HofstraBBall wrote:

Uptown wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Where was this thread when we were the toast of the city three games ago? What happened to "we need a defensive minded coach"? What has been the shooting percentage these last few games? I think it just comes down to guys making shots. It's easy to point to the coach. But when guys are not making shots, no system works. I can't remember a system fans have not criticized when players are not doing their job.

Think a better question is are the high minute logs now having an affect?

This post is very general and not specific to any my posts, because I've made these statements in numerous game threads throughout the year. Even when we were winning more consistently, Randle-ball wasn't a very good offense...

I've outlined the issues with Thibs offensive sets or lack thereof and the reasons why guys ain't making shots and ain't doing a job that some are not qualified for...Its up to the coach to adjust to his personnel.

Agree with some. Offenses can always be improved somewhat. Especially from a fan prospective. At the end of the day if players make shots you win and fans are happy. Fans will always claim there is a better scheme out there but if you look at any team, even the chip winners, there is no magic 10 pass offense they are coming up with. If you watch it's mostly simple sets where guys are making shots at high clicks. What was Mavs offense? Luca dribbles until something happens. Just never bought into coaches being at fault in the NBA. It's a players league and players have to make shots.

Of course its a players league, but one of the many jobs that a coach has is to put his players in positions to be as successful as they can be.

I already addressed Luka-ball in my original post. Luka, Lebron, Kwahi, Harden, etc all play in offenses built around their ability to make things happen for themselves and others. These guys are franchise changing players. We do not have that type of talent on this team.

Some teams that don't have that ball dominant franchise player actually promote ball and off ball movement. The Spurs, the Pacers, Nuggets ( yes, they have Joker. but the off ball movement is incredible) the Heat...etc. These teams generate a lot of open looks off movement. pin downs, curls and flare screens for their shooters ( Duncan Robinson and Hero are in constant motion, as is Mills from the Spurs and Nuggs run a lot of baseline flex cuts and backdoor misdirections to take advantage of Jokers vision).

We have too many possessions where Randle, Rj and Elf take turns putting their heads down and diving into a crowded paint. Out of 30 teams, we are 29th in assist, a few decimal points ahead of the Blazers. These players are asked to generate alot of offense on their own. Would like to see us help each other score just as much as we help stop the other team from scoring.

martin wrote:

Knicksfan wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Where was this thread when we were the toast of the city three games ago? What happened to "we need a defensive minded coach"? What has been the shooting percentage these last few games? I think it just comes down to guys making shots. It's easy to point to the coach. But when guys are not making shots, no system works. I can't remember a system fans have not criticized when players are not doing their job.

Think a better question is are the high minute logs now having an affect?

Posts like this happened back then, but you would be labeled a pessimist and told to focus on winning.

Appreciating the winning and the job Thibs has done defensively can coexist with being worried about the youth playing and the offense being predictable and almost non-existent.

I’m personally souring up on Thibs as the coach. Yes, he has turned this team into a defensive team and that deserves all the credit. But the weaknesses we knew he had in gigs with Chicago and Minnesota remain. I personally don’t like a coach that is stubborn because you need creativity and willingness to adapt to win in the NBA. In a league that has become more offensive oriented, you can’t expect to win if you always go one-on-one and don’t move the ball. It’s also unfair to favor some players while not trying hard to get others into your game plan.

It’s conflicting because bottom line it should be a cause of celebration we have been so competitive. But I personally have seen too many traits that I dislike from Thibs. Stubbornness is the worst. You have a bench, so use it! You have players with different strengths, so use those! The opposing team has changed its strategy on you, so adapt! Change your rotation if you have to in order to win that game. But it’s very hypocritical to say you are in win-now mode and yet not do anything to adapt in order to actually win.

Not sure I understand this statement as it pertains to Thibs and his ability to coach on the offensive side of the ball, I think you have mentioned this in the Frank thread too.

