaches would quickly develop counters, which wouldn't be that hard to be honest. Even out of almost completely randomness the Bulls still had some wide open dunks. Let alone the fact that if you defend like that for long stretches during several games, fatigue builds up pretty fast, even for young players.
This reminds me when the Team USA played against some Euro squads years ago. Europeans threw zone defense at the Americans right away. At the beginning offensive players struggled a little bit to figure out stuff (since they were mostly used to play against man-to-man in the NBA), but after some minutes they adjusted and the zone defense wasn't that effective anymore.
Those defensive schemes usually work when you use them out of nowhere during a possession or two, then switch back to the traditional man-to-man defense. Most offensive players find it hard to adjust on the fly without calling a timeout, so when the defense changes from man-to-man to a 2-3 zone from one possession to the other, it confuses some offenses. So it is effective sometimes. Coach Carlisle did that against the Heat in 2011 and it worked. However, if some team played 2-3 zone all the time for example, opposing teams would spread out shooters and bust the defense.
Defensive play calling is pretty big in basketball too.
Sauru wrote:fuck rick pitino.
thats really all i have to add here.
air gordon wrote:shadow, you're the aquaman of the nlsc super friends
how about that young celtics team? it was a good idea to use against the bulls who were without Pippen and surprisingly full of guys that can't handle or pass. Rusty larue sighting!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests