Let's discuss QS's offense

[LogGrad98]

He can draw all the Xs and Os he wants, but at some point one of our players still has to make an aggressive move and beat a defender in the lane. Hill has been in charge of that for the most part, but he's not the fastest player anymore I don't think we can count on him as a first option. Joe Johnson is old. Favors has been on limited minutes. Burks and Hayward....gone. Exum and Lyles have been in their shells early on. It's a recipe for disaster. Hayward will help a ton. This isn't a surprise last year the offense was dreadful without him against 1st units.

The offense looked clunky last season with players playing it that had some experience with it. Adding a new cog is just going to add clunkiness. It will take a while to smooth things out. Hopefully they work into an offense that works with our players strengths. I feel like his offense is the focal point and he is trying to shoehorn players into it rather than adapting to our players' strengths. Sloan had a better ORTG throughout because he adapted. When he lost Stock and Malone he started running more motion offenses rather than straight pick and roll since his new players were not as adept at it, while at the same time teaching the pnr to make it a stronger part of the offense.

Frankly I am not really sure what QS is trying to do within his offense. It seems the players often don't either. One reason I think guys are missing open looks is they are not expecting to be open. In both games I have seen this year (missed the 3rd game), there were more than a few times that someone rotated to pick up the ball and looked somewhat surprised to find themselves open, which throws them out of rhythm. It is not second nature through the offense to know when the openings are coming, as compared to Pop's offense or the triangle for example, where the players know their spots and know more what to expect.

My 2 cents anyway.

 

[mellow]

I would like to discuss Quins offense, but I truly couldn't tell you what it is. Pass, run, catch the ball 28-ft out (with your back to the basket), pass, run, repeat.

 

[LogGrad98]

there is much, much more to planning a defensive system than "having a big-man and letting the perimeter defenders roam".

How did Boston post one of the best team-defences in the NBA last year without a rim protector?

There sure is. That is exactly my point. I do not believe it is by his design. I think he is taking what he has and building off of it, which is good, but it is no grand all-mighty brilliant defensive scheme driving it. It is more or less what he lucked into and he is doing what any run of the mill coach would do, let it be good due to the pieces involved. I do not see a "master's hand" in it at all. I guess if you do you are just so much more perceptive than I am.

Boston obviously had excellent defensive coaching, to answer the 2nd question. What would Boston have been like with a Gobert in the middle?

 

[KqWIN]

Two things about our offense that people don't talk about enough:

1) It's not that bad.

2) Pace has no correlation to offensive efficiency.

The way people speak about our offense would make you think that we've been one of the worst offenses in the league. That simply isn't true. The Jazz were 16th in offense last year, and 17th the year. Not great, but not the worst either. The Jazz have not had elite offensive talent, so I don't know how you can expect an elite offensive output. I definitely think they could/should have produced better, especially last season, but being a mediocre offense with mediocre offense isn't the horror story that everyone seems to talk about.

Speaking of talent, does anyone know where our starters have ranked in offense this year? (Yes, I'm conveniently doing this before we play the spurs ). The Jazz starters are ranked 2nd among units that have played more than 25 minutes together. It's SSS theatre, but we saw this trend last year as well. The offense is great when we have talent on the floor and it goes to hell once we put some subs in. I'm sure this is the case with every team, but it's so drastic with the Jazz because the offense needs multiple threats.

We move the ball and swing it more than any other team in the league. If you're going to attack all sides of the floor, you're going to need to have threats on all sides of the floor. The offense is predicated on making reads and creating momentum, but that all goes away when you have 2-4 non threats on the court.

 

[Hekate]

I like the offense more this season. Everything will be better when Hay returns.

Movements seem more on point this season. Last season our off ball movements were simpler and any misdirection we thought we were creating in the first half of shot clock didn't confuse the defense at all. This season we get more open more easily.

