Posting up Paul Pierce - Why doesn't it happen anymore?

[dksidey]

In the midst of all the trade rumors, I was going through the pros and cons of playing Pierce at the 2 and was thinking about the mismatch on offense that would occur with Pierce in the post against a typical 2 guard. As soon as the thought pattern of "Pierce/Post/Mismatch" surfaced I had a flashback to Antoine feeding Paul in the post and remembered this used to be a staple of the offense. Pierce was strong enough to out muscle the 2s, quick enough to lose the 3s, and smart enough to pass out of the double team. Before Paul could shoot threes with any consistency he was a force down on the low block. I think in part it was due to his ability to take a hit and have sufficient body control to finish the move. 

Given our lack of post play (cough, Rasheed and KG), Paul's declining speed (and corresponding lack of ability to create space off the dribble), and our line up of shooting big men, does anyone know why we haven't setup more plays up in the paint for Pierce?

[P2]

Yeah, I liked his post up moves. I also have no idea why he doesn't do them anymore. I also really loved him driving to the hoop real hard and then step back and pull up for a jumper. The one I remember best is when Artest just got traded to Sacramento and we just acquired Wally, Pierce did this amazing step back:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzpp7dIHti8

[PierceMVP08]

Oh man, I've been wondering this same exact thing.  Paul's post up game was devastating.  If I remember correctly this is all he did in the fourth quarter of the comeback against the nets.  He use to get it in the post, face up and fully abuse the defender from the triple threat position.  It was a thing of beauty.  I really have no idea why they don't do this at all.  They constantly isolate him on the perimeter.  Why not isolate him on the post??? sigh 

[dksidey]

Oh man, I've been wondering this same exact thing.  Paul's post up game was devastating.  If I remember correctly this is all he did in the fourth quarter of the comeback against the nets.  He use to get it in the post, face up and fully abuse the defender from the triple threat position.  It was a thing of beauty.  I really have no idea why they don't do this at all.  They constantly isolate him on the perimeter.  Why not isolate him on the post??? sigh 

I also hate isolating him on the perimeter because he is having trouble getting by people and/or getting the step back that P2 mentioned. However, once he gets close to the hoop he still appears to be able to finish (even in traffic). Therefore, it seems as though one of the best ways to invigorate his offense would be to get him closer to the hoop to start his move. It kills me when the play is have Rondo hand the ball to Pierce at the top of the key and let him try to create with little to no time left on the shot clock. 

If you look at some of the great 2/3 players in the league (Kobe, MJ, etc...), many of them developed post games when their legs started to go to allow them easier scoring opportunities. We are fortunate in that Pierce already has the post game and we just need to use it.   

[Who]

Pierce still spends a lot of time on the midpost.

[DrGlen]

Great question!

Iso-ball (with the right complement of players) can be extremely effective.

But I suspect we have players who privately feel that iso-ball is bad basketball.

My guess is that Ray Allen is one of these players. Didn't he say he used to think #34 was a selfish player? Didn't he tell Rondo during the recent win over Washington (without Pierce) how much he loved that the ball was constantly hopping around on offense for a change? It is interesting that Ray shot unusually well that game. Is he discontent with our offense? As an old player now essentially begging for one last contract, is Ray beginning to feel under appreciated for his sacrifice? A lot of basketball is mental, so is this affecting his 3 pt accuracy?

And I can't imagine Rondo relishing the role as a spot up shooter either. Add in youth, pride, a big contract, and an all-star nod, and suddenly he lets slip to the media that he thinks there are different agendas. Hmmm ... Is he philosophically discontent with Paul-centric offense? Is this the reason for his inconsistency on both ends of the floor? What did Ainge and Rivers mean when they hint that Rondo can be an immature handful? And why did Ray recently have to single out Rondo to tell him that he needs to act like this year could be Rondo's last chance at a ring?

All of this is conjecture on my part, reading between the lines, but I have been wondering if this may be the big elephant in the Celtics locker room stomping on Ubuntu. If so, I find it hard to choose a side in this. I love all of our players. And I also think we have a first rate front office. Even KG seemed diplomatic in his vague keep-it-in-the-locker-room response to the media.

IMHO, Doc and Danny must feel that Pierce's iso-ball can be useful in the playoffs, and so Rondo is forced to give up the rock during the coarse of each game (3rd quarter?) to keep Pierce "sharp".

Unfortunately, we have Perkins parked down low and Rondo's man constantly double teaming. So the poor results featuring a slower, aging, and injured Pierce starting iso-ball further away from the basket may be fueling growing discontent among those already fundamentally opposed to iso-ball. After all, why sacrifice your game for a selfish offensive plan that is losing games? Is this the reason for lack of cohesion in our 3rd quarter play?

It's been painful watching the Celtics lately, but I am very curious how things unfold.

[dksidey]

Great question!

Iso-ball (with the right complement of players) can be extremely effective.

But I suspect we have players who privately feel that iso-ball is bad basketball.

My guess is that Ray Allen is one of these players. Didn't he say he used to think #34 was a selfish player? Didn't he tell Rondo during the recent win over Washington (without Pierce) how much he loved that the ball was constantly hopping around on offense for a change? It is interesting that Ray shot unusually well that game. Is he discontent with our offense? As an old player now essentially begging for one last contract, is Ray beginning to feel under appreciated for his sacrifice? A lot of basketball is mental, so is this affecting his 3 pt accuracy?

And I can't imagine Rondo relishing the role as a spot up shooter either. Add in youth, pride, a big contract, and an all-star nod, and suddenly he lets slip to the media that he thinks there are different agendas. Hmmm ... Is he philosophically discontent with Paul-centric offense? Is this the reason for his inconsistency on both ends of the floor? What did Ainge and Rivers mean when they hint that Rondo can be an immature handful? And why did Ray recently have to single out Rondo to tell him that he needs to act like this year could be Rondo's last chance at a ring?