In Minny, Thibs had one of the better Offensive Efficient teams in the league, the defense was horrible. And for several years when Chicago was at the top, their offense was top 10 and top 5 in Offensive Efficiency.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2279949-turns-out-tom-thibodeau-can-coach-offense-too

https://theknickswall.com/what-can-knicks-learn-tom-thibodeau-timberwolves-offense/

I’m gonna take the lazy approach and link these two articles.

It’s nothing new to highlight his defensive genius while question his offense. Even on the Bulls, the subject was an issue put in question. The Wolves were a different case, yet their offensive success was in part attributed to having strong offensive pieces. And let’s not forget even before coming to the Knicks he was questioned about being able to move his team to the 3-point era other teams where.

Which again goes back to my points in the threads I’ve mentioned it: unless he has a star or offensive piece that brings his offense and can consistently score, any system under Thibs is practically nonexistent. So it is a fair criticism of him that no offensive creativity is employed to maximize any weapons he has, whether they are great or not.

And again, other aspects of his coaching make this, at least for me, harder to root for. The stubbornness regarding his rotation, the use of his bench including young players has also been questioned in his previous stops. One of his supposed objectives as a coach was to take the most out of every player’s talent, something that hasn’t been the case with many on our bench.

So that’s why I lost hope in him. I’m sure the Knicks will look better if they are able to trade for a star that brings his own offense. A PG that is allowed to run the team will probably have the same results. But Thibs is who he is. He is a wizard on the defensive end and has really transformed us. But his drawbacks, many that seem to be a constant on the Thibs’ experience, those have really turned me off on his coaching.

Knicksfan wrote:

martin wrote:

Knicksfan wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Where was this thread when we were the toast of the city three games ago? What happened to "we need a defensive minded coach"? What has been the shooting percentage these last few games? I think it just comes down to guys making shots. It's easy to point to the coach. But when guys are not making shots, no system works. I can't remember a system fans have not criticized when players are not doing their job.

Think a better question is are the high minute logs now having an affect?

Posts like this happened back then, but you would be labeled a pessimist and told to focus on winning.

Appreciating the winning and the job Thibs has done defensively can coexist with being worried about the youth playing and the offense being predictable and almost non-existent.

I’m personally souring up on Thibs as the coach. Yes, he has turned this team into a defensive team and that deserves all the credit. But the weaknesses we knew he had in gigs with Chicago and Minnesota remain. I personally don’t like a coach that is stubborn because you need creativity and willingness to adapt to win in the NBA. In a league that has become more offensive oriented, you can’t expect to win if you always go one-on-one and don’t move the ball. It’s also unfair to favor some players while not trying hard to get others into your game plan.

It’s conflicting because bottom line it should be a cause of celebration we have been so competitive. But I personally have seen too many traits that I dislike from Thibs. Stubbornness is the worst. You have a bench, so use it! You have players with different strengths, so use those! The opposing team has changed its strategy on you, so adapt! Change your rotation if you have to in order to win that game. But it’s very hypocritical to say you are in win-now mode and yet not do anything to adapt in order to actually win.

Not sure I understand this statement as it pertains to Thibs and his ability to coach on the offensive side of the ball, I think you have mentioned this in the Frank thread too.

In Minny, Thibs had one of the better Offensive Efficient teams in the league, the defense was horrible. And for several years when Chicago was at the top, their offense was top 10 and top 5 in Offensive Efficiency.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2279949-turns-out-tom-thibodeau-can-coach-offense-too

https://theknickswall.com/what-can-knicks-learn-tom-thibodeau-timberwolves-offense/

I’m gonna take the lazy approach and link these two articles.

It’s nothing new to highlight his defensive genius while question his offense. Even on the Bulls, the subject was an issue put in question. The Wolves were a different case, yet their offensive success was in part attributed to having strong offensive pieces. And let’s not forget even before coming to the Knicks he was questioned about being able to move his team to the 3-point era other teams where.

