Defense (semi-OT)
Dave Zero
I've got an Australian friend, a hockey player, who I've been talking
about basketball with lately. Now I love the game but I've never played
on anything higher than a playground/recreational level, and I don't
claim to be an expert on the finer nuances of the game and its strategy.
So I'm asking those of you who know something about basketball,
specifically defensive play, to read what he said and tell me where the
flaws in his proposed strategy are.
Here's the quote:
I'm the armcair
coach who can never understand why they score and then run straight back
to
the other end of the court and let their opposition gain the whole
court....
when you could keep them out of play or force an easy turnover- quite
simply
with an aggressive forechecking system - its effective in hockey, it'd
be
even more effective in b'ball as you have the ball+player taken off
court,
and you have a timelimit to get it back in play.
When someone scores, rather than everyone turning tail and letting the
other
team bring the ball back into play, everyone mans up, which leaves the
guy
behind the baseline with no good passing option, someone directly in
front
of him to make it even harder to bring it into play, and a time limit
quickly counting down before he has to make a bad pass and hope, or hand
the
ball over.
Seems simple to me, if the opposition can't get the ball in play, they
sure
as hell can't win the game.
=========
Thanks in advance for any replies.
--
Dave Zero
"And I don't care about making an ass out of myself because most people
already realize I am one." - Dr. Kary B. Mullis
"I criticize by creation" - Cicero
"I'm not here to make people happy. I prefer to piss people off." - Liam
Gallagher
Swillabrew
news:IX8_b.14835$W74....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
I'm no expert on the game, but in most sports it generally takes more energy
to play defense than it does offense as the D has to react constantly to
what the O is doing.
In basketball, playing an aggressive full-court defense will wear the team
on defense down faster than their opponents. Full-court D is something
teams use occasionally to create turnovers or bad shots but it's not
something they can do all game long.
That's my opinion, but of course I could be wrong.
Go Blazers !
Vic Romano
If everyone mans-up on the in bounds, then a player will break down the
floor and receive a wide-open lob pass for an easy bucket. And remember,
after a made basket - or a made second free throw - the man inboundsing
the ball can run along the baseline.
--
Don't Get Eliminated!!
greg brown
"Dave Zero" <dave...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:IX8_b.14835$W74....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> ASBLL posters,
>
>
> sure
> as hell can't win the game.
>
Full-court pressing defenses, which sounds like what your friend is
suggesting, are a gimmick that gets taken advantage of by good NBA teams.
It's great in theory and when the right team does it the right way against
the right team it can be devastatingly effective. Think UCLA -- 1960's.
But in the NBA, it is rarely successful over anything longer than a quarter
or two and, from what I've seen, are only used consistently by NBA teams
attempting to hide a fundamental weakness like lack of size, or against
teams that are slow, or have bad ballhandlers and passers. I think there
have been some NBA teams who have tried it as a basic defense, but I don't
recall any championship team using it as a basic defense. From what I've
seen, NBA teams usually have too many good ballhandlers to make it a
worthwhile gamelong pursuit.
Also, from what little I know of hockey, "forechecking" in basketball would
get you into foul trouble pretty quickly. Your friend sounds like he may
know way less about basketball than what you know about hockey.
Greg
Alson Wong
news:v5e_b.4379$yZ1...@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Full-court pressing defenses, which sounds like what your friend is
> suggesting, are a gimmick that gets taken advantage of by good NBA teams.
> It's great in theory and when the right team does it the right way against
> the right team it can be devastatingly effective. Think UCLA -- 1960's.
UCLA's press was the best I've ever seen, and they did it into the '70s as
well. Teams would sometimes go a number of possessions over a couple of
minutes without getting the ball past the midcourt line.
Swillabrew
news:103j71m...@corp.supernews.com...
Agreed, but it doesn't work as well in the NBA. Some teams will use it
strategically for short periods but it's not something that works for an
extended part of a game.
Go Blazers !
Alson Wong
news:103j782...@corp.supernews.com...
> Agreed, but it doesn't work as well in the NBA. Some teams will use it
> strategically for short periods but it's not something that works for an
> extended part of a game.
True, although Rick Pitino and Paul Westhead tried it with the Knicks and
Nuggets.
$Bill
Last year was just the opposite - UCLA was pressed to death. They still
don't have a PG although I hear there is a freshman coming in mext year
that is supposed to be good. It's pretty pathetic when your PG can't
bring the ball up by himself against one defender. They have decent
talent this year, but aren't at all disciplined.
$Bill
It doesn't hurt at all to put one man on the ball and force the PG to
slow up getting it across the line while his teammates get back to defend.
Gary Collard
>
> ASBLL posters,
>
> I've got an Australian friend, a hockey player, who I've been talking
> about basketball with lately. Now I love the game but I've never played
> on anything higher than a playground/recreational level, and I don't
> claim to be an expert on the finer nuances of the game and its strategy.
>
> So I'm asking those of you who know something about basketball,
> specifically defensive play, to read what he said and tell me where the
> flaws in his proposed strategy are.
>
> Here's the quote:
[snip, basically why don't teams press all game?]
Pressing is a high risk high reward strategy, better to use if you need to
catch up fast and/or are less talented than your opponent and are willing
to risk getting killed to increase your chance of winning. The main
caveats are that it takes a lot more players due to energy and foul
concerns. Like all high risk high reward strategies in all walks of life,
it has its value in spots but is dabgerous as a rule to live by.
--
Gary Collard
SABR-L Moderator
gmco...@yahoo.com
"You can't just go out and buy a championship ring...well, unless
Dwight Gooden runs out of coke." -- Adam Carolla