Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 34 of 34
  1. #31
    Born again Cavs fan bballnoob1192's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,538

    Default Re: Why is going small > going big?

    it's just how well the team plays with their lineup that forces the other team to adjust. the GSW already showed they can beat cavs with mozgov going off for career highs. The better team always forces the adjustment IMO. remember how the lakers forced teams to start going for bigmen to counter Gasol/odom/bynum? They couldn't run a small team against the lakers cuz the lakers bigs were great at clogging the lanes. The GSW goes small cuz almost everyone on their team can hit a three at a decent to great percentage, so teams have to go small to compete against them. Clogging the lane with bigs does you no favor against the warriors.

  2. #32
    Decent playground baller redboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    336

    Default Re: Why is going small > going big?

    going big works much better when you have a big that can post up and take advantage of their size. many of today's nba's centers don't really have that ability

  3. #33
    Gambling expert StephHamann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    5,002

    Default Re: Why is going small > going big?

    Ask Madonna Pippen and Jordan

  4. #34
    Chuck Hayes Stan Timmy D for MVP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    6,666

    Default Re: Why is going small > going big?

    You have to have the right personnel, and since it's a copycat situation everyone is rushing to get smaller and more flexible. You need two guys who can punish the small lineup and there aren't too many teams out there who carry two guys who are valuable enough to avoid the trend.

  5. #35
    Very good NBA starter
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    8,542

    Default Re: Why is going small > going big?



    Imo, it's a combo of strategic basketball in the moment + using the personnel available (less elite post players, more shooters nowadays) + adapting to general trends and rule changes in the NBA game. As mentioned, sometimes it just works to replace a defender like Splitter with a more versatile offensive player in Diaw, or in Golden State and Phoenix the past 10 years we've seen alot of small ball, but barring major injuries to AS's/Super Stars and changes to the league I think a 'traditional lineup' is still the most effective. Even Dirk by the time he won a championship was taking much less three's than his Nellie days and posting up in the midrange with more confidence and experience. But, on the other hand, one could make an argument that the big man/post up positions are dying imo

  6. #36
    Local High School Star SpanishACB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,325

    Default Re: Why is going small > going big?

    Quote Originally Posted by iamgine
    It seems the notion was when the other team goes small ball, the opponent need to match it. But why does the opponent not go the other way; going big?

    i.e when GSW plays Draymond Green at center, why not counter with...say playing Mason Plumlee and Brook Lopez together.
    because outfield players get many more touches than interior players

    if you have smart outfield players capable of passing the ball to the post (a forgotten skill), and skilled bigs, good ball movement to force advantageous matchups, you should be able to score 2 on crazy percentages vs small ball, but they're not even trying.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •