Hollinger takes isolation offenses to task

[Nikolokolus]

Very interesting read (you'll need an insider account to read the full article but here are some highlights)

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/play...?columnist=hollinger_john&page=PERDiem-100506

I may have accidentally stumbled upon one in observing my two "home" teams, Atlanta and Portland, compete in the playoffs over the past two seasons. Watching the Hawks in particular, nearly every commentator has been shocked by how little ball movement their offense generates and how many times they end up isolating Joe Johnson while everybody else stands around and watches.

This complaint might sound familiar to folks in the Northwest, because it's not altogether different from what the Blazers do with Brandon Roy. Both teams' fan bases constantly complain about the lack of originality and shameless predictably inherent in such an attack.

The similarities don't end there. Both teams are coached by former players -- Mike Woodson for Atlanta and Nate McMillan for Portland -- with a no-nonsense, old-school mentality.

And both have been wildly successful with this system. In fact, if you look at the numbers, you wonder what everybody's upset about. Both Atlanta and Portland are far better offensive teams than people realize -- their slow pace, low turnover rate and monstrous offensive rebounding numbers mask their efficiency.

theirs is a volume strategy. The Hawks and Blazers might not take better shots than other teams, but they take a lot more of them. Over time, that gives them enough of an advantage to make them potent offensive squads overall.

So what's the problem?

Apparently, there isn't one … until Game 83. Remember when I was talking about things that change in the playoffs? One change is that these iso-heavy offenses apparently have a lot more trouble when opponents have time to game plan against them in a playoff series.

Take a look at the playoff results from these teams the past two seasons, and the conclusion is hard to ignore. If this happened in any one playoff series, we might be able to dismiss it as a short-term fluke. But the fact that it's happened six times in six series tells us that maybe something about isolation-heavy offenses doesn't function well in an environment in which opponents have several days to scout, game-plan and match up for this specific tactic.

We'll start with Portland. The Blazers were the second-best offense in 2008-09 in the regular season, and met the fourth-best defense from Houston in the first round. Based on the opponent, we would have expected some drop-off from the Blazers, yes, but among the 16 playoff teams, they were only eighth in offensive efficiency.

The Blazers were as successful as before at avoiding turnovers, but they couldn't make shots and couldn't get the misses. In particular, the Rockets eliminated their second shots, taking the league's top regular-season offensive rebounding team down to 11th among 16 playoff teams. Portland's TS percentage also dropped from eighth among 30 teams to 12th out of 16.

In 2009-10, Portland faced a much weaker defensive team in Phoenix, but basically the same thing happened. While some of this can be pinned on Roy's injury, the numerical changes were virtually identical to a year earlier -- they were just as good at avoiding turnovers, but missed a lot more shots and didn't rebound nearly as many of them.

So what is it? Perhaps the Hawks and Blazers have just had some bad games against some pretty good defenses. But between the two, we've built up a 31-game sample showing that something more nefarious might be at work.

Obviously, this has important implications for Atlanta's Game 2 in Orlando on Thursday. Iso-Joe has had its moments; Game 4 of the 2008 Boston series, for instance, when Johnson single-handedly tore apart one of the best defensive teams in history. But in the aggregate, its failures have been far greater than its successes, and it's notable that the most similar offensive team has faced similar troubles.

Is there something about iso-heavy offenses that makes them vulnerable in the playoffs? We can't say it with certainty yet, but the case is building rapidly. The Hawks have three games left to show that Iso-Joe can be as effective in May as it is between November and April.

Food for thought.

 

[BrianFromWA]

I brought something like this up the other day. It's an article of basketball gospel that "running teams don't win in the playoffs", which is the excuse trotted out whenever someone (usually me) brings up how stagnant our offense is and that we need more layups, FTs and open 3's and less desperation end-of-the-clock 3's and 19-foot jumpers. But I've asked multiple times how those Iso offenses work when other teams are keyed up on defending your particular Isolator and taking away what you do best.
Seems Hollinger's hypothesizing that "Neither Running NOR Iso teams win in the playoffs". Crap. Now what?

 

[blue32]

You need to have a multiple offense strategy. Not just stick to Run or Iso or what have you. Keep the opponent guessing and keep the opponents coach unable to create game plans for your team. Is that possible? I assume so.....

 

[Nikolokolus]

It's not about running, it's about off-the-ball movement, crisp interior passing, pick and rolls (with an actual rolling big man), flex cuts, down screens -- shit solid screens of any sort would be a start with this team -- and an offense that features more than just one or two moving parts and a lot of guys standing around in the corners occasionally receiving a kick out.

 

[hasoos]

At the same time, I would point out what the hell was Nate supposed to do? When they switched Grant Hill on to Miller, and we had no healthy Roy, we had no way to make them pay for their move of putting Hill on Miller. Not one player stepped up and hit open shots and spaced the floor in order to make them pay for making that move. You can't tell me that Rudy didn't have an assload of competely wide open 3's. The reason that Nate couldn't adjust anything, is because he didn't have a player worth a damn to make PHX pay for what they did. The other thing I would point out, is the reason Andre Miller couldn't take advantage of having a big swapped on to him, is because he can't hit an outside shot. Watch Billups. Watch Nash. What do they do? Big swaps on to them. They take them outside, let them sag off of them (Just like Hil was doing with Miller), but they can bang the outside shot if given that space. Miller can't. Big player just sags off him and dares him to shoot. Game over.