These are just floated theories and questions about something without any real data behind them; more narrative than actual substance, right? Someone questioned something doesn't really hold much IMHO. And you are throwing up a high hurdle of "offensive sucess.... attributed to having strong offensive pieces"... I mean there is no response to that; you can't just say ALL of that success was just the pieces.

Knicksfan wrote:Which again goes back to my points in the threads I’ve mentioned it: unless he has a star or offensive piece that brings his offense and can consistently score, any system under Thibs is practically nonexistent. So it is a fair criticism of him that no offensive creativity is employed to maximize any weapons he has, whether they are great or not.

I feel like you it's better take a baseline of where your talent is and then measure the output from there; under any other circumstance, if you don't, your baseline is.... any coach should be able to take a talent-less team and coach them up to a point where they show coaching chops; hyperbolic example: take a D3 college team and you should be able to coach them up if you have coaching talent. No way

I feel like Thibs has really maximized Julius, RJ, Bullock, Burks (and their stats suggest that). Can you magically make Noel/Mitch/Elf better players? Has the result made the Knicks team offense any better? Doesn't look like it but what about against their given talent. Are there key elements to a roster that either limit or open up a team's offense? Knicks have zero PGs, little in the way of being able to break down players via dribble (both of which would open up 3 point shooting and easy baskets at the rim). Knicks have great rim catchers and they can't throw an alley oop to save their collective lives.

Again, if it were easy to just snap fingers and make a rotation of guys better offensively (offensive efficiency), why aren't Miami, Spurs, Lakers, GS doing much better than the Knicks offensively when their respective rosters and coaches are pretty darn good?

I can't tell why 3point shots per game is a measurable stat for how a team is doing offensively; I get the reasoning behind maximizing rim and 3point shots. If you have excellent 3point shooters, you go with it; if you don't.... do you keep shooting 3s?

The guys that ARE shooting 3s on the Knicks are doing them pretty darn well and at a high or equal rate than previous years. Is that a positive step offensively for the team or should we just attribute that to strong offensive pieces (that no other coach were able to get out of those players).

Knicksfan wrote:And again, other aspects of his coaching make this, at least for me, harder to root for. The stubbornness regarding his rotation, the use of his bench including young players has also been questioned in his previous stops. One of his supposed objectives as a coach was to take the most out of every player’s talent, something that hasn’t been the case with many on our bench.

Is there a balance between having a core rotation of 10 players (not the floated 8 before the season started) and giving those guys a chance to get solid'ish minutes - ie develop - or are bench players just thrown in and out willy nilly night to night? Is there a balance to winning when you can and also getting guys minutes?

Be specific with which players should be playing. Who is not playing that you think should be playing and what chances have they NOT gotten and which players are you sitting.

Knicksfan wrote:So that’s why I lost hope in him. I’m sure the Knicks will look better if they are able to trade for a star that brings his own offense. A PG that is allowed to run the team will probably have the same results. But Thibs is who he is. He is a wizard on the defensive end and has really transformed us. But his drawbacks, many that seem to be a constant on the Thibs’ experience, those have really turned me off on his coaching.

No one will ever be able to convince you that it's watchable, that's just a personal thing; Thibs ain't no MDA and more so, he doesn't really have any offensive talent outside of Julius and a bit with RJ IMHO. That's bare minimum talent on the offensive end. It's also the same level of offensive coaching Riles did with the 90's Knicks IMHO ****ing boring but it is what it is.

franco12 wrote:this is a bit like the Don Chaney Knicks- there is not a lot of offensive firepower out there - but I agree I think we could be doing better. There is no motion to our offense - when Frank plays, he brings the ball up, hands it off and go stands in the far corner. If he's not there, Obi's there.

It's like we can only think of an offense that involves three players at any one time. We make it too easy for teams to guard us.

