A last minute reassessment of the draft
- Thread starter Dr. Jones
- Start date
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Well, yeah. Obviously, I wouldn't use the picks that we own in the 1st round on him.
Assembling a team of the future to beat a "2.9 offense" is preparing to the wars of past. By the time this team is up and running "2.9" will be either the thing of past or beaten by a new generation of run-n-gun teams like GSW who will have on the floor at all times at least 4 players who can shoot 40%+ from three in any situation and everyone will be looking for next Curries and Thompsons.
David Stern
Well-Known Member
My revised draft day wish list:
McCullum
Bazz
Trade 21 for Robinson
That's a very solid draft to add depth to this rebuild.
McCullum
Bazz
Trade 21 for Robinson
That's a very solid draft to add depth to this rebuild.
mellow
Well-Known Member
I think that GS is a 2.9 offense because they shoot so many threes they force the defenses to come out of the lane and guard the perimeter. Thompson & Curry shot an astounding 1156 3's last season. The W's shot about 20 threes per game. And incredibly there were 12 teams who shot threes at a higher rate. Houston and NYK shot 3s at an astounding rate of 29 per game. The number guys say that Houston should shoot more. 5 years ago 5 teams shot more than 20 3's per game. 10 years ago 2 teams. The Jazz had a huge increase in three pt attempts last season (17 per game) but are still about 5 years behind the league.
Houston shot an unbelievable 34 3pt attempts per game in the playoffs. The number guys say they should shoot more. The trend will continue . I believe the NbA will eventually have to address this trend like they have addressed other trends....rule changes. But for now the Jazz are so far behind the rest of the league that a McCollum in place of Burks would (5.4 in college vs Burks 1.8 in college 1.4 in NBA) would be a huge advancement.
Exactly. And assuming the team the Jazz building will enter serious contention in 4 to 5 years from now assuming things go well with the rebuild, "2.9 offense" will be a common place and only the team having the best system to beat this offense and correlating defense will win the championship. That's why I believe we don't need to aim to build "2.9 offense". We will have to beat "defense against 2.9 offense" which will be the next best thing.
can somebody please explain to me this '2.9 offense' thing?
It's doing my head in...
It's doing my head in...
I believe it is an offensive to counter the pseudo-zone the best defensive teams run. The defenses are "2.9" seconds in the key and get back.
Cool, thanks guys.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
It's essentially becoming a euro team.
The funny thing is, we seem to want to become the type of team that has always had cool success in the season and has never won a championship.
3 pt shooting is necessary for a championship but it isn't anything you can rely on to win a championship. Championships are built on driving to the basket (whether it be through the post or some dominate iso player like MJ or Lebron), getting to the FT line, and controlling the tempo of the game.
The funny thing is, we seem to want to become the type of team that has always had cool success in the season and has never won a championship.
3 pt shooting is necessary for a championship but it isn't anything you can rely on to win a championship. Championships are built on driving to the basket (whether it be through the post or some dominate iso player like MJ or Lebron), getting to the FT line, and controlling the tempo of the game.
mellow
Well-Known Member
Grantland on ESPN has done quite a few articles on it and the eveolution of advanced Matrixa and three point shooting.
Here is a starter:https://www.grantland.com/story/_/i...trategy-forcing-coaches-rethink-their-offense
There is another good piece they did that has the advanced metrics guys saying that Houston and GS should almost double the ammount of threes they attempt each game (also suggested that Milsap should be taking 3-4 threes a game for the Jazz). The Coaches and the metrics people are sort of at war, and Metrics keeps winning ground. I couldn't find it, I'll search on draft night or sometime.
6' 9" wingspan for a 6' 7" player is not great length.
It's because metrics are fundamentally rooted in hard facts while coaches generally regurgitate falsities that they were taught.
Why do you assume these are true? Everything I've read on modern coaching says they are very aware of the metrics.
