Brad Stevens and the motion offense

[greece66]

Basic a post to cover my ignorance.
Stevens promised we play motion offense this year (correct me if I am wrong)
From what I understand, this means there is no fixed attacking pattern but we try to create an advantage in any given situation using: pass and screen away, downscreens, flare screens, penetrate and fill behind.
Still, when we play half court offense, when we fail that is to 'push the pace', looks like nothing is happening. Our guys stand around staring at Rondo.
Just for visual pleasure I put here a video where we are actually executing good half court offense:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P3ssEePimM
I understand there are many bright and wise guys in this forum (word is some people have even watched Cousy play and/or played/coached bball at a high level) so please:
a) understand and respect I am no bball specialist and English is not my native tongue (I actually had to google downscreen to get what we are talking about). I would be extremely grateful if ppl who know what they are talking about explained the basics here.
b) What on earth has gone wrong? From what I ve been reading and from what I ve seen so far this season we suck at half court offense. Why is it so dang difficult for our guys to keep passing, moving and making screens. I understand they have to do this against the best players in the world, but what the hell, I ve seen the 15 year old squad of Panathinaikos practicing and they can do it alright. So what is stopping us from good execution?
c) has there been a change of plans? I remember we were all talking of SAS and motion offense in September and somehow we have now switched to good old Tommy pushing the pace. To begin with these two are not mutually exclusively (as far as ignorant me can understand), but do you think Stevens has reconsidered his original ideas?
So guys, I would very much appreciate your thoughts, please keep it polite, and save the trade Rondo, start ET conversation for somewhere else. I would be really grateful for a good old meaningful exchange of ideas ancient Athenian democracy like 

[Celtics4ever]

Motion offense was designed for man to man defense.   The main feature in the offense is screens or picks.  A player might pass to the left and pick right so that,  that wing player is open then he rolls after the pick.  He might pick and the player might make a back cut.   In the NBA a lot of picks or screens are in the extended high post or free throw area.    This will free up a player to drive if the lane is open or kick the ball out for a corner three when the help defense collapses on him.

Good article on the 3-2 motion offense

http://www.coachesclipboard.net/MascotMotionOffense.html

Dribble drive motion

http://www.coachesclipboard.net/DribbleDriveMotionOffense.html

Article about Stevens philosophy

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?page=keown/100330

I never expected us to be that good with our talent level.   I think we are playing above our players abilities in some cases.

Why is it not working.   I think it is a lot.   But our talent level is not good.   Not all our guys can make a shot when open or screened.   Not all our guys have the athletic ability to drive to the basket unhindered.

[greece66]

Many thanks for the post. I will definitely have a good look at tonight's game with these things in mind.

[greece66]

I went through the two first links.
There is a lot to digest there.
If you have the time, one more question for you:
Given that as you few players can dribble, take a screen and then a shot, and also few in our roster can play well in isolation, then why go for the motion offence? Why do you think Stevens thinks motion offence is what suits as best?
Is it about using the strategy that best suits our present talent or about using the strategy that will allow our present roster to develop best their skills?

[Chris22]

The real question is, Why do our players stand around on offense in the fourth quarter?

Sometimes they are literally standing like statues while Rondo dribbles.

It seems when other teams lockdown on defense, we stop moving our feet.

As Tommy say, "Move the ball, move yourself."

[kozlodoev]

The real question is, Why do our players stand around on offense in the fourth quarter?

It is a well-known fact that against teams that play defense, you need to be able to execute plays in order to win and not just run around like a headless chicken.

[PickNRoll]

I went through the two first links.
There is a lot to digest there.
If you have the time, one more question for you:
Given that as you few players can dribble, take a screen and then a shot, and also few in our roster can play well in isolation, then why go for the motion offence? Why do you think Stevens thinks motion offence is what suits as best?
Is it about using the strategy that best suits our present talent or about using the strategy that will allow our present roster to develop best their skills?

Just my amateur opinion, but motion offense can compensate for a lack of skill or athletic advantages.  I think it's good for this roster, and it's working.  i.e. If you have Shaq down low, you don't need to overthink it -- just feed him the ball.  We do not.  In fact, we have almost zero exploitable matchups on a given night.

I don't love the term "motion offense".  All offense requires motion.  I think "read and react" is more descriptive.  Rather than using a specific, linear sequence of actions, players have some freedom of action... maybe 2 or 3 things to choose from.  They can individually and collectively assess the defense and make the best choice.  Their mutual understanding of the available actions is what allows them to anticipate each other's actions and gain advantages.

Things break down when players make poor choices or don't follow the rules.  They

• Violate spacing rules
• Choose actions that provide no advantage.  e.g. Evan Turner drives from the top of the key when he has no advantage.  He moves into space that is occupied by Sullinger.  He's cut off and has no shot available.  Zeller, reacting to Turners drive has abandoned his normal screen action to go for an offensive rebound.  Play is dead.  I should be clear that in my mind passing the ball is assumed to always provide an advantage when spacing is good.
• Attempt to honor spacing at the cost of motion.  The "stand around the 3 point line" approach.
• Move the ball to "dead-ends".  e.g. Brandon Bass on the baseline.  KO in the low post.  Bradley in an ISO.  This is why Rondo is a master.  He's sometimes like a pitcher shaking off signs.  You can see him looking and waiting for good combinations of actions.  Sometimes this manifests as him pounding the ball though.

[greece66]

The real question is, Why do our players stand around on offense in the fourth quarter?

It is a well-known fact that against teams that play defense, you need to be able to execute plays in order to win and not just run around like a headless chicken.