All of this is conjecture on my part, reading between the lines, but I have been wondering if this may be the big elephant in the Celtics locker room stomping on Ubuntu. If so, I find it hard to choose a side in this. I love all of our players. And I also think we have a first rate front office. Even KG seemed diplomatic in his vague keep-it-in-the-locker-room response to the media.

IMHO, Doc and Danny must feel that Pierce's iso-ball can be useful in the playoffs, and so Rondo is forced to give up the rock during the coarse of each game (3rd quarter?) to keep Pierce "sharp".

Unfortunately, we have Perkins parked down low and Rondo's man constantly double teaming. So the poor results featuring a slower, aging, and injured Pierce starting iso-ball further away from the basket may be fueling growing discontent among those already fundamentally opposed to iso-ball. After all, why sacrifice your game for a selfish offensive plan that is losing games? Is this the reason for lack of cohesion in our 3rd quarter play?

It's been painful watching the Celtics lately, but I am very curious how things unfold.

I would think that one of the ways to maximize the effectiveness of the Pierce post-up would be to have Ray Allen make the entry pass and have rondo cut shortly after to force his man to guard him. If Ray's man sags then Ray has a potential 3 ball, if he stays then Pierce has room to work or can swing the ball. One of the reasons the Antoine to Pierce post up worked was because Antoine was a 3pt threat and the entire league knew he would shoot it if given the chance. Ray provides a similar threat, but has a much higher likelihood of actually hitting the shot.

In regards to Rondo, he has the option of getting the ball on the cut for a quick pass and he can also be the safety valve for a swing pass (by cutting back out to the free throw line post cut) if Pierce is doubled and unable to hit the open man. I would think that Rondo would be ok with running this a couple times a game. I think this would be a great high percentage play (if used selectively) and would help break up momentum on those 20-2 runs in the third quarter.

My biggest problem with the Pierce mid-post that has been going on is that it allows the defender of the post passer to automatically double with no separation. The post passer defender can do a credible job on doubling the post and later challenging the shot. As a result, I think Paul gets frustrated after the first couple of attempts and goes out to get the ball and we end up with a long contested shot. It seems as though if we were to set back screens on the opposite block to free Pierce up on the block that we would be in much better position to do some damage. 

[ducksawce]

Great question!

Iso-ball (with the right complement of players) can be extremely effective.

But I suspect we have players who privately feel that iso-ball is bad basketball.

My guess is that Ray Allen is one of these players. Didn't he say he used to think #34 was a selfish player? Didn't he tell Rondo during the recent win over Washington (without Pierce) how much he loved that the ball was constantly hopping around on offense for a change? It is interesting that Ray shot unusually well that game. Is he discontent with our offense? As an old player now essentially begging for one last contract, is Ray beginning to feel under appreciated for his sacrifice? A lot of basketball is mental, so is this affecting his 3 pt accuracy?

And I can't imagine Rondo relishing the role as a spot up shooter either. Add in youth, pride, a big contract, and an all-star nod, and suddenly he lets slip to the media that he thinks there are different agendas. Hmmm ... Is he philosophically discontent with Paul-centric offense? Is this the reason for his inconsistency on both ends of the floor? What did Ainge and Rivers mean when they hint that Rondo can be an immature handful? And why did Ray recently have to single out Rondo to tell him that he needs to act like this year could be Rondo's last chance at a ring?

All of this is conjecture on my part, reading between the lines, but I have been wondering if this may be the big elephant in the Celtics locker room stomping on Ubuntu. If so, I find it hard to choose a side in this. I love all of our players. And I also think we have a first rate front office. Even KG seemed diplomatic in his vague keep-it-in-the-locker-room response to the media.

IMHO, Doc and Danny must feel that Pierce's iso-ball can be useful in the playoffs, and so Rondo is forced to give up the rock during the coarse of each game (3rd quarter?) to keep Pierce "sharp".

Unfortunately, we have Perkins parked down low and Rondo's man constantly double teaming. So the poor results featuring a slower, aging, and injured Pierce starting iso-ball further away from the basket may be fueling growing discontent among those already fundamentally opposed to iso-ball. After all, why sacrifice your game for a selfish offensive plan that is losing games? Is this the reason for lack of cohesion in our 3rd quarter play?

It's been painful watching the Celtics lately, but I am very curious how things unfold.

Dr. Glen, you just gave the best description of what I think may be going on as well. 

What we have here is a tale of two basketball teams...and I don't mean as in two teams in two halves of regulation basketball.  I mean more what you are suggesting...that the leaders of this team are torn over what style of basketball works best.

I totally forgot about that Washington game that was mostly without Paul.  Ray DID shoot uncannily well!  That was also one game in which the offense was surprisingly consistent (at least from the starters....the bench was still horrible). 

I've seen the opposite happen though as well.  In games where Paul plays exceedingly well (the last Atlanta game), Ray struggles from outside.  It's almost as if Ray's perimeter game struggles (more so) when the offense is Pierce-centric.

Of course, what is the right thing to do?  Having Paul getting in the flow of things is very important...yet is it soo important as to disrupt the flow of offense in 2nd halves.  It has been said by Rondo himself that Paul calls the majority of the second half offense.  This is telling.

Maybe this is all conjecture, but the pieces do fit quite well.  Because Paul is coming back from injury, Ray is struggling to get his groove on (presumably from age), and KG is not quite 100% in getting back his edgy, barky dominance, this team (especially Rondo) is stuck in the middle trying to figure out how to best run the offense.