It is hard to complain and criticize Thibs too much. Dude has this team playing 500 ball which is not anything anyone realistically expected.

Feel like this is what a large majority of teams do?

Knicksfan wrote:

martin wrote:

Knicksfan wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Where was this thread when we were the toast of the city three games ago? What happened to "we need a defensive minded coach"? What has been the shooting percentage these last few games? I think it just comes down to guys making shots. It's easy to point to the coach. But when guys are not making shots, no system works. I can't remember a system fans have not criticized when players are not doing their job.

Think a better question is are the high minute logs now having an affect?

Posts like this happened back then, but you would be labeled a pessimist and told to focus on winning.

Appreciating the winning and the job Thibs has done defensively can coexist with being worried about the youth playing and the offense being predictable and almost non-existent.

I’m personally souring up on Thibs as the coach. Yes, he has turned this team into a defensive team and that deserves all the credit. But the weaknesses we knew he had in gigs with Chicago and Minnesota remain. I personally don’t like a coach that is stubborn because you need creativity and willingness to adapt to win in the NBA. In a league that has become more offensive oriented, you can’t expect to win if you always go one-on-one and don’t move the ball. It’s also unfair to favor some players while not trying hard to get others into your game plan.

It’s conflicting because bottom line it should be a cause of celebration we have been so competitive. But I personally have seen too many traits that I dislike from Thibs. Stubbornness is the worst. You have a bench, so use it! You have players with different strengths, so use those! The opposing team has changed its strategy on you, so adapt! Change your rotation if you have to in order to win that game. But it’s very hypocritical to say you are in win-now mode and yet not do anything to adapt in order to actually win.

Not sure I understand this statement as it pertains to Thibs and his ability to coach on the offensive side of the ball, I think you have mentioned this in the Frank thread too.

In Minny, Thibs had one of the better Offensive Efficient teams in the league, the defense was horrible. And for several years when Chicago was at the top, their offense was top 10 and top 5 in Offensive Efficiency.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2279949-turns-out-tom-thibodeau-can-coach-offense-too

https://theknickswall.com/what-can-knicks-learn-tom-thibodeau-timberwolves-offense/

I’m gonna take the lazy approach and link these two articles.

It’s nothing new to highlight his defensive genius while question his offense. Even on the Bulls, the subject was an issue put in question. The Wolves were a different case, yet their offensive success was in part attributed to having strong offensive pieces. And let’s not forget even before coming to the Knicks he was questioned about being able to move his team to the 3-point era other teams where.

Which again goes back to my points in the threads I’ve mentioned it: unless he has a star or offensive piece that brings his offense and can consistently score, any system under Thibs is practically nonexistent. So it is a fair criticism of him that no offensive creativity is employed to maximize any weapons he has, whether they are great or not.

And again, other aspects of his coaching make this, at least for me, harder to root for. The stubbornness regarding his rotation, the use of his bench including young players has also been questioned in his previous stops. One of his supposed objectives as a coach was to take the most out of every player’s talent, something that hasn’t been the case with many on our bench.

So that’s why I lost hope in him. I’m sure the Knicks will look better if they are able to trade for a star that brings his own offense. A PG that is allowed to run the team will probably have the same results. But Thibs is who he is. He is a wizard on the defensive end and has really transformed us. But his drawbacks, many that seem to be a constant on the Thibs’ experience, those have really turned me off on his coaching.

He doesn't play young players, you sound ridiculous... what about Mitch, RJ, IQ, OBI. You want him to play frank and knox more, well that ain't happening, no one on earth is going to rotate 12 guys.

If you want to point fingers at the rotation, that should be directed at the person who signed Payton(perry), or failed to acquire better talent to give the coach a better option.

Thibs loves his rotation so much, that unless a flat out super star became available, they would rather eat their cap money, by pass the waiver wire, and hold their assets.

fishmike wrote:Offense looks terrible... which is not shocking. By NBA standards its a terrible offensive team. Everyone knows shooting was going to be a huge problem starting the year. We have no creators. Our best at that is Randle.

