If MJ played today, why wouldn't a coach run this play every possession?

[3ball]

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/5-25-2015/7mUjI9.gif


Isolations versus 1-defender strongsides - obviously, 1-defender strongsides couldn't be done in the 80's because guys didn't shoot 3's, so there were no weakside floor-spreaders drawing defenders away from the strongside (spacing).. But today's game has the requisite 3-point shooting and spacing, so 1-defender strongsides are common.

Given MJ's isolation efficiency, it would be optimal to run the "1-defender strongside play" EVERY play.. It makes mathematical sense.. Lebron isolates the most often in today's game even though his isolation points per possession (PPP) and FG% are very low in the regular season, and even lower in this postseason (stats shown below).

If Lebron's low isolation efficiency rates justify his league-leading isolation frequency AND help his team, than what kind of impact would MJ's far superior, league-leading isolation efficiency have against these 1-defender strongsides (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=377570)?


Link to NBA.com for isolation statistics:

http://stats.nba.com/playtype/#!/isolation/?dir=1

In regular season, Lebron ranked only 78th out of 350 in isolation PPP, while his FG% ranked 117th out of 350.. In the playoffs, Lebron is 35th out of 40 in isolation PPP, and 30th out of 40 in FG%.
.

[Quickening]

Because he is old as fck and probably can't shoot for chit anymore :facepalm

[Rose'sACL]

Would you defend curry and lebron the same way?
go watch 2013 and 2014 finals. in 2013 finals, kawhi was standing back a little to make lebron shoot instead of drive to the rim.
in 2014 when lebron's jumper was wet, kawhi was guarding him closely.
in current playoffs, lebron's jumper has been poor so hawks were playing defense to protect against the drive to the rim on most possesions.

[KobesFinger]

So Jordan shoots 80 shots a game?

[IGOTGAME]

you understand that its possible to bring a second defender strongside and zone the rest of the players? that this was a strategic decision.

You are a crazy person.

Its was way easier to isolate back before the zone rules. you are a crazy person. seek help. im serious, only a crazy person does this.

[3ball]

http://www.gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/690898df7bfc98d1c910a111434ea70b.gif

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/51d9024d465f70980f24451de018c34f.gif


So Jordan shoots 80 shots a game?


Not necessarily - he might pass it.. But regardless, given MJ's GOAT iso ability, it would be mathematically correct to run the play 80 times a game, where MJ is isolated against 1 strongside defender.

We know that if Lebron's middle-of-the-pack isolation efficiency can help his team succeed and justify him isolating more often than any player in the entire league, than the impact of MJ's LEAGUE-LEADING isolation efficiency would justify an MJ isolation on literally every single play.'

In previous eras, the lack of spacing and legal paint-camping made MJ thread needles in order to score and pass on strongsides that were chalk-full with all 5 defenders, as seen in GIFs above.. In today's game, he'd face fewer strongside defenders due to weakside floor-spreaders that draw defenders away from the strongside (spacing).

[livinglegend]

I have a serious question.
Is there anyone on this forum who seriously reads 3ball's long post?

[3ball]

you understand that its possible to bring a second defender strongside


Yeah, it's called a strongside flood, where a defender on the weakside floods over to the strongside.

But strongside floods can't occur and aren't necessary if everyone is already on the strongside to begin with, like in previous eras when there were no weakside floor-spreaders to draw defenders away (no spacing)..

The strongside floods you speak of are only necessary BECAUSE weakside floor-spreaders initially drew defenders away from the strongside, which leaves the strongside with only 1 or 2 defenders and necessitates the flooding of defenders BACK TO the strongside... The spacing (weakside floor-spreaders) necessitates the flooding.. Here, let me give you an example to illustrate - see the next post:

[3ball]

.
In the picture below, weakside floor-spreaders have drawn defenders away from the strongside.. If Noah doesn't leave #20 Mosgov and flood to the strongside, the strongside will only have 2 defenders on it.. This demonstrates how spacing necessitates flooding - defenders must flood BACK to the strongside (Noah), only because they were originally drawn away by floor-spreaders on the weakside (Mosgov)


http://i61.tinypic.com/2z7mnvm.png



Otoh, previous eras didn't have weakside floor-spreaders drawing defenders away from the strongside, so the strongside was usually ALREADY FLOODED with all 5 defenders, as seen below:


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/54cd4db17a9330ca58b8e33a0b6f9b2f.gif


Without 3-point shooting, previous eras didn't have spacing or weakside floor-spreaders to draw defenders away from the strongside, so players faced more defenders on the strongside than today's game.. In today's game, weakside spacing ensures a more porous distribution of strongside defenders that prevents today's players from ever having to face a strongside with all 5 defenders on it (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11128077&postcount=21).

