The main defensive problem in this sequence for the Kings isn't the lack of “good help” provided by Al-Farouq Aminu.

The main problems are:

i. The inability of Randy Foye to contain Evans off the bounce;

ii. The inability of Brian Cook to provide adequate shot-blocking or draw-the-charge/force the extra pass defensive rotation, in support of Mr. Foye;

and,

iii. The fact that Mr. Aminu decided to come off his designated check in the strong side corner, in the first place … when he should have simply “stayed home” instead, and thereby totally eliminated the “drive and kick to the corner” opportunity for Tyreke Evans.

In fact, rookie Eric Bledsoe does a terrific job of “helping-the-helper”, in this instance … who was the aforementioned Mr. ["No Defensive Presence"] Cook and NOT “the wandering aimlessly” Mr. Aminu.

What part of “force Evans left” did Foye not understand. Evans only goes right. If Foye is forcing him left then Aminu is not the help guy, Smith is and he is in much better position.

The main defensive problem in this sequence for the Kings isn’t the lack of “good help” provided by Al-Farouq Aminu.

The main problems are:

i. The inability of Randy Foye to contain Evans off the bounce;

ii. The inability of Brian Cook to provide adequate shot-blocking or draw-the-charge/force the extra pass defensive rotation, in support of Mr. Foye;

and,

iii. The fact that Mr. Aminu decided to come off his designated check in the strong side corner, in the first place … when he should have simply “stayed home” instead, and thereby totally eliminated the “drive and kick to the corner” opportunity for Tyreke Evans.

In fact, rookie Eric Bledsoe does a terrific job of “helping-the-helper”, in this instance … who was the aforementioned Mr. ["No Defensive Presence"] Cook and NOT “the wandering aimlessly” Mr. Aminu.

that is incorrect analysis. aminu is not supposed to be in the lane to help. that would leave omri casspi, a 3 pt shooter, to be WIDE open and evans would easily make that pass to the right wing. help should be coming from the weakside, and unfortunately that was brian cook. had it been deandre jordan, kaman, or griffin, evans probably would've had his shot blocked. but brian cook has a 15 inch vertical and evans just waited for him to fall out of the picture with the nifty layup.

and if you're wondering what to do with cook's man, the opposite wing guy (#12) should drop into the paint. when your man is 2 passes or 1 skip pass away from the ball, you can sag off of him. but if your man is omri casspi, standing 10 feet away from evans, you DO NOT sag off and put one foot in the paint.

What part of “force Evans left” did Foye not understand. Evans only goes right. If Foye is forcing him left then Aminu is not the help guy, Smith is and he is in much better position.

I understand what you are saying, but it is all about philosophies. Me personally, I would rather force a pass to the outside than let Evans go to the basket like that. You either force a turnover or a three point shot.

Yes, Casspi would have been wide open and he was on fire, but vs. an Evans lay-up, I still give that up every day of the week…

LOL the author's analysis is always questionable

that is incorrect analysis. aminu is not supposed to be in the lane to help. that would leave omri casspi, a 3 pt shooter, to be WIDE open and evans would easily make that pass to the right wing. help should be coming from the weakside, and unfortunately that was brian cook. had it been deandre jordan, kaman, or griffin, evans probably would’ve had his shot blocked. but brian cook has a 15 inch vertical and evans just waited for him to fall out of the picture with the nifty layup.

and if you’re wondering what to do with cook’s man, the opposite wing guy (#12) should drop into the paint. when your man is 2 passes or 1 skip pass away from the ball, you can sag off of him. but if your man is omri casspi, standing 10 feet away from evans, you DO NOT sag off and put one foot in the paint.

if aminu was in the paint to stop evan's layup, there'd be nearly no chance of forcing a turnover. of course the principle is that outside shots are preferable to a layup, but a wide open 3 versus a tough driving layup is a little different. but if my main concern was to prevent tyreke from getting a layup, i would have foye completely back off and have tyreke pull up for a shot. i'd still prefer tyreke to pull up for a long 2 than a wide open casspi 3.

I understand what you are saying, but it is all about philosophies. Me personally, I would rather force a pass to the outside than let Evans go to the basket like that. You either force a turnover or a three point shot.

Yes, Casspi would have been wide open and he was on fire, but vs. an Evans lay-up, I still give that up every day of the week…

LOL the author’s analysis is always questionable

if aminu was in the paint to stop evan’s layup, there’d be nearly no chance of forcing a turnover. of course the principle is that outside shots are preferable to a layup, but a wide open 3 versus a tough driving layup is a little different. but if my main concern was to prevent tyreke from getting a layup, i would have foye completely back off and have tyreke pull up for a shot. i’d still prefer tyreke to pull up for a long 2 than a wide open casspi 3.

Your philosophy give Gregg Popovich conniptions.

Some good defensive teams help from the strong side, but most of the ones that do a good job of limiting opponent efg% emphasize preventing the corner 3. The Spurs and Magic are two prime examples.

I totally understand what you are saying, and I agree with that. I'm talking in terms of a late game situation. Do you want to give up a lay-in, or do you want to give up a three pointer? In situations like this, I want to force the pass and the three point shot.

Like I said though, all about philosophies and there are plenty of them. What makes talking about Xs and Os so much fun…

Anytime you force someone into a pass there is a chance of a turnover. High pass, low pass, or a bobbled pass. A number of things can happen. You could also force a bad pass that still gets caught and throws the shot off.

I do agree that Foye could have played farther back on Evans though…

Your philosophy give Gregg Popovich conniptions.

Some good defensive teams help from the strong side, but most of the ones that do a good job of limiting opponent efg% emphasize preventing the corner 3. The Spurs and Magic are two prime examples.