This is a Thibs issue? Does Thibs get any credit for the improvement the players have shown under him? Or the team as a whole?

How about some team/roster perspective?

Last year's Knicks offense: TS% .531, .501 EFG% , 106.5 points per 100 poss
This years' Knicks offense: TS% .549, .515 EFG%, 109 points per 100 poss

We didnt add a ton of firepower. These improvements are basically coaching and player maturity. I am pretty happy with how the players are progressing (as a group). We have no floor general. Thibs def has the team taking better shots. We miss sooooo much

We all knew we lacked high level offensive talent entering the season. My main point is for Thibs to put this team in position to get better looks. Push the ball in transition and beat defense down the floor before they can set up, run some flex cuts for RJ on the baseline so he can use his size as an advantage, run Quick off some flare screens for open looks like Coach Cal did rather than Quick having to create most of his shots off the dribble....

Ultimately, I would like to see more ball and body movement. These adjustments won't turn us into one if the elite offensive teams in the league, but it will be an improvement.

knicks1248 wrote:

Knicksfan wrote:

martin wrote:

Knicksfan wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Where was this thread when we were the toast of the city three games ago? What happened to "we need a defensive minded coach"? What has been the shooting percentage these last few games? I think it just comes down to guys making shots. It's easy to point to the coach. But when guys are not making shots, no system works. I can't remember a system fans have not criticized when players are not doing their job.

Think a better question is are the high minute logs now having an affect?

Posts like this happened back then, but you would be labeled a pessimist and told to focus on winning.

Appreciating the winning and the job Thibs has done defensively can coexist with being worried about the youth playing and the offense being predictable and almost non-existent.

I’m personally souring up on Thibs as the coach. Yes, he has turned this team into a defensive team and that deserves all the credit. But the weaknesses we knew he had in gigs with Chicago and Minnesota remain. I personally don’t like a coach that is stubborn because you need creativity and willingness to adapt to win in the NBA. In a league that has become more offensive oriented, you can’t expect to win if you always go one-on-one and don’t move the ball. It’s also unfair to favor some players while not trying hard to get others into your game plan.

It’s conflicting because bottom line it should be a cause of celebration we have been so competitive. But I personally have seen too many traits that I dislike from Thibs. Stubbornness is the worst. You have a bench, so use it! You have players with different strengths, so use those! The opposing team has changed its strategy on you, so adapt! Change your rotation if you have to in order to win that game. But it’s very hypocritical to say you are in win-now mode and yet not do anything to adapt in order to actually win.

Not sure I understand this statement as it pertains to Thibs and his ability to coach on the offensive side of the ball, I think you have mentioned this in the Frank thread too.

In Minny, Thibs had one of the better Offensive Efficient teams in the league, the defense was horrible. And for several years when Chicago was at the top, their offense was top 10 and top 5 in Offensive Efficiency.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2279949-turns-out-tom-thibodeau-can-coach-offense-too

https://theknickswall.com/what-can-knicks-learn-tom-thibodeau-timberwolves-offense/

I’m gonna take the lazy approach and link these two articles.

It’s nothing new to highlight his defensive genius while question his offense. Even on the Bulls, the subject was an issue put in question. The Wolves were a different case, yet their offensive success was in part attributed to having strong offensive pieces. And let’s not forget even before coming to the Knicks he was questioned about being able to move his team to the 3-point era other teams where.

Which again goes back to my points in the threads I’ve mentioned it: unless he has a star or offensive piece that brings his offense and can consistently score, any system under Thibs is practically nonexistent. So it is a fair criticism of him that no offensive creativity is employed to maximize any weapons he has, whether they are great or not.

And again, other aspects of his coaching make this, at least for me, harder to root for. The stubbornness regarding his rotation, the use of his bench including young players has also been questioned in his previous stops. One of his supposed objectives as a coach was to take the most out of every player’s talent, something that hasn’t been the case with many on our bench.

