Joined
·
3,964 Posts
We're saying the bench is the problem. I agree.
My question: how much is the players' fault, how much is the coach's fault and how much is the GM at fault for building the wrong roster?
My opinion. The Nets offense is this complex, delicate dance that requires 5 players in sync at all times because most Nets are limited skill-wise. Therefore, the floor unit needs to be highly coordinated. Complex, delicate things can be beautiful - like the Nets offense is at times - but they break down easier under real-world pressures (like fatigue or a good defense). Compare the Nets to the Kings who ARE flexible and interchangeable with the motion offense because their players are triple-threats where most Nets players, well, aren't. Flexibility for the Nets in games depends wholly on Jason Kidd, and even the best PG in the world has his limits.
What that amounts to - due to the needs of the offense crossed with players' limited skill-sets - is the Nets can't just plug in players off the bench like other teams. Scott has the challenge of placing a coordinated 5 on the court at all times or else the offense completely falls apart. When that happens, everybody looks bad. How was this problem solved last season? Remember, the bench lost leads last season, too. At best, they maintained a game. The problem wasn't solved, it was mitigated with a rigid, pre-scripted rotation. Through 48 minutes of every game, the plays and floor combinations rarely deviated. For a variety of reasons, the planned patterns have been lost to Scott this season, which is why he over-uses his starting unit, the only pattern he trusts. (Two other remaining patterns from last season are the Harris/Kittles back-court and Rogers as 3rd forward, which didn't work last season, either.)
Aside. We saw the weakness with such a rigid style in the Finals. While it assured a high level of play, the same rigidity obstructed necessary adjustments and contingencies when Plan A didn't work.
This season, the delicate structure of the Nets' motion offense is falling apart and Scott has failed to fix the problem. Rod Thorn shares equal blame for his failure to acquire enough flexible and interchangeable triple-threat players for the motion offense. The only exception on the bench is Scalabrine, who is a triple-threat player. The problem is, Veal is 6th on Scott's depth chart for manning the pivot - behind Twin, A-Train, K-Mart, Rogers and RJ - where his skills would be best-suited for the motion offense.
It's a tough problem to solve. The obvious solution is to scrap the motion offense and, mid-season, build an entirely new offense based on the strengths AND limitations of present personnel. Ain't gonna happen. Another solution is find a head coach with the ability to make lemonade (motion offense) out of apples (players who don't fit the motion offense).
A second reason for the Nets poor bench production is bench players misused and/or playing out of position.
Lucious Harris, an SG with (at best) SG-level point skills, is playing back-up PG in a system reliant on a ball-handling, court-vision, passing PG. While Lu is playing a poor PG, he ALSO can't use his SG game. Lu was a poor PG even before he was hurt.
Williams is pulling yeoman's duty as a back-up C, but he's a 6'9 PF. Also, despite his low-post presence, he lacks the skill-set (think Brad Miller) required of a pivot in the motion offense.
Scalabrine, drafted for his post offensive skills, is a natural for the pivot role in the motion offense, whether as a PF or C. Indeed, in limited opportunities with the Nets, he has shown good ability as a pivot comfortable in the paint. However, his GIVEN role has been to set screens, space the floor and swing the ball. Plays are rarely, if ever, called for him. The few shots given to him (about 3.5 per game) are usually garbage shots. Veal has been asked to sacrifice his game, even though his pivot skills are EXACTLY what the Nets need for the motion offense.
I can't blame Armstrong, Planinic, Pack and Rogers on Scott. I CAN blame them on Thorn.
Sum. Blame a fragile motion offense, blame a GM who signs players with the wrong profile, blame bench players forced out of position, blame a coach wasting the one player who does fit the motion offense. You can blame the players, too, but I would blame the above factors first.
My question: how much is the players' fault, how much is the coach's fault and how much is the GM at fault for building the wrong roster?
My opinion. The Nets offense is this complex, delicate dance that requires 5 players in sync at all times because most Nets are limited skill-wise. Therefore, the floor unit needs to be highly coordinated. Complex, delicate things can be beautiful - like the Nets offense is at times - but they break down easier under real-world pressures (like fatigue or a good defense). Compare the Nets to the Kings who ARE flexible and interchangeable with the motion offense because their players are triple-threats where most Nets players, well, aren't. Flexibility for the Nets in games depends wholly on Jason Kidd, and even the best PG in the world has his limits.
What that amounts to - due to the needs of the offense crossed with players' limited skill-sets - is the Nets can't just plug in players off the bench like other teams. Scott has the challenge of placing a coordinated 5 on the court at all times or else the offense completely falls apart. When that happens, everybody looks bad. How was this problem solved last season? Remember, the bench lost leads last season, too. At best, they maintained a game. The problem wasn't solved, it was mitigated with a rigid, pre-scripted rotation. Through 48 minutes of every game, the plays and floor combinations rarely deviated. For a variety of reasons, the planned patterns have been lost to Scott this season, which is why he over-uses his starting unit, the only pattern he trusts. (Two other remaining patterns from last season are the Harris/Kittles back-court and Rogers as 3rd forward, which didn't work last season, either.)
Aside. We saw the weakness with such a rigid style in the Finals. While it assured a high level of play, the same rigidity obstructed necessary adjustments and contingencies when Plan A didn't work.
This season, the delicate structure of the Nets' motion offense is falling apart and Scott has failed to fix the problem. Rod Thorn shares equal blame for his failure to acquire enough flexible and interchangeable triple-threat players for the motion offense. The only exception on the bench is Scalabrine, who is a triple-threat player. The problem is, Veal is 6th on Scott's depth chart for manning the pivot - behind Twin, A-Train, K-Mart, Rogers and RJ - where his skills would be best-suited for the motion offense.
It's a tough problem to solve. The obvious solution is to scrap the motion offense and, mid-season, build an entirely new offense based on the strengths AND limitations of present personnel. Ain't gonna happen. Another solution is find a head coach with the ability to make lemonade (motion offense) out of apples (players who don't fit the motion offense).
A second reason for the Nets poor bench production is bench players misused and/or playing out of position.
Lucious Harris, an SG with (at best) SG-level point skills, is playing back-up PG in a system reliant on a ball-handling, court-vision, passing PG. While Lu is playing a poor PG, he ALSO can't use his SG game. Lu was a poor PG even before he was hurt.
Williams is pulling yeoman's duty as a back-up C, but he's a 6'9 PF. Also, despite his low-post presence, he lacks the skill-set (think Brad Miller) required of a pivot in the motion offense.
Scalabrine, drafted for his post offensive skills, is a natural for the pivot role in the motion offense, whether as a PF or C. Indeed, in limited opportunities with the Nets, he has shown good ability as a pivot comfortable in the paint. However, his GIVEN role has been to set screens, space the floor and swing the ball. Plays are rarely, if ever, called for him. The few shots given to him (about 3.5 per game) are usually garbage shots. Veal has been asked to sacrifice his game, even though his pivot skills are EXACTLY what the Nets need for the motion offense.
I can't blame Armstrong, Planinic, Pack and Rogers on Scott. I CAN blame them on Thorn.
Sum. Blame a fragile motion offense, blame a GM who signs players with the wrong profile, blame bench players forced out of position, blame a coach wasting the one player who does fit the motion offense. You can blame the players, too, but I would blame the above factors first.