I totally understand what you are saying, and I agree with that. I’m talking in terms of a late game situation. Do you want to give up a lay-in, or do you want to give up a three pointer? In situations like this, I want to force the pass and the three point shot.

Like I said though, all about philosophies and there are plenty of them. What makes talking about Xs and Os so much fun…

Anytime you force someone into a pass there is a chance of a turnover. High pass, low pass, or a bobbled pass. A number of things can happen. You could also force a bad pass that still gets caught and throws the shot off.

I do agree that Foye could have played farther back on Evans though…

Thanks for the clarification; I thought you were referring to this as a philosophy in general, rather than end-of-game situations.

In that case, it's a tough call. Good shooters such as Casspi typically shoot around 40% on long-2s and 3s, while most players, including Evans, shoot above 50% at the rim. If player shooting is consistent throughout the game, the obvious answer is to play the percentages; cut off the penetration and live with the jumper. But I'm not sure this is the case.

I think the shot becomes a lot more difficult for Evans in this situation. First off, once he's driven, the only options he has available are to pass to someone else to shoot immediately, or shoot himself. A pass to anyone but Casspi means an easy rotation for the defense. Because there's so little time left on the clock, the defense doesn't need to worry as much about offensive rebounding; a there's time to convert a tip-in, but not much else. Thus the defense can collapse with relative impunity, and his passing options are limited. Second, defenses generally are allowed to be a lot more physical in the closing seconds of a game. I didn't see this game and don't know how it was called, however.

Finally, on a very general level, if teams have fundamental philosophies I think they should try to stick to them as much as possible. If you've done something one way since training camp, during every practice and shoot-around, and for the first 47 minutes of every game, I don't buy changing it for just a few seconds.

I'd say to always give help where a rotation is possible rather than where it isn't, so staying home on Casspi is the best choice. This is what the Clips chose to do, and their strategy was sound. The problem was the poor execution by Cook and Foye, plus a pretty impressive layup from Evans. If you want to rotate from the strong side and you do it regularly – the Celtics sometimes do, for instance, and they do all right on that side of the floor – that's fine. The execution is far more important than which philosophy you adhere to.

Thanks by the way for all the analysis; I don't always agree (which is a good thing!), and it's always a well-presented and stimulating.

Thanks for the clarification; I thought you were referring to this as a philosophy in general, rather than end-of-game situations.

In that case, it’s a tough call. Good shooters such as Casspi typically shoot around 40% on long-2s and 3s, while most players, including Evans, shoot above 50% at the rim. If player shooting is consistent throughout the game, the obvious answer is to play the percentages; cut off the penetration and live with the jumper. But I’m not sure this is the case.

I think the shot becomes a lot more difficult for Evans in this situation. First off, once he’s driven, the only options he has available are to pass to someone else to shoot immediately, or shoot himself. A pass to anyone but Casspi means an easy rotation for the defense. Because there’s so little time left on the clock, the defense doesn’t need to worry as much about offensive rebounding; a there’s time to convert a tip-in, but not much else. Thus the defense can collapse with relative impunity, and his passing options are limited. Second, defenses generally are allowed to be a lot more physical in the closing seconds of a game. I didn’t see this game and don’t know how it was called, however.

Finally, on a very general level, if teams have fundamental philosophies I think they should try to stick to them as much as possible. If you’ve done something one way since training camp, during every practice and shoot-around, and for the first 47 minutes of every game, I don’t buy changing it for just a few seconds.

I’d say to always give help where a rotation is possible rather than where it isn’t, so staying home on Casspi is the best choice. This is what the Clips chose to do, and their strategy was sound. The problem was the poor execution by Cook and Foye, plus a pretty impressive layup from Evans. If you want to rotate from the strong side and you do it regularly – the Celtics sometimes do, for instance, and they do all right on that side of the floor – that’s fine. The execution is far more important than which philosophy you adhere to.

Thanks by the way for all the analysis; I don’t always agree (which is a good thing!), and it’s always a well-presented and stimulating.

Thanks for the clarification; I thought you were referring to this as a philosophy in general, rather than end-of-game situations.

In that case, it's a tough call. Good shooters such as Casspi typically shoot around 40% on long-2s and 3s, while most players, including Evans, shoot above 50% at the rim. If player shooting is consistent throughout the game, the obvious answer is to play the percentages; cut off the penetration and live with the jumper. But I'm not sure this is the case.

I think the shot becomes a lot more difficult for Evans in this situation. First off, once he's driven, the only options he has available are to pass to someone else to shoot immediately, or shoot himself. A pass to anyone but Casspi means an easy rotation for the defense. Because there's so little time left on the clock, the defense doesn't need to worry as much about offensive rebounding; a there's time to convert a tip-in, but not much else. Thus the defense can collapse with relative impunity, and his passing options are limited. Second, defenses generally are allowed to be a lot more physical in the closing seconds of a game. I didn't see this game and don't know how it was called, however.

Finally, on a very general level, if teams have fundamental philosophies I think they should try to stick to them as much as possible. If you've done something one way since training camp, during every practice and shoot-around, and for the first 47 minutes of every game, I don't buy changing it for just a few seconds.

I'd say to always give help where a rotation is possible rather than where it isn't, so staying home on Casspi is the best choice. This is what the Clips chose to do, and their strategy was sound. The problem was the poor execution by Cook and Foye, plus a pretty impressive layup from Evans. If you want to rotate from the strong side and you do it regularly – the Celtics sometimes do, for instance, and they do all right on that side of the floor – that's fine. The execution is far more important than which philosophy you adhere to.

Thanks by the way for all the analysis; I don't always agree (which is a good thing!), and it's always a well-presented and stimulating.

[...] to make a decision.  What do I think that Kevin Martin should have done?  Well, you guys already should know the answer this. Categories: 4th Quarters, Houston Rockets, LA Lakers Tags: blog [...]