So that’s why I lost hope in him. I’m sure the Knicks will look better if they are able to trade for a star that brings his own offense. A PG that is allowed to run the team will probably have the same results. But Thibs is who he is. He is a wizard on the defensive end and has really transformed us. But his drawbacks, many that seem to be a constant on the Thibs’ experience, those have really turned me off on his coaching.

He doesn't play young players, you sound ridiculous... what about Mitch, RJ, IQ, OBI. You want him to play frank and knox more, well that ain't happening, no one on earth is going to rotate 12 guys.

If you want to point fingers at the rotation, that should be directed at the person who signed Payton(perry), or failed to acquire better talent to give the coach a better option.

Thibs loves his rotation so much, that unless a flat out super star became available, they would rather eat their cap money, by pass the waiver wire, and hold their assets.

I SOUND ridiculous? Get your ears checked, dude.

RJ plays, sure. Mitch played as well. IQ is used sometimes, yanked the second he makes a mistake and after his ROY stretch, has been playing limited minutes. Obi it’s really funny you mention him as an example when he gets 10 minutes or less most times, has seemingly been used out of position and out of his style and if he will be criticized for his play, the coach that puts him in that position deserves some as well.

Frank is a longer story that has been exhausted here, but he has given this team strong minutes off the bench when called. Knox, he is a mystery. Looked like he was gonna be a weapon, especially on a team needing shooting. You could argue that he looks like a player better suited for the style of play being asked from Obi, so arguments of actually using Knox in such role aren’t baseless.

Truth is, when your starting lineup and bench vets get most of the minutes, yeah, you can say the youth doesn’t play that much.

martin wrote:Knicks offense does suck, but its offensive talent is even worse.

You can only squeeze so much lemon out of that rock.

Exactly this. People quickly get used to good things and now everyone takes for granted that we are a .500 team, and they forget what the predictions were before the start of the season and that we thought the only positive part of the season would be the draft and the chance to get Cade or Suggs.

Uptown wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Uptown wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Where was this thread when we were the toast of the city three games ago? What happened to "we need a defensive minded coach"? What has been the shooting percentage these last few games? I think it just comes down to guys making shots. It's easy to point to the coach. But when guys are not making shots, no system works. I can't remember a system fans have not criticized when players are not doing their job.

Think a better question is are the high minute logs now having an affect?

This post is very general and not specific to any my posts, because I've made these statements in numerous game threads throughout the year. Even when we were winning more consistently, Randle-ball wasn't a very good offense...

I've outlined the issues with Thibs offensive sets or lack thereof and the reasons why guys ain't making shots and ain't doing a job that some are not qualified for...Its up to the coach to adjust to his personnel.

Agree with some. Offenses can always be improved somewhat. Especially from a fan prospective. At the end of the day if players make shots you win and fans are happy. Fans will always claim there is a better scheme out there but if you look at any team, even the chip winners, there is no magic 10 pass offense they are coming up with. If you watch it's mostly simple sets where guys are making shots at high clicks. What was Mavs offense? Luca dribbles until something happens. Just never bought into coaches being at fault in the NBA. It's a players league and players have to make shots.

Of course its a players league, but one of the many jobs that a coach has is to put his players in positions to be as successful as they can be.

I already addressed Luka-ball in my original post. Luka, Lebron, Kwahi, Harden, etc all play in offenses built around their ability to make things happen for themselves and others. These guys are franchise changing players. We do not have that type of talent on this team.

Some teams that don't have that ball dominant franchise player actually promote ball and off ball movement. The Spurs, the Pacers, Nuggets ( yes, they have Joker. but the off ball movement is incredible) the Heat...etc. These teams generate a lot of open looks off movement. pin downs, curls and flare screens for their shooters ( Duncan Robinson and Hero are in constant motion, as is Mills from the Spurs and Nuggs run a lot of baseline flex cuts and backdoor misdirections to take advantage of Jokers vision).

