[UCCBball] This weekend's game - offensive setup

[Andrew Bailey]

On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 03:16:08PM +0900, tommo at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au wrote:
> Quoting "Andrew Bailey" <acolyte at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au>:
> 
> > I don't agree with this as much. If you are in the low post and the wing
> > is in the right position you're pretty much open to a quick pass in my mind
> > but it would hurt to have a deep wing and point up. What won't work is the
> > other forward cutting to high post.
> 
> The problem is that our wing doesn't tend to be in the right position,  
> because they receive a shallow angle pass from the point guard  
> resulting in them being way too high up to achieve a good passing angle.
> 
> The other forward cutting up to high post is an absolute standard of  
> tonnes of offensive plays, and creates so many options. You've really  
> just said here "It won't work" without saying why, so I'm not sure how  
> to explain this to you.
> 

Chris's little pictures kind of cleared it up for me. If you're on the baseline or close to it ( a foot or two ) I can see this working with the other forward cutting. If you further up than that, and you often are, then there isn't any space to cut to. Of course you could be higher because the wing isn't deep enough. 

I do actually try this cut a few times a game. It very rarely seems to be useful. 

> > We don't really have that good deep jump shots either. The reason I  
> > think this
> > will lead to a rushed offence is that we have no one to pass to to get it to
> > the other side . A good swing play will have the ball the other side  
> > before any
> > of our forwards could cut to that space( and they are the closest )
> 
> Sometimes you need to actually localise your offense to a particular  
> area, just for that specific branch of the offensive play. The  
> other-side wing remains for a pass back towards the other side, and  
> the other-side forward can cut out to the wing to complete the swing  
> the rest of the way around.

Fair enough.  i don't dispute the need to try and disrupt a zone. But that needs. 

> 
> >> You're right that we get four players on one side, but I disagree that
> >> it'll ruin our spacing. The four players will be well-spaced, with a
> >> sizable box formation from high-to-low and key-to-sideline.
> >>
> >
> > Rememre there are some defenders in there as well and you tend to post up
> > quite high. There really isn't anywhere for the other forward to go  
> > to on that side that doesn't just shut down. And most of our point  
> > guards wont pass over an opposing gaurd so high post isn't really  
> > going to get the ball in this scenario.
> 
> I vastly favour the low post, and if I do post higher up, it's  
> generally because the angle for a low post pass isn't there at the  
> time. I really have to disagree with you about the forward cutting to  
> the high post - there are areas there that aren't immediately shut  
> down - I cut there all the time. It's a great area to put a body in as  
> it causes a serious threat to the other team and opens up a really  
> solid inside option other than the low post.
>

I know you do go there a lot, I try and keep out of your way.
 
> > I wouldn't have alled the free throw area high post so we could be  
> > misunderstanding each other. You tend to post up a LOT closer to the  
> > basket than I do. I prefer to draw out a forward to create room for  
> > either a) a pass to a cutting player b ) space for me to drive  
> > around.  You tend to post up closer to the basket as you'll try for  
> > a spin hook. This probably accounts for our different perspective on  
> > where the space is for cutting.
> 
> If you push the high post much higher than the free throw area you're  
> going to run into the point guard ;)
> 

No cause the point guard is wide under you scenario ;-)

> Anyway, that's fine if that's the way you like to position yourself.  
> Just to clarify - when I talk about cutting to the high post I don't  
> mean to cut there and post up a player, I just mean cut to that space.  
> Sorry if I wasn't clear on that. I think that area would suit your  
> style of offense (allowing a bit of space to drive around or cut)  
> quite well. Also, with you at the high area and me at the low area I  
> think we'll find that our offensive styles will start to complement  
> one another a lot more.
> 

Yeah we need to find a better way to make that work. 

> > I don't nessarily disagree with you on this but I'd need moer than a  
> > slow text based medium to figure it out. WHat I do think is  
> > important is that we should be able to get the ball from that low  
> > position to the other side wing without anyone moving much.
> 
> I'm afraid such a setup doesn't really exist, unless we have 4 on the  
> outside. I also have a serious objection to any offense which is run  
> "without anyone moving much". That's one of our major issues at the  
> moment - we play a flat-footed shallow swing offense that doesn't  
> really tend to go anywhere - we need to MOVE more and actually push  
> the defense a bit.
> 

*sigh* Yes we do need to move around more. I suppose my point is it's hard to capitalise on moving their defence around if you can't swing the ball quickly.

That all said,  I am quite willing to try the offense and see if it works.

I suppose one selfish base of my concern is that it will involve me doing a lot of running and not really getting the ball.

Andrew.

-- 
"The hot dog eating contest is not only a beautiful display of athleticism,
it is a fundamental way for citizens of all nations to display patriotism," 
- Wayne Norbitz