Accordingly, the stats of today's players should be downgraded appropriately, particularly the paint and at-rim efficiencies that benefited from the porous strongside defense.. It should also be noted that the porous spacing also allows today's players to take longer with decisions, while getting away with a weaker, less sophisticated repertoire and isolation ability (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=375397).

[livinglegend]

You 3ball! Nobody reads your essays.
Stop wasting your time.

PS: anyone reading all those long texts is stupid as fvck. No offense.

[3ball]

.
Top Five Michael Jordan Buckets on Dennis Rodman


5)

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/0986a07e22b04495db4102d3c4529709.gif



4)

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/7464a3314e5aec5ce037672c12d8c447.gif



3)

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/35edccca0a794c31a98a57e7e58bb748.gif



2)

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/7e73a5105b77725d4d7c47736486d0b9.gif



1)

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/Jordan_Game_Winner_over_Rodman_cdfed0b0df8b81a04f9 cc8608a8e31bb.gif... Game-Winner 1989 ECF Game 3

[livinglegend]

No long essay needed - today's player faces fewer defenders on the strongside due to weakside floor-spreaders that draw them away (also called spacing).

Is that simple enough for your dumbass

if no long essay was needed, why did you write a long essay?

[dubeta]

if no long essay was needed, why did you write a long essay?

:oldlol:

[sdot_thadon]

if no long essay was needed, why did you write a long essay?
:oldlol:

[jongib369]

These are reposts, but too long? Essay? Shouldn't be surprised people don't have the attention span to read a paragraph or two when most arguments consist of two numbers, and a slash. You want 3ball to shut up, you'll have to put in the effort he did to prove his point wrong. Or you know, don't click his post

[FreezingTsmoove]

Go watch ESPN and listen to the garbage they spew? 3ball is 100%correct with everything in this thread. If you don't want to read why are you on a forum?

[Kvnzhangyay]

Go watch ESPN and listen to the garbage they spew? 3ball is 100%correct with everything in this thread. If you don't want to read why are you on a forum?

so basically whats correct is what you think?

what a "forum"!

[livinglegend]

3ball exposing some of his alts in this thread. :oldlol:
I knew it would happen.

[ILLsmak]

I have a serious question.
Is there anyone on this forum who seriously reads 3ball's long post?

I rarely even look at the gifs more than scrolling thru them.

-Smak

[livinglegend]

I rarely even look at the gifs more than scrolling thru them.

-Smak

Right.
Why would anyone read his long posts after all the trolling he has done?
Everyone knows his agenda. Nobody takes him seriously.
He is only wasting his time posting all those things.

[Beastmode88]

if no long essay was needed, why did you write a long essay?

Thats a long essay? For someone thats going for a phd it should be a cake walk. :biggums:

[3ball]

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/5-25-2015/7mUjI9.gif


THREAD CLIFFS:

If Lebron's low isolation efficiency (http://stats.nba.com/playtype/#!/isolation/?dir=1&sort=Time&Season=2014-15&SeasonType=Playoffs) justifies him to isolate more often than anyone in the entire league, surely MJ's GOAT isolation efficiency would justify him to isolate every single play against these same 1-defender strongsides (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=377570) (example shown above).

Certainly, nothing would compare to the already-flooded, 5-defender strongsides (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11128077&postcount=21) MJ faced in previous eras when there was no spacing at all, let alone on the weakside spacing needed to draw defenders away from the strongside.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Mike would have torn today's defenses into Steve Nash look-alikes all across the league. Without hand-checking, dude would have been more unstoppable than he seemed 20 years ago; the defensive three second rule would also have helped.

The smartest of players (MJ being one of them) could pick apart zone defenses at will too (bu-bu-ZONE!!) They understand the shifts, they understand the weaknesses in every zone, and that's why the best defensive teams always play man. The weakest defensive teams play zone. That isn't to say that there isn't a time to play a zone, either. It's a game of adjusting when needed.

[3ball]

Mike would have torn today's defenses into Steve Nash look-alikes all across the league. Without hand-checking, dude would have been more unstoppable than he seemed 20 years ago; the defensive three second rule would also have helped.

The smartest of players (MJ being one of them) could pick apart zone defenses at will too (bu-bu-ZONE!!) They understand the shifts, they understand the weaknesses in every zone, and that's why the best defensive teams always play man. The weakest defensive teams play zone. That isn't to say that there isn't a time to play a zone, either. It's a game of adjusting when needed.
That's all nice and good, but that doesn't address the point of the thread - Lebron gets to face 1-defender strongsides (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=377570) while MJ faced 5-defender strongsides (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11128077&postcount=21).