San Antonio is having the same problem now because RJ can't hit an open 3. You put a player over there that can hit that open 3 to take the pressure off, and PHX defense doesn't look so good anymore. Unfortuantely, San Antonio has outside shooting problems as well.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Food for thought indeed. Of course, some people don't want to eat.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Hollinger takes iso offense to task?!?

You "glass half empty" fans crack me up. He's clearly saying that we have the best regular season offense.

 

[hasoos]

Teams should have more than one offense. Denver has a iso offense, and they have a motion offense.

I find that the transition and fast break game tends to be more or less based on player ability, not the coach.

 

[e_blazer]

First, I agree with hasoos that trying to make anything out of this season's Blazers' playoff series is absurd. Too many injuries to too many key players, our main "isolator" in particular, to reach any reasonable conclusions. That said, I don't think it's a matter of dumping the isos entirely, but rather adding to the Blazers' offensive repertoire. I'd love to see our two best offensive players, Roy and Aldridge, be used frequently in pick and roll schemes. I think that would put the defenses in a really tough pick your poison scenario similar to Utah's old bread and butter Stockton/Malone offense.

 

[hasoos]

I think the best executing offense in the league, with the best motion and passing, is Utah's. They move the ball. The only guy who handles the ball for long periods of time is the PG, but even they are constantly on the move. The only problem they have, is they lack size.

 

[BBert]

It's not about running, it's about off-the-ball movement, crisp interior passing, pick and rolls (with an actual rolling big man), flex cuts, down screens -- shit solid screens of any sort would be a start with this team -- and an offense that features more than just one or two moving parts and a lot of guys standing around in the corners occasionally receiving a kick out.

What he said.

 

[Wheels]

I was on the fence about Nate before the playoffs... but lets just say I'm not anymore after what I saw.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Bwahahahahaha

Wait.....I thought ISO's were good? I thought a slow pace was good?

Our offense is flawed for playoff success. We are a jump shooting team, that can't be taken seriously until we develop a post up game. Ball movement and attacking the rim from the weak side are what winds you games in the playoffs.

 

[HailBlazers]

They are good, it is good.

We need a center who demands a double team. Our team was build for that.

 

[Tince]

The runs basically run an isolation / pick and roll offense, just at a different tempo, and more importantly with different players.

If Greg were healthy and could command a double team, we'd probably feel a lot differently about our offense.

Having said that, I wish we ran an offense like Utah, but for whatever reason, nobody in the league can duplicate it.

 

[BrianFromWA]

when we did have greg healthy and commanding double-teams, Nate's response was:

I want Greg to establish us on the defensive end of the floor,” McMillan said. “I don’t want him concerned so much about the offensive end of the floor. Last year, we were able to score and we’ll be able to score this year. But I want that (center) position and Greg to focus on establishing our defense — covering that basket, rebounding that ball … really being a monster in the paint.”

Oct. 26, 2009

 

[Mediocre Man]

when we did have greg healthy and commanding double-teams, Nate's response was:

Oct. 26, 2009

Bwahahahaha.................Oh AssClown.

 

[<-=*PdX*=->]

You need to have a multiple offense strategy. Not just stick to Run or Iso or what have you. Keep the opponent guessing and keep the opponents coach unable to create game plans for your team. Is that possible? I assume so.....

bingo.

 

[HailBlazers]

when we did have greg healthy and commanding double-teams, Nate's response was

Read into what you will (assclowns), but I think he was simply trying to take some pressure off G.O. so his offense would come naturally, without force

 

[RoyToy]

when we did have greg healthy and commanding double-teams, Nate's response was:

Oct. 26, 2009

Averaged 15pts in his last 7 games.

McMillan hate is absurd on this forum.

 

[BrianFromWA]

WTF? HE averaged 14 ppg in the preseason -- BEFORE that comment. Then he averaged 11, including your 15 in his last 7.

It's justified...and those ostriches that keep saying "Nate's well-respected Nationally, stfu haters" aren't paying attention when people like Hollinger, Barkley, Thorpe, etc. talk about our team. I don't hate Nate. I hate his concept of what our offense is and what "winning" basketball is...

 

[Pinwheel1]

Nate likes to exloit mis-matches. Which is logical. Running an ISO is fine as long as you have more than one player on the floor who can do it so they can't double and even tripple the guy.

One of the announcers said Portland has no jump shooters other than Roy (Who at the time was not playing). This is true. We have set shooters. Phoenix has at least two in Nash and Richardson. We need one other guy who can take their man off the dribble. Nothing we have not discussed in length over the years. The ISO would not be a problem for Atlanta either if Roy and Johnson were on the same team. (Or if Johnson was on our team)

Give me one other guy other than Roy who can you can isolate, and two of our set shooters, and one of our Centers, and we are fine.