 

[Deleted member 848]

So about that offence

 

[gregbroncs]

Looked good tonight. We have 3 missing players, 2.5 as Favors played half the game. And we have essentially 4 new players in Johnson, Hill, Diaw and Exum. What did everybody expect early in the year?

 

[BTP]

So I only watched the first quarter last night and I'll probably rewatch the rest later.
But I really tried to pay attention to the offense of the Jazz exclusively.
I'd break it down play by play but I doubt anyone would care to read that ****.

What I saw is that the main scheme until the first TV timeout around the 6min mark was that the Jazz basically always played "motion strong" when they were in the halfcourt. Motion strong is a basic play opening that all Popovich disciples run. Some ball reversal at the top of the arc trying to identify where to attack. The Jazz just tried to leverage Rudy's diving prowess. It worked pretty well, let me break down what I remember:
Most of the time we had sideline PnR with Gobert and Hill. The first possessions went through Hood, but Kawhi was on him so they abandoned that quickly. During the second possession Gobert didn't get bumped from the strong side, which allowed him to establish a deep seal vs Gasol, Favors recognized that flared out to the weak side elbow, Hood who was crossmatched against Simmons played the proxy pass and Favors served Rudy with the lob for the easy bucket.
After that sequence strong side man wasn't just shading inside towards Rudy, but bumping him hard.
THey recognized it right away. Gasol switched on Hood on a middle of the floor PnR, Kawhi denied the pocket pass to Rudy, Simmons still rotated inside to bump Rudy even though Kawhi had him contained. Hood made the kick out to the corner, Johnson then kicked it out to Derrick who went to the top and got closed out by Tony, since Aldridge helped contest Hood's drive. Derrick moved it to the other corner to Hill who made the open three as Aldridge had missed that it was his rotation to close out to this corner after Hood made the kickout.
Offense read it perfectly after that which allowed the Jazz to park someone in the strong side corner and have him move up towards the arc once Rudy's well timed dives caused the rotation, leading to open threes.

It looked a little like they just tried to get Gasol involved into every play on the ball and either Parker or Simmons if possible. Relying on the two man game kept a lot of strcture in it and the attempt was to beat them and either score or improvize based on rotation(which they seemed to force at will early on)
Ultimately Rudy's $100M dives were what enabled those easy plays. Even Kawhi got caught up at times even though the Jazz seemed to actively try to avoid playing through him.
After 3 successful plays first TO happened(not sure if TV or Spurs - inside the 7min mark, so probably TV if I'm not mistaken)

Post TO the first two Jazz possessions were broken, as the Spurs pressured the handoffs on the ball reversals more, but Jazz continued to score. The looks weren't as clean but the added pressure made the Jazz ball movement messy but the Spurs got confused on some rotations when the Jazz managed to elude the pressure.
After the Spurs score again Snyder takes time and the play after that is going back to Hood PnR, where he reads the late switch and pulls the trigger from deep. Hood is really good at reading where the help comes from when using screens. Super impressed.
Once Exum and Mack came in for Hill and Johnson the spacing got way more iffy. Spurs kept pressuring the handoffs, as they had initiated some deadly PnRs earlier.
Caused TOs and the possessions got way more problematic. Spurs tried to deny the ball from Hood as much as they could and the others couldn't break the defense, which lead to less help rotations on dives.

The main focus in the first Q was breaking down the Spurs bigs in the PnR, forcing rotations and then improvizing until someone getts a clean look. It worked with good spacing and good guard play in the PnR. As soon as someone not as prolific when it comes to executing screens took over the possessions turned into isolations or broke down completely more often. Hood and Hill were great, Exum, Mack made basic mistakes and Johnson highjacked a couple possessions that he turned into (bad) isos.
ON the other hand I'm really amazed how good Johnson's off ball movement is considering he's spent a decade as Iso-Joe. He's really good when he's got an advantage he can leverage.
Favors was great reading angles and moving into open space which allowed him to make the extra pass or a semi contested J as a bail out move late into the clock or when the O grew stale.

