How The Grizzlies Defense Stifled The Spurs | NBA Playbook

How The Grizzlies Defense Stifled The Spurs

When the Memphis Grizzlies tanked to get the San Antonio Spurs, it was safe to say that I didn’t really agree with the opinion.  In fact, I predicted that the Spurs would run away with the series in a sweep.  The biggest reason why I thought that there was going to be sweep was because I thought that the Spurs offensive system of getting the ball to the middle and kicking it out would cause problems for the Grizzlies’ defense.

At this point, it is safe to say that I was wrong.  I don’t know if it was my overestimating of the Spurs’ offense or underestimating of the Grizzlies’ defense, but I obviously didn’t think that the Grizzlies could contain the Spurs.  After seeing four games in this series, I think it has become obvious that the Grizzlies are really good at defending passing lanes, taking away what the Spurs want to do, get the ball in the corner and knock down the three point shot.

Game four was more of the same for the Grizzlies:

This camera angle gives us a perfect view of the Grizzlies and their defensive strategy against the Spurs.  Here, Parker goes away from the screen and attacks the rim.  Most defenses would collapse, giving up an open three to Matt Bonner.  Instead of doing that, Zach Randolph stays in the passing lane, taking away the pass to the corner as Mike Conley and Marc Gasol defend Parker at the rim.  The Grizzlies are funneling everything back to the middle of the court, where they can rotate and challenge the jumper.

On this play, Tony Parker attacks the rim, driving on Greivis Vasquez and taking him to the hole.  Again, all season, the help has been coming from the weakside, allowing Parker to kick the ball to the corner for the three.  Here, the defense stays in the passing lanes with the help coming from the top.  The Grizzlies were willing to give up the pass back and rotate to it, however that doesn’t happen here, as Darrell Arthur blocks the shot.

Much like the shot that Arthur blocked, the above two clips show the shots that the Spurs were getting in game four (and for much of the series), mid-range floaters that were contested.  This is what happens when the Spurs number one option was taken away by the Grizzlies and their ability to play the passing lanes.

Now, there were times when the ball was getting to the corner, but the