It could be said that 5-defender strongsides are 5 times tougher than 1-defender strongsides, but regardless, MJ dominated a tougher version of the game, and to a greater extent.

In Lebron's case, despite routinely facing 1-defender strongsides, his isolation efficiency is very low.. However, Lebron's low isolation efficiency (http://stats.nba.com/playtype/#!/isolation/?dir=1&sort=Time&Season=2014-15&SeasonType=Playoffs) is still enough to justify him isolating more than anyone in the entire league, which means MJ's GOAT isolation efficiency would justify him isolation every single play.

[Poetry]

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/5-25-2015/7mUjI9.gif


Isolations versus 1-defender strongsides - obviously, 1-defender strongsides couldn't be done in the 80's because guys didn't shoot 3's, so there were no weakside floor-spreaders drawing defenders away from the strongside.

Not just that, there was a rule specifically in place for that: Illegal Offense.

[Trollsmasher]

because MJ can't pass

[ShawkFactory]

That's all nice and good, but that doesn't address the point of the thread - Lebron gets to face 1-defender strongsides (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=377570) while MJ faced 5-defender strongsides (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11128077&postcount=21).

It could be said that 5-defender strongsides are 5 times tougher than 1-defender strongsides, but regardless, MJ dominated a tougher version of the game, and to a greater extent.

In Lebron's case, despite routinely facing 1-defender strongsides, his isolation efficiency is very low.. However, Lebron's low isolation efficiency (http://stats.nba.com/playtype/#!/isolation/?dir=1&sort=Time&Season=2014-15&SeasonType=Playoffs) is still enough to justify him isolating more than anyone in the entire league, which means MJ's GOAT isolation efficiency would justify him isolation every single play.
Why are you copy-and-pasting stuff to a person who's agreeing with you?

Stop bumping your failed threads. Go make another one.

[3ball]

Why are you copy-and-pasting stuff to a person who's agreeing with you?

Stop bumping your failed threads. Go make another one.


STFU, I was responding to another poster... and stop harrassing me in all my threads
.

[3ball]

Without hand-checking, dude would have been more unstoppable than he seemed 20 years ago; the defensive three second rule would also have helped.



Agreed.. It's harder to score on this defense:


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/573113292e852dcb8f5fe242c53e3982.gif



Than this defense:


http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/5-25-2015/QpWaKl.gif


MJ faces no-spacing and legal paint camping, so the strongside and paint are already flooded with all 5 defenders..

Otoh, Lebron enjoys spacing, including weakside floor-spreaders that have drawn all defenders away - so he faces a wide open paint and only 1-defender on strongside, necessitating a flood of weakside defender(s) to the strongside.. Pathetic

[IGOTGAME]

Yeah, it's called a strongside flood, where a defender on the weakside floods over to the strongside.

But strongside floods can't occur and aren't necessary if everyone is already on the strongside to begin with, like in previous eras when there were no weakside floor-spreaders to draw defenders away (no spacing)..

The strongside floods you speak of are only necessary BECAUSE weakside floor-spreaders initially drew defenders away from the strongside, which leaves the strongside with only 1 or 2 defenders and necessitates the flooding of defenders BACK TO the strongside... The spacing (weakside floor-spreaders) necessitates the flooding.. Here, let me give you an example to illustrate - see the next post:

You understa that the same iso is possible under the illegal defense rules without "floor spreaders" because getting in position to "flood" the strong-side was illegal defense. Back then your only two options were stay near your man(defined by rules) or commit to a double team.

What you show with your gifs is often poorly executed plays or spacing. But it all comes back to a fundamental misunderstanding of the illegal defense rules compared to the rules today. I don't always disagree with your conclusions but the reasoning is off.

[3ball]

getting in position to "flood" the strong-side was illegal defense.



Defenders never left the strongside to begin with because there were no weakside floor-spreaders to draw them away.. With defenders remaining on strongside, the strongside was automatically-flooded with all 5 defenders.. 5-defender strongsides were the standard in previous eras, as you'd expect when there are no weakside floor-spreaders (spacing).

Otoh, today's game never has 5-defender strongsides because teams use weakside floor-spreaders to draw defenders away from the strongside, often resulting in 1-defender strongsides instead.. The fewer strongside defenders caused by weakside spacing necessitates the flooding of defenders BACK TO the strongside..

So today's game as 1-defender strongsides that require flooding, and previous eras had 5-defender strongsides that didn't.