We have too many possessions where Randle, Rj and Elf take turns putting their heads down and diving into a crowded paint. Out of 30 teams, we are 29th in assist, a few decimal points ahead of the Blazers. These players are asked to generate alot of offense on their own. Would like to see us help each other score just as much as we help stop the other team from scoring.

What you mentioned is not on the coach. Why are Randle and Barret putting their heads down? Thibs told them to? And I disagree about the "Franchise" player narrative. EVERY team has a "Best" player. Randle is our best player. Why? Because he has the best shot at scoring over anyone else on the roster each time down. Unfortunately, the NBA is Iso ball. Coaches give it to their best player because they know that is their best shot to score. And like I said, ALL TEAMS do it. With that said. I think that most coaches expect their players to make the right play. Something that Thibs has pushed onto Randle this year and thus his breakout year. PLAYERS have to make the right play and not put their heads down. Players have to try to drive and set someone up for an open three-point shot. I too wish that coaches were able to do what College, high school and AAU coaches can do. Which is put in offenses where we can have everyone involved. That would be fun to watch. But then maybe we should not be watching the NBA. Question is, why are fans still expecting that type of play after watching NBA basketball for years? Have you watched other good teams? I mean really watch them? Including some you mentioned above. They all run simple sets which usually include ISO ball. The difference is that the good teams make shots or have players that make the right play. It's not because they have some fancy set of plays.

HofstraBBall wrote:

Uptown wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

Uptown wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:Where was this thread when we were the toast of the city three games ago? What happened to "we need a defensive minded coach"? What has been the shooting percentage these last few games? I think it just comes down to guys making shots. It's easy to point to the coach. But when guys are not making shots, no system works. I can't remember a system fans have not criticized when players are not doing their job.

Think a better question is are the high minute logs now having an affect?

This post is very general and not specific to any my posts, because I've made these statements in numerous game threads throughout the year. Even when we were winning more consistently, Randle-ball wasn't a very good offense...

I've outlined the issues with Thibs offensive sets or lack thereof and the reasons why guys ain't making shots and ain't doing a job that some are not qualified for...Its up to the coach to adjust to his personnel.

Agree with some. Offenses can always be improved somewhat. Especially from a fan prospective. At the end of the day if players make shots you win and fans are happy. Fans will always claim there is a better scheme out there but if you look at any team, even the chip winners, there is no magic 10 pass offense they are coming up with. If you watch it's mostly simple sets where guys are making shots at high clicks. What was Mavs offense? Luca dribbles until something happens. Just never bought into coaches being at fault in the NBA. It's a players league and players have to make shots.

Of course its a players league, but one of the many jobs that a coach has is to put his players in positions to be as successful as they can be.

I already addressed Luka-ball in my original post. Luka, Lebron, Kwahi, Harden, etc all play in offenses built around their ability to make things happen for themselves and others. These guys are franchise changing players. We do not have that type of talent on this team.

Some teams that don't have that ball dominant franchise player actually promote ball and off ball movement. The Spurs, the Pacers, Nuggets ( yes, they have Joker. but the off ball movement is incredible) the Heat...etc. These teams generate a lot of open looks off movement. pin downs, curls and flare screens for their shooters ( Duncan Robinson and Hero are in constant motion, as is Mills from the Spurs and Nuggs run a lot of baseline flex cuts and backdoor misdirections to take advantage of Jokers vision).

We have too many possessions where Randle, Rj and Elf take turns putting their heads down and diving into a crowded paint. Out of 30 teams, we are 29th in assist, a few decimal points ahead of the Blazers. These players are asked to generate alot of offense on their own. Would like to see us help each other score just as much as we help stop the other team from scoring.