Overall the Jazz put little effort into switching matchups. Their main focus was leveraging advantages into rotation.
On the weak side they did almost no misdirection or screens to set up players.
It looks like they want a lot of read and react during their possessions and not everyone is (yet) up to the task.
Another problem that occurred was when no advantage was achieved the players found themselves in no-mans-land as there was no possible read to make and the offense got messy.
The overall quality of looks will get a lot better once Hayward comes back. Having 2 prime decision makers with the ball on the court most of the time will improve the pressure a lot.
It's early into the season and I can see why Snyder wants to throw their reserves into the mix and gives them room to fail and learn. It would probably be good though to mix in a couple more complex plays with more pre-planned outs, especially when 2 reserve perimeter players share the floor.

 

[Stoked]

Looked good tonight. We have 3 missing players, 2.5 as Favors played half the game. And we have essentially 4 new players in Johnson, Hill, Diaw and Exum. What did everybody expect early in the year?

And against a tough schedule.

There are still going to be rough games and off nights. But I believe in this team and want the 4th seed!

 

[aussietin]

Disclaimer: I'm definitely not a basketball junkie, and I haven't watched many games this season.

But I do always ask this question: why do people want the Jazz to play fast?
- It was mentioned that pace =/= efficiency, and that we're mediocre on offense. Upping pace might not even be beneficial.
- Our offense was never the biggest problem IMO, the problem was in late game situations, our offense and defense both sucked. Playing faster wouldn't help that, close games always slow down in the last few minutes, and I don't think we have the tools to become a team that can blow teams out by 30 by the 3rd quarter - our personnel isn't explosive like that.
- I'm all for getting more coherent set plays in the halfcourt, but upping the pace shouldn't be the go-to way to fix that
- Our strength is in our set defense because we have two legitimate rim protectors and very good perimeter D. We want to slow down the game to get into that as much as possible, reduce fast breaks.
- If we try and run more, we are essentially emphasizing our mediocre area and weakening our area of strength
- In another thread, people were talking about reducing the strain on Favors due to his injuries. Big men are at higher risk for feet/leg injuries later in their career, so why not try to pre-emptively design a game plan around extending longevity for Gobert/Favors?

It sometimes feels to me that fans are super selfish and just want to see better offense because offense is more fun to watch. A fast pace is more fun to watch, but I think it doesn't emphasize our strengths.

Aiming to get a mediocre offense for this season should be enough. I believe that with a couple more years and improvements from our core, we can sit around a #10 offense with a top defense, which can get us to contender level.

Hope everything I said was coherent...

 

[JAZZGASM]

Disclaimer: I'm definitely not a basketball junkie, and I haven't watched many games this season.

But I do always ask this question: why do people want the Jazz to play fast?
- It was mentioned that pace =/= efficiency, and that we're mediocre on offense. Upping pace might not even be beneficial.
- Our offense was never the biggest problem IMO, the problem was in late game situations, our offense and defense both sucked. Playing faster wouldn't help that, close games always slow down in the last few minutes, and I don't think we have the tools to become a team that can blow teams out by 30 by the 3rd quarter - our personnel isn't explosive like that.
- I'm all for getting more coherent set plays in the halfcourt, but upping the pace shouldn't be the go-to way to fix that
- Our strength is in our set defense because we have two legitimate rim protectors and very good perimeter D. We want to slow down the game to get into that as much as possible, reduce fast breaks.
- If we try and run more, we are essentially emphasizing our mediocre area and weakening our area of strength
- In another thread, people were talking about reducing the strain on Favors due to his injuries. Big men are at higher risk for feet/leg injuries later in their career, so why not try to pre-emptively design a game plan around extending longevity for Gobert/Favors?

It sometimes feels to me that fans are super selfish and just want to see better offense because offense is more fun to watch. A fast pace is more fun to watch, but I think it doesn't emphasize our strengths.