Today's weakside floor-spreaders (spacing) is why I can find 10-15 possessions per game where the Cavs station 4 players behind the 3-point line on the weakside, so Lebron can face a 1-defender strongside.. But there isn't even ONE example of this from previous eras - in all my years of watching, I've never seen a team station 4 players behind the 3-point line on the weakside.. Weakside floor-spreading (spacing) simply didn't exist in previous eras - it's a modern invention used to reduce strongside defenders (1-defender strongsides) and force remaining defenders to help from further away (the weakside)..





Back then your only two options were stay near your man(defined by rules) or commit to a double team.


Nowhere in the Illegal Defense Guidelines does it say defenders have to be "near" their man (meaning standing right next to them or within any immediate distance), nor is anything like that ever implied (just do a CTRL F word search in the Guidelines below to verify):

http://nbahoopsonline.com/History/Leagues/NBA/Rules/Fouls.html


Similar to a fair amount of new fans, you seem to think man-to-man defense means you have to stand right next to your man.. This is not true.. Haven't you wondered all these years why every possession from previous eras shows defenders sagging off their man, especially 3-point shooters?.. That must have driven you crazy since you think defenders need to stand right next to their man.. Look at MJ here on his final shot - everyone is sagging off the shooters.. This is STANDARD:


http://www.gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/6ac0c15644b20b9442abd707d258769b.gif


Here's some common knowledge: since the game was invented, players learning man-to-man defense for the first time are taught to play halfway in between their man and the ball, and point at both with each hand to keep track.

The only times playing halfway in between your man and the ball isn't the standard are the specific spots it's illegal under the regulations of that particular league - for example, rules like defensive 3 seconds or other league-specific rules can prevent defenders from fully accomplishing the standard man-to-man objective of halfway in between your man and ball..

Under the Illegal Defense Guidelines (Rule 2a (http://nbahoopsonline.com/History/Leagues/NBA/Rules/Fouls.html)), strongside and weakside defenders were allowed to sag off corner and sideline 3-point shooters all the way back into the paint for up to 2.9 seconds, just like today's game (infact, ANY weakside defender could be in paint for up to 2.9 seconds):


2a. Weakside defenders may be in a defensive position within the "outside lane" with no time limit, and within the "Inside lane" for 2.9 seconds.
For 3-point shooters above the FT line extended or ANY player above the free-throw line extended, defenders could sag back into the paint for up to 2.9 seconds, just like today's game, as stiplulated in Rules 2d and 2e..

The only real advantage today's defensive schemes have is being able to guard 2 players with 1 defender (zone) OUTSIDE the paint... But inside the paint, today's defensive 3 seconds rule doesn't allow defenders to wait in the 16 x 19 foot painted area if no one is within armslength (http://www.nba.com/nba101/misunderstood_0708.html) (about 3 feet).. Having to stand within 3 feet of your man is the opposite of a zone.. It's actually the type of defense you erroneously thought man-to-man was - THAT'S that type of defense today's game requires inside the paint (most important area of the floor).

Otoh, in previous eras, Rule 2b (http://nbahoopsonline.com/History/Leagues/NBA/Rules/Fouls.html) of the Illegal Defense Guidelines allowed defenders to remain in the paint "with no time restriction" if their man was anywhere inside the paint, or within 3 feet of either side.. This is legal paint-camping or zone in the paint.. Indeed, previous eras allowed zone in the paint (paint-camping), while today's game allows zone outside the paint only (with a defensive 3 seconds rule and armslength requirement inside paint).

Those are the league-specific rules governing the EXTENT to which you can play standard man-to-man defense (being halfway in between your man and the ball).. But make no mistake - sagging off your man in man-to-man defense is not only standard, but it's considered bad, benchable defense NOT to sag off your man.. "Hugging" or "clinging" to your man is cringeworthy man-to-man defense.
.

[Chadwin]

If I could coach a Lebron team back then, I would just pull the other 4 guys to almost half court and let him iso all game.

[3ball]

http://www.gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/6ac0c15644b20b9442abd707d258769b.gif


If I could coach a Lebron team back then, I would just pull the other 4 guys to almost half court and let him iso all game.



when players were behind the 3-point line in previous eas, defenders didn't have to stand right next to their man - look at the GIF above - all defenders are sagging off 3-point shooters - this is standard man-to-man defense, no different from today - that's exactly how defenders sag off their man today.

but to your point, in previous eras, teams simply NEVER stationed 4 guys behind the 3-point line on the weakside.. you can't find ONE play where they did.. that's only something that happens in TODAY'S game.

it wouldn't work in previous eras anyway - teams in 1985 took only two 3-pointers per game, so the 4 guys behind the 3-point line (floor-spreaders) WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ACTUAL THREATS... Defenders would still have to be on the weakside guarding the floor-spreaders like today's game, but defenders would KNOW the floor-spreaders weren't going to shoot.. KNOWING their man won't shoot, defenders wouldn't have the decision to make of whether to come off the shooter - they KNOW they are coming off the shooter, and can abandon them quicker - the knowledge that their man won't shoot and isn't actually a threat ruins the entire clear-out strategy.. Defenders would be like goalies that get the early jump because they know which way the ball is going..