What you mentioned is not on the coach. Why are Randle and Barret putting their heads down? Thibs told them to? And I disagree about the "Franchise" player narrative. EVERY team has a "Best" player. Randle is our best player. Why? Because he has the best shot at scoring over anyone else on the roster each time down. Unfortunately, the NBA is Iso ball. Coaches give it to their best player because they know that is their best shot to score. And like I said, ALL TEAMS do it. With that said. I think that most coaches expect their players to make the right play. Something that Thibs has pushed onto Randle this year and thus his breakout year. PLAYERS have to make the right play and not put their heads down. Players have to try to drive and set someone up for an open three-point shot. I too wish that coaches were able to do what College, high school and AAU coaches can do. Which is put in offenses where we can have everyone involved. That would be fun to watch. But then maybe we should not be watching the NBA. Question is, why are fans still expecting that type of play after watching NBA basketball for years? Have you watched other good teams? I mean really watch them? Including some you mentioned above. They all run simple sets which usually include ISO ball. The difference is that the good teams make shots or have players that make the right play. It's not because they have some fancy set of plays.

First off, I've coached Junior High and then HS ball for 10 years. Last year was my last, but over the course of those 10 years, I have collected a box full of coaching clinic DVDs from Jay Wright, to D'Antoni, to Pop, to Coach K, to Coach Calhoun, etc. The reason I bring that up is to point out that not only have I watched, carefully, every single team that I mentioned, but I don't just watch those teams strictly for entertainment, I'm watching to learn offensive and defensive sets, tendencies, game management, out of bounds plays,, plays out of time outs..etc.

All teams Iso, you are absolutely correct. But what we need to pay attention to is how often are we Isoing? What are the other players doing while we are Iso-ing and When are we Iso-ing (how much time is on the shot clock? What quarter is it? what's the score? What was working or not working before we went Iso-mode?)

What are players doing while one player is Iso-ing? One of the reasons phil jackson implemented the triangle was to create the off ball actions (back screens, flex cuts) while Jordan was iso-ing. When the Lakers would pound the ball into Kareem in the post (which is a form of iso), Riley created the Laker cut. When Joker and or Murray are iso-ing, the Nuggs are not just standing around all the time. They set off the ball back-picks, the run run back-door cuts. There is no reason why we can run some off the ball actions. Thibs can also help Randle with a few lineup changes. Elf in the game with Randle crowds the paint and he is not a kick-out option because he's 24 % 3pt shooter on mainly open shots.

When are we Iso-ing? Take last nights game as an example. We got the the lead mainly because we actually pushed the ball off rebounds and created open court shots because the Nets weren't able to set-up their half court defense. I believe we had 16 assists in the first half mainly by increasing the tempo. One of the turning points of the game was in the 3rd quarter. Nets made a slight run, and Randle decided to play Randle-ball which resulted in a series of bad-shots and turnovers. Consecutive wasted possessions where we either didn't get off a shot, or took very low percentage ones, which also helped the Nets get back into the game and eventually take the lead. There was no reason to play Randle-ball at the time. It just wasn't very smart basketball when you consider time, the quarter, the score and who was on the floor with him.

How often are we Iso-ing? Randle iso's more than Luka, LeBron, Giannis, Kyrie and Dame. His EFG% is ten pts lower than all of those guys. I get it, Randle is our best player, but he shouldn't iso-ing as much as he is. I'm not calling for fancy sets, I'm calling for off-ball movement. I'm calling for smarter plays in terms of when to iso- and when not to. I'm calling for a play that can take advantage of some of the strengths that we do have on the offensive side of the ball. The next time we run a pin-down to free Quickley for an open 3 will be the first time. Same for Burks. Not seeing as much PNR lately either. These guys shouldn't have to create their looks off the dribble all the time. Sometimes, ok. But all the time! Or wait for Randle to create for them.

There are a few other issues I have with this season in terms of philosophy but thats another thread that I may get into soon...