I totally agree with what you say that running around means nothing. As a joking remark, I remember a time when the Greek football club Olympiakos sucked really bad, and the fans (rather hooligans) where cheering for a totally useless player with no technique, skill, or IQ, but who was running up and down the court exactly like a headless chicken. Now that I remember this thing (it was 20 years ago) I can't decide what is funnier- the way the guy played or the fans being excited about his useless effort.
But still, I think there is something Chris22's remark. The inability to execute plays must have a reason. And (again from an ignoramus point of view) it seems hard to believe that a player at this level could lack the skill to .... set up a pick. I can understand watching them taking picks and then missing the shots.
But (again forgive my ignorance if what I am saying is silly) they often seem like literally just standing there. Why is that?

[littleteapot]

IMO the biggest impediment to us running an effective motion offense is that our players aren't versatile enough.

Just look at the highlighted play:

-Green off Rondo screen, Bradley to Green: Green's guy goes under Rondo's and KO's pick and Rondo's guy hedges so Green can't pop up for a catch-and-shoot. The D knows that Rondo can't shoot so they have no problem leaving him, and they know that Bradley can't hit Green perfectly on the move so there's no reason to cover him tightly either.

-Green/KO pick and roll: The defense shows hard because they know Olynyk isn't going to get open under the basket.

-Rondo/Green pick and roll: Green can't screen and no one respects Rondo's jumper.

Eventually Rondo makes something out of nothing and then the defense falls asleep on Bass and lets him do exactly what he likes to do, but if that doesn't happen its just another example of the Celtics not being able to make a play in the halfcourt, IMO because they aren't versatile enough.



Also - the Spurs absolutely do attack in transition. The beauty of their offense is that it flows effortlessly from transition offense or early offense. It seems like the C's players aren't thinking fast enough in transition to do that stuff - they just run down their lanes.

[greece66]

I went through the two first links.
There is a lot to digest there.
If you have the time, one more question for you:
Given that as you few players can dribble, take a screen and then a shot, and also few in our roster can play well in isolation, then why go for the motion offence? Why do you think Stevens thinks motion offence is what suits as best?
Is it about using the strategy that best suits our present talent or about using the strategy that will allow our present roster to develop best their skills?

Just my amateur opinion, but motion offense can compensate for a lack of skill or athletic advantages.  I think it's good for this roster, and it's working.  i.e. If you have Shaq down low, you don't need to overthink it -- just feed him the ball.  We do not.  In fact, we have almost zero exploitable matchups on a given night.

I don't love the term "motion offense".  All offense requires motion.  I think "read and react" is more descriptive.  Rather than using a specific, linear sequence of actions, players have some freedom of action... maybe 2 or 3 things to choose from.  They can individually and collectively assess the defense and make the best choice.  Their mutual understanding of the available actions is what allows them to anticipate each other's actions and gain advantages.

Things break down when players make poor choices or don't follow the rules.  They

• Violate spacing rules
• Choose actions that provide no advantage.  e.g. Evan Turner drives from the top of the key when he has no advantage.  He moves into space that is occupied by Sullinger.  He's cut off and has no shot available.  Zeller, reacting to Turners drive has abandoned his normal screen action to go for an offensive rebound.  Play is dead.  I should be clear that in my mind passing the ball is assumed to always provide an advantage when spacing is good.
• Attempt to honor spacing at the cost of motion.  The "stand around the 3 point line" approach.
• Move the ball to "dead-ends".  e.g. Brandon Bass on the baseline.  KO in the low post.  Bradley in an ISO.  This is why Rondo is a master.  He's sometimes like a pitcher shaking off signs.  You can see him looking and waiting for good combinations of actions.  Sometimes this manifests as him pounding the ball though.

Could you talk a bit more about that?

[kozlodoev]

Could you talk a bit more about that?

Can generally be summarized by "don't get in the way of people trying to do stuff" (bringing your defender to them in the process). In the particular case of this video, I saw at least one example of Olynyk plodding around the lane when Rondo was trying to drive.

[greece66]

In any case, I think I prefer this conversation about a zillion times to the trade/non-trade Rondo/start Smart/ET/Zeller threads. There is much more in terms of intellectual exchange going on.
Thank you guys!

[PickNRoll]

I think it's interesting to contrast our offense with one like Toronto's in the early part of the year.  They had a very simple and surprisingly effective approach.  Basically, "we have two studs (before DeRozan got hurt) and we're going to put the ball in their hands.  Our 2 guys are better than your two guys in a PnR game".  When one of em gets tired, Lou Williams will come in and do the exact same thing.  If you try to cheat, then Ross, Valanciunus and Johnson are gonna get involved.

[hwangjini_1]

In any case, I think I prefer this conversation about a zillion times to the trade/non-trade Rondo/start Smart/ET/Zeller threads. There is much more in terms of intellectual exchange going on.
Thank you guys!

agreed and thanks to g666 for asking great questions. for a change, i did not feel as if my IQ was dropping by reading a thread.

i learned a lot from all this. thank you guys.

now my question. above folks talked about making decisions, what specific circumstances trigger what specific decisions? i really don't know basketball x and o's, so any help is appreciated.

[greece66]

Some thoughts after watching the game against the Bobcats.
-Our pace was much slower than usual. Reasons? Was it that Bobcats had faster returns than the other teams we played against?
-Stevens experimented a lot with the PG. RR, Smart, Pressey, ET and even Bradley all played PG at some point. Any guesses as to why this is happening?
-Given the importance assigned to 'pushing the pace', I started paying much more attention to Sully's slowness. He was almost always last to go cross the half court. Any ideas as to what stops him from losing a dozen pounds and reaching his full potential?
-(not sure how to formulate this in Eng) but it seemed to me that when the D forced JGreen to dribble/drive with his weak hand, he was in much trouble.
-Speaking of Green, IMO he was yesterday our most agile player in the offense without the ball, but the rest of the team seemed not to pay much attention to what he was doing