Otoh, in today's game, the reason the 1-defender strongside occurs so often and is so effective, is because defenders MUST respect the shooters, and can't immediately abandon them to help on the strongside - today's shooters are actual threats, so defenders actually must consider not helping AT ALL.... and they certainly can't help as quickly or decisively... But in previous eras, the defenders would KNOW they didn't have to guard the shooter, which would allow them to come over to help quicker, thus eliminating the effectiveness of the play.

But again, this never happened in previous eras anyway... There isn't 1 play where a coach ever put 4 guys behind the 3-point line on the weakside.. So it doesn't matter what YOU would do for Lebron... It only matters what coaches actually did - and if Lebron played in previous eras, his teammates wouldn't shoot threes, so he wouldn't have anyone spreading the floor for him.. He'd have to face no spacing just like everyone else, including congested paints and more defenders on the strongside.. And again, even if a coach DID run the clear-out play, it wouldn't be nearly as effective (or effective at all) because defenders would know the shooters are never going to shoot.

Btw, you say you'd iso lebron all day... That wouldn't be a good move - In regular season, Lebron ranked only 78th out of 350 in isolation PPP, while his FG% ranked 117th out of 350.. In the playoffs, Lebron is 35th out of 40 in isolation PPP, and 30th out of 40 in FG%: http://stats.nba.com/playtype/#!/isolation/?dir=1&sort=Time&Season=2014-15&SeasonType=Playoffs.
.
.

[UK2K]

So Jordan shoots 80 shots a game?

If you could get Jordan 80 halfway decent looking shots in a game, every game, chances are you are probably going to win.

[Locked_Up_Tonight]

If Michael Jordan shot the ball 80 times a game he would be so tired by about February his team may not even make the playoffs.

The old adage of "tread on the tires" applies to these type of scenarios.

Just like a running back has so many carries in him, a scorer can only shoot so many times or play so many minutes until it catches up with him.

So in theory (if it was a video game), sure they could run it every game. But in real life, even the great Jordan could not have that kind of usage rate every game.

[Dr.J4ever]

when players were behind the 3-point line in previous eas, defenders didn't have to stand right next to their man - look at the GIF above - all defenders are sagging off 3-point shooters - this is standard man-to-man defense, no different from today - that's exactly how defenders sag off their man today.

but to your point, in previous eras, teams simply NEVER stationed 4 guys behind the 3-point line on the weakside.. you can't find ONE play where they did.. that's only something that happens in TODAY'S game.

it wouldn't work in previous eras anyway - teams in 1985 took only two 3-pointers per game, so the 4 guys behind the 3-point line (floor-spreaders) WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ACTUAL THREATS... Defenders would still have to be on the weakside guarding the floor-spreaders like today's game, but defenders would KNOW the floor-spreaders weren't going to shoot.. KNOWING their man won't shoot, defenders wouldn't have the decision to make of whether to come off the shooter - they KNOW they are coming off the shooter, and can abandon them quicker - the knowledge that their man won't shoot and isn't actually a threat ruins the entire clear-out strategy.. Defenders would be like goalies that get the early jump because they know which way the ball is going..

Otoh, in today's game, the reason the 1-defender strongside occurs so often and is so effective, is because defenders MUST respect the shooters, and can't immediately abandon them to help on the strongside - today's shooters are actual threats, so defenders actually must consider not helping AT ALL.... and they certainly can't help as quickly or decisively... But in previous eras, the defenders would KNOW they didn't have to guard the shooter, which would allow them to come over to help quicker, thus eliminating the effectiveness of the play.

But again, this never happened in previous eras anyway... There isn't 1 play where a coach ever put 4 guys behind the 3-point line on the weakside.. So it doesn't matter what YOU would do for Lebron... It only matters what coaches actually did - and if Lebron played in previous eras, his teammates wouldn't shoot threes, so he wouldn't have anyone spreading the floor for him.. He'd have to face no spacing just like everyone else, including congested paints and more defenders on the strongside.. And again, even if a coach DID run the clear-out play, it wouldn't be nearly as effective (or effective at all) because defenders would know the shooters are never going to shoot.