 

[RoyToy]

WTF? HE averaged 14 ppg in the preseason -- BEFORE that comment. Then he averaged 11, including your 15 in his last 7.

It's justified...and those ostriches that keep saying "Nate's well-respected Nationally, stfu haters" aren't paying attention when people like Hollinger, Barkley, Thorpe, etc. talk about our team. I don't hate Nate. I hate his concept of what our offense is and what "winning" basketball is...

He stayed out of foul trouble in the preseason, and um, it was preseason. Preseason pretty much means nothing.

What's justified is him averaging 15pts/G in his last 7 games. Obviously what they were doing with Greg was working.

 

[BrianFromWA]

yeah, they took him from an average of 15ppg to an average of 11, but only after padding the stats with a good stretch at the end. Let's check this out...# of shots. He went 8, 11, 6, 8, 13 in those (that 4-13 at the end was his worst of the season). In his last ten games he averaged 7 shots a game. The entire season he averaged 7.2.

What exactly were they doing? And how was it working any more than before Nate said "we don't want to focus on his offense" and limited him to 11 shots in the first 3 games after that?

 

[RoyToy]

yeah, they took him from an average of 15ppg to an average of 11, but only after padding the stats with a good stretch at the end. Let's check this out...# of shots. He went 8, 11, 6, 8, 13 in those (that 4-13 at the end was his worst of the season). In his last ten games he averaged 7 shots a game. The entire season he averaged 7.2.

What exactly were they doing? And how was it working any more than before Nate said "we don't want to focus on his offense" and limited him to 11 shots in the first 3 games after that?

"They took him from an average of 15ppg to an average of 11"

Preseason stats are pointless.

Padding his stats? Lol, I think he was just getting started and we were going to see more of it. I wouldn't call it padding his stats.

In his last 10 games he was actually averaging 8.3 shots per game, not 7. You're using the Hou game to skew the average, a game he played 4min in. So 8.3 is more than his 7.2 avg for the season.

First game of the season Oden had 7 turnovers and committed 5 fouls. Nate's fault??????

Second and third game he only played 21min each because of foul trouble. I don't see why McMillan should focus the offense around a guy that can't stay on the floor, espepcially when you have options like Aldridge and Roy.

 

[BrianFromWA]

HOw many games again did he foul out of? One. He can't stay on the floor b/c most players don't say "eff you coach, I"m not coming out".

Bring up opening night. What magical adjustments did Nate make to his offense so that Oden only had 13 in his next 10 games?

Of course you don't see why you should focus the offense on Oden. That's fine. Hollinger's explaining it to you. Just read him, if you don't trust us. But I think you'll have a harder time just saying "NATE H8TER" to Hollinger to prove your viewpoint.

 

[BrianFromWA]

ANd before it gets to this point, let me just say that I believe the Nate can make adjustments after 20 games. He did eventually overcome his idiocy about starting Blake, and then continuing to start Blake after he was beaten out by Miller by shifting his best player out of position and making our worst shooter our de facto shooting guard. Maybe he turned a corner on Greg's usage and called for him to get more shots in the offense...but wait.

A rudimentary stat I liked to look at in Greg's offensive development went like this: Shots minus offensive rebounds. Sure, it's not perfect. Sometimes he'd grab an offensive board and travel. Or pass it out. Or fall out of bounds or something. Or get fouled. But it's kind of a good look at how many shots Greg's getting in the offense, and how many he's getting b/c he gets a miss and tips it in. Raw numbers...

-1 (more o-reb than shots)
0
1
3
3
7
6
7
8
5
3
5
4
7
6
6
6
4
1
2 (yes, in the game he got 13 shots--highest all year--he did so b/c he got 11 offensive rebounds. Not b/c Nate decided to feed him the ball on the block)
Over the course of 21 games it he took 88 more shots than offensive rebounds...about 4 per game. 4 shots he didn't create for himself per GAME. That goes right along with Nate's speech Oct. 26. He wants him rebounding and playing D.
Oh yeah, and that whole "he got 15 ppg his last 7 games"? Look at the stats. He never got more than a +7, and averaged a +4.5...right along with his +4.4 for the year. No...he didn't all of a sudden become a bigger part of the offense.

 

[RoyToy]

I don't put much stock into what you just said because an offensive rebound does not = 1 shot, it equals an offensive rebound that may or may not result in a shot attempt. You also don't point out he also had 8 FTA attempts to go with his 13 FGA attempts in that Miami game. That's a lot of work right there with the ball in his hands.

If you want to keep ignoring the basic fact that he averaged 15pts in his last 7 games and 8 shot attempts the whole month of November, whatever. He was playing the best ball of his career and was coming along great yet it's still someone's fault he wasn't averaging 20pts/G.

 

[BrianFromWA]

So, lost in all of your pointing to 7 games that may or may not have been big...do you think Hollinger's right about Nate's offense sucking in the Playoffs (and not just b/c of injuries, since it happened last year in HOU and to ATL two years in a row)?

 

[RoyToy]

I didn't read the Hollinger piece, just saw someone post that McMillan didn't know what he was doing with Oden, ignoring the fact that Oden was playing the best ball of his career before he got injured.