Aiming to get a mediocre offense for this season should be enough. I believe that with a couple more years and improvements from our core, we can sit around a #10 offense with a top defense, which can get us to contender level.

Hope everything I said was coherent...

I posted a longer analysis of our offense last year, but a basic summary: Our offensive sets largely mimics a few of the Spurs main sets, with a lot fewer wrinkles. We run a few sets out of the horns, strong, weak, etc., but the Spurs have big men that can shoot and spread the floor making it much more effective. The sets we run are very good at getting open 3 pt shots. We saw it last night, and all of last year (we usually don't make a very high percentage). Our sets also include a mind numbing amounts of top of the key screens designed to create a mismatch and/or get players open for corner/wing 3s. I am fine with running these sets, even though they are not creative, and are boring to watch, and essentially every team does the same damn thing. I just don't want it to be at the expense of running an offense that creates easy points. We don't have any emphasis on baseline cuts, back doors, post pnr, etc. Essentially all of the things that used to make the Jazz unique, and IMO, our players have the talent to do really well with. I don't mind a paced offense, I'd just love to see some wrinkles of the UCLA and flex run by these players.

The other issue is if we are going to win based on our defensive identity, shooting a bunch of 3s and long 2s will not be conducive to that goal where the long rebounds tend to create fast breaks and opens shots. On the defensive side, the Jazz do a pretty good job rotating and staying in front of their man, but we rarely take charges. (And Ginobili takes phantom charges--after all these years and the refs still fall for it).

 

[BTP]

Disclaimer: I'm definitely not a basketball junkie, and I haven't watched many games this season.

But I do always ask this question: why do people want the Jazz to play fast?
- It was mentioned that pace =/= efficiency, and that we're mediocre on offense. Upping pace might not even be beneficial.
- Our offense was never the biggest problem IMO, the problem was in late game situations, our offense and defense both sucked. Playing faster wouldn't help that, close games always slow down in the last few minutes, and I don't think we have the tools to become a team that can blow teams out by 30 by the 3rd quarter - our personnel isn't explosive like that.
- I'm all for getting more coherent set plays in the halfcourt, but upping the pace shouldn't be the go-to way to fix that
- Our strength is in our set defense because we have two legitimate rim protectors and very good perimeter D. We want to slow down the game to get into that as much as possible, reduce fast breaks.
- If we try and run more, we are essentially emphasizing our mediocre area and weakening our area of strength
- In another thread, people were talking about reducing the strain on Favors due to his injuries. Big men are at higher risk for feet/leg injuries later in their career, so why not try to pre-emptively design a game plan around extending longevity for Gobert/Favors?

It sometimes feels to me that fans are super selfish and just want to see better offense because offense is more fun to watch. A fast pace is more fun to watch, but I think it doesn't emphasize our strengths.

Aiming to get a mediocre offense for this season should be enough. I believe that with a couple more years and improvements from our core, we can sit around a #10 offense with a top defense, which can get us to contender level.

Hope everything I said was coherent...

I don't think ppl want the Jazz to force playing faster.
Statistically early offense and transition offense yields more points per possession than halfcourt sets/isolation.
They want the Jazz to be more aggressive after rebounds so they can increase the amount of more valuable possessions.
The byproduct is that more possessions are being played overall.
A reason why it could be good is the high altitude in SLC.
Bodies are very habit driven. If they live at sealevel, they're used to 21% oxygen. The air in SLC has roughly 17% less oxygen compared to sealevel resulting in a 17.4% oxygen ratio.
If your body isn't used to living at high altitude it has trouble adjusting to these ratios resulting in an increased level of fatigue(not very literate when it comes to medicine just read some conclusions)
If your team plays faster basketball, bodies fatigue faster, potentially increasing the disparity of performance between home and away team, when you assume the Jazz who spend roughly 4-6 months in high altitude every year and their bodies are used to low oxygen levels.

I think it's reasonable to ask for them to run. I'm not sure why they keep the pace down, maybe it's educational purpose or personnel.