Btw, you say you'd iso lebron all day... That wouldn't be a good move - In regular season, Lebron ranked only 78th out of 350 in isolation PPP, while his FG% ranked 117th out of 350.. In the playoffs, Lebron is 35th out of 40 in isolation PPP, and 30th out of 40 in FG%: http://stats.nba.com/playtype/#!/isolation/?dir=1&sort=Time&Season=2014-15&SeasonType=Playoffs.
.
.

Okay, this time you make some good points. In fact, I agree with all of them.

One caveat though. You yourself had mentioned before about today's rules allowing for strong side floods or what others would call a satellite big. This is basically the presence of a one man zone usually a big positioned on a 2nd level right outside the paint guarding no one, but just waiting for a possible penetration of an offensive player being isolated.

Yes, in previous eras clogged offenses would cause clogged defenders to stay close to the paint or actually be in the paint, but it's quite different to be guarding another man and not totally in position to help out, than to have a satellite big just waiting. It's very similar to international zones where a man can just wait for you to charge into him for the offensive foul.

These type of defenses so common today could lead to high scoring though with today's better shooting from 3, as you mentioned. I would argue today's players pass the ball better too, overall.

[AirBourne92]

they would have to run an iso closer to the basket since mj doesnt have a long range jumper

[OldSchoolBBall]

they would have to run an iso closer to the basket since mj doesnt have a long range jumper

Jordan was a better shooter out to 23 feet than Lebron has ever been in his career.

[3ball]

One caveat though. You yourself has mentioned before about today's rules allowing for strong side floods or what others would call a satellite big.




In previous eras, 4 or 5 defenders remained on the strongside because there were no weakside floor-spreaders to draw them away.. With defenders already on the strongside, floods to that side weren't necessary, as seen below - there's no weakside floor-spreaders, so all defenders are already on strongside:


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/6f2bdd4d49761fa8f80d0db756aa9770.gif


As you can see above, floods to the strongside aren't necessary when 4 or 5 defenders are already on the strongside (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11128077&postcount=21).. This never happens today, because every team reduces the number of strongside defenders by using weakside floor-spreaders to draw them away (seen below) - reducing the number of strongside defenders is just one of the many effects and objectives of spacing.


http://i61.tinypic.com/2z7mnvm.png


In the picture above, Lebron is same spot Jordan was earlier, except weakside floor-spreaders have drawn defenders away from the strongside.. If Noah doesn't leave #20 Mosgov and flood to the strongside, the strongside will only have 2 defenders on it.. This demonstrates how spacing necessitates flooding - defenders must flood BACK to the strongside (Noah), only because they were originally drawn away by floor-spreaders on the weakside (Mosgov)





Yes, in previous eras clogged offenses would cause clogged defenders to stay close to the paint or actually be in the paint, but it's quite different to be guarding another man and not totally in position to help out, than to have a satellite big just waiting.


This leaves someone wide open because the satellite big had to abandon his man to flood over (like Noah did in the previous picture).. Also, defenders can only satellite OUTSIDE of the paint - they aren't allowed to protect the paint by waiting IN the paint.. Instead, to provide help defense in the paint, defenders must start from outside the paint and then move into the paint, rather than just wait in the paint to begin with.

Whereas previous eras could protect the paint by just waiting in there, and they didn't have to leave their man to do it - the lack of spacing and 3-point shooting meant their man was in the paint already or nearby).
.

[Dr.J4ever]

In previous eras, 4 or 5 defenders remained on the strongside because there were no weakside floor-spreaders to draw them away.. With defenders already on the strongside, floods to that side weren't necessary, as seen below - there's no weakside floor-spreaders, so all defenders are already on strongside:


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/6f2bdd4d49761fa8f80d0db756aa9770.gif


As you can see above, floods to the strongside aren't necessary when 4 or 5 defenders are already on the strongside (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11128077&postcount=21).. This never happens today, because every team reduces the number of strongside defenders by using weakside floor-spreaders to draw them away (seen below) - reducing the number of strongside defenders is just one of the many effects and objectives of spacing.


http://i61.tinypic.com/2z7mnvm.png


In the picture above, Lebron is same spot Jordan was earlier, except weakside floor-spreaders have drawn defenders away from the strongside.. If Noah doesn't leave #20 Mosgov and flood to the strongside, the strongside will only have 2 defenders on it.. This demonstrates how spacing necessitates flooding - defenders must flood BACK to the strongside (Noah), only because they were originally drawn away by floor-spreaders on the weakside (Mosgov)



This leaves someone wide open because the satellite big had to abandon his man to flood over (like Noah did in the previous picture).. Also, defenders can only satellite OUTSIDE of the paint - they aren't allowed to protect the paint by waiting IN the paint.. Instead, to provide help defense in the paint, defenders must start from outside the paint and then move into the paint, rather than just wait in the paint to begin with.