Coaches are well aware of the statistics that "prove" this or that lineup is better, but they can't worship them as a holy grail. Gregg Popovich was ridiculed by one reporter after losing the series because the statistics showed playing Duncan and Splitter was a defensive nightmare. Spoelstra adjusted by going small, and after that win said we'd see "more of the same".
Making strong adjustments that might seem counter intuitive based on pure metrics is where good coaching lies.
Let me give you an analogy with Texas Hold 'em. I can be in a pot with a 33% chance of hitting the nut flush, get 5:1 on my money, adjust in my head for the possibilities of a full house or better negating my flush, and make a statistically sound call that's guaranteed to win me money in identical cash game situations in the long run.
However, I'm not a casino playing pure win:lose %'s. There are plenty other variables such as the size of the pot to my bankroll, depth into a tournament, etc. that are so situational that a purely statistical call is not guaranteed to win me money over time.
Also, to site 3 point shooting and follow it up with metrics gaining ground after you wrote that Griffin bit yesterday on how he wouldn't sniff a leading 3 point attempts title today is kinda funny.
I think the changing league outpaced the metrics on that one (and had something to do with allowing zone defense again).
mellow
Well-Known Member
I was refereing to an article that said more 3pt shots and Milsap should be taking 3-4 a game. Not my opinion, it was Simmon's based on the numbers some geeks were giving him. Simmons reported that the metric geeks were trying to push the coaches further than the coaches were comfortable and that within the organizatins using metircs there was an ongoing discussion about the role of the numbers in coaching. IMO the metrics guys are winning against experineced gut instinct coaches, atleast in the minds of NBA owners/GMs that is why Corbin is now the 8th most tenured coach and so many new coaches have little or no coaching experience--Teams don't think they need it.
Also, to site 3 point shooting and follow it up with metrics gaining ground after you wrote that Griffin bit yesterday on how he wouldn't sniff a leading 3 point attempts title today is kinda funny.
No doubt the game has changed around the 3pt shot. The trend has been a steady increase in 3pt shooting, particularly in the last 10 years. But the article to which I was refering suggested that teams should take way more 3pt shots than even the top teams are taking now. It suggested nearly 1/2 of the fga be 3's if I remember right.
I wish the Jazz took more 3's but nearly half of the attempts (40+ per game) seems crazy to me. The 3pt shot was ahead of metrics, but now metrics wants to push the 3pt shot further than the players & coaches are comfortable. I will be watching Houston with great interest this next season, Morey believes in the analytics. I think they could average 30-35 attempts per game maybe even approach 40.
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
[FONT="]
Agree. Miami is winning because they have a true "Big 3" anchored by the best player in the game. None of the other Big 3's have been able to win yet. What gives Miami problems? Teams that are big inside, but also have effective outside shooters - whether that be long-range 2's or 3-pt'ers. SA is like that and so is Indiana. Lakers used to be like that and are trying to return to that model with Howard. And as good as OKC is, they're also desperate to get a big to replace Perkins. The encouraging thing about Utah is we may be on that road with Favors and Kanter (and Hayward). They're young and raw, but have shown flashes. No, they're not going to be a "Big 3," but they don't have to be. I don't see any of the three breaking the bank - at least not yet. Utah can add other pieces over the next 2-3 years while those guys are developing.[/FONT]
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
Perhaps I'm placing too much hope in the young guys, but I think we've all seen glimpses of dominance from Kanter and Favors. They just need the PT and experience to learn how to bring it every night. I expect to see solid defense this year from those two, with some struggles on the offensive side. As for Hayward, I think he is very close to having an amazing season. It's maddening to see him struggle so much during the first part of the season and then play great after the all-star break. In a perfect world, Jazz would start off slow, playing close with the starters, but losing due to a poor bench. Then pick up a couple of high draft picks and a veteran or two at the deadline...enough to improve, but too late to finish above 5th or 6th worst record in the league. Maybe even follow the GS model, where their primary acquisition is injured and won't play until the 2014-15 season.