Whereas previous eras could protect the paint by just waiting in there, and they didn't have to leave their man to do it - the lack of spacing and 3-point shooting meant their man was in the paint already or nearby).
.

It's a different defensive look alright when you compare eras. After all, offenses played different too.

When you look at your old gifs closely, defensive players are not just standing waiting for an intrusion, but usually guarding another man too and ON THE MOVE. To me, it's a different challenge for an offensive player to penetrate the paint in this type of look, for sure, because even though it's usually more clogged, bigs who are on the move are easier to attack than bigs who are just waiting or standing without guarding anyone.

Today, a big can stand right outside the paint in perpetuity, and they can stand inside the paint for 2.9sec. I think this is more likely to force a jumper, or a swing to the weak side for a 3. However, a good offensive team that stretches the floor can be more explosive than teams during the 90s because of spaced out defenses. So more PENETRATION NOT LESS BECOMES POSSIBLE, BUT IT'S DUE TO A POSITIVE--GOOD SHOOTING. No doubt about that, but it also makes shooting from 3 and stretch 4s a more viable commodity than in the past. So mission accomplished for NBA rules makers.

In other words, the game has changed, and it is different. Not superior, just different.

[3ball]

bigs who are on the move are easier to attack than bigs who are just waiting or standing without guarding anyone.


Today's satellite bigs stand outside the paint and have to abandon their man (leave him wide open) to provide help... Previous era bigs stood inside the paint and didn't have to leave their man..

If I'm a coach, I'll take legal paint-camping all day over your preference of having your bigs wait outside the paint.





Today, a big can stand right outside the paint in perpetuity, and they can stand inside the paint for 2.9sec. I think this is more likely to force a jumper, or a swing to the weak side for a 3.


So wait.. Having to wait OUTSIDE the paint forces more jumpshots than legal paint camping?... That's completely illogical..

Teams shoot more 3-pointers today because it spaces the floor and makes penetration easier, while maximizing eFG% - this is common knowledge.. But you are trying to say that the higher 3-point attempts are due to..... what again?.... defensive 3 seconds?... waiting outside the paint??... I don't even know what you're trying to say.. It makes no sense...

And the NBA says you're wrong.. Their data shows that the rule changes INCREASED penetration - do you really want me to post where the NBA said the objective of the rule changes was to increase penetration, and that the rule changes had WORKED to increase penetration?... This is what the NBA said.. How can you ignore these facts and make up your own narrative?





However, a good offensive team that stretches the floor can be more explosive than teams during the 90s because of spaced out defenses.


It's irrelevant that teams would be more explosive by shooting more 3 pointers back then... It's about how today's individual player would perform facing the exact same thing faced by players in previous eras.

If today's player was put back in the 80's, they wouldn't have their normal team around them shooting 3's and spreading the floor - teams only attempted 2 three-pointers per game in 1985, so NO ONE would be spreading the floor... Instead, today's player would face the same congested paints and higher number of strongside defenders that ALL players faced at that time.

[Dr.J4ever]

Today's satellite bigs stand outside the paint and have to abandon their man (leave him wide open) to provide help... Previous era bigs stood inside the paint and didn't have to leave their man..

If I'm a coach, I'll take legal paint-camping all day over your preference of having your bigs wait outside the paint.



So wait.. Having to wait OUTSIDE the paint forces more jumpshots than legal paint camping?... That's completely illogical..

Teams shoot more 3-pointers today because it spaces the floor and makes penetration easier, while maximizing eFG% - this is common knowledge.. But you are trying to say that the higher 3-point attempts are due to..... what again?.... defensive 3 seconds?... waiting outside the paint??... I don't even know what you're trying to say.. It makes no sense...

And the NBA says you're wrong.. Their data shows that the rule changes INCREASED penetration - do you really want me to post where the NBA said the objective of the rule changes was to increase penetration, and that the rule changes had WORKED to increase penetration?... This is what the NBA said.. How can you ignore these facts and make up your own narrative?



It's irrelevant that teams would be more explosive by shooting more 3 pointers back then... It's about how today's individual player would perform facing the exact same thing faced by players in previous eras.

If today's player was put back in the 80's, they wouldn't have their normal team around them shooting 3's and spreading the floor - teams only attempted 2 three-pointers per game in 1985, so NO ONE would be spreading the floor... Instead, today's player would face the same congested paints and higher number of strongside defenders that ALL players faced at that time.

"But you are trying to say that the higher 3-point attempts are due to..... what again?.... defensive 3 seconds?... waiting outside the paint??... I don't even know what you're trying to say.. It makes no sense..."

Didn't come close to saying that. What I meant is that a player like Lebron who was being isolated from the elbow, for example, is more likely to just resort to a jumper(usually a long 2) because a satellite big is situated right behind the primary defender, standing and just waiting. As an offensive player in this scenario, you have almost no resort but to either take a jumper or swing the ball to the weak side for a 3.

But of course we take 3s today as an end in itself, and not just a means to an end of spacing and efficiency and such. We take 3s today, not because defenses force us to, but because we have to take 3s to compete and win today.

[3ball]

http://www.gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/bac13f0cb1f5f61a734995b0ca6bf86c.gif


bigs who are on the move are easier to attack than bigs who are just waiting or standing without guarding anyone.



The lack of spacing meant defenders were standing in the same spot the flooders would be and they didn't have to leave their man wide open to do it.. That's the most important point.

But the fact that the potential help defenders were simultaneously guarding other players is a benefit.. In no-spacing, defenders didn't have to choose between guarding their man or Lebron like the satellite big is forced to do - the satellite big has to leave his man wide open to semi-guard Lebron.. No-spacing allows the defender to DO BOTH (see Moses Malone step in front of MJ by taking ONE STEP off his man above).

Of course, this brings us back to the elephant in the room: the satellite big only exists because weakside floor-spreaders drew him away from the strongside.. Without that weakside spacing, the satellite big would already be on the strongside and wouldn't need to flood over (no one needs to flood over to strongside when there are already 4-5 defenders on the strongside (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11128077&postcount=21)).





more likely to just resort to a jumper(usually a long 2) because a satellite big is situated right behind the primary defender, standing and just waiting.


Lebron versus his man + satellite big on strongside is easier than facing 4 or 5 defenders on strongside.. On 4-5 defender strongsides, ball movement didn't have nearly the same viability as it does in today's spacing, so players were forced to take contested, mid-range shots repeatedly.

Ball movement is only a counter to flooding because today's spacing enables more effective ball movement.. It's very ironic: spacing enables better ball movement, thus providing a solution for the problem it created: the need to flood, after weakside floor-spreaders draw all the defenders to the strongside.. Spacing creates the need for flooding on defense, but also provides the solution on offense with more effective ball movement.





satellite big


http://s29.postimg.org/y32v1xeqv/overload.jpg


Flooding Deandre to OUTSIDE the paint on strongside (above) is not the optimal way to guard the entire floor and doesn't reduce the likelihood of a score.. The optimal way is put Deandre under the rim to paint-camp.

By paint-camping under the rim, he can contest Lebron in the paint without having to abandon his own man (Mosgov) and leave the weakside a man-down defensively.. Also, with Deandre still on Mosgov, Griffin doesn't have to leave Love in the near corner - paint-camping avoids the extra rotations like Griffin's, and the resulting mismatches.. Paint-camping has been long-proven as most equitable way to defend the floor.






http://www.gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/1dc96941a9ff6d64bfb56f67900cac7e.gif


when a satellite big is situated right behind the primary defender...

almost no resort but to either take a jumper or swing the ball to the weak side for a 3.



Not true - the biggest problem with flooding, shading and satellite bigs is that they all require the big man to leave the paint and contest in the ballhandler's wheelhouse: the perimeter

This is clearly disadvantageous to the big man and the overall defense, and a boon to the perimeter ballhandler, who gets to face the big man away from the rim, and then consequently, no one AT the rim.. Even Austin Rivers would be expected to destroy that type of defense - there was a whole thread on it:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=374490

Even though satellite bigs floating outside the paint (i.e. shading, flooding) are easy to beat for perimeter ballhandlers, they provide a bandaid to offset today's spacing, paint-camping ban, and hand-check ban, so defensive effectiveness doesn't fall off a cliff in comparison to previous eras.

Previous eras had satellite bigs and shading too - in screen-roll situations.. It was EXACTLY like today's game, where the big man sagged way off his man the screen-setter, and then awaited the perimeter ballhandler for the invariable blow-by:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=358589&page=8
.

[stephanieg]

If Jordan played today he'd be a soft three point ho like everyone else. No Pistons or Celtics to pressure him into getting tougher. No pressure to post because he's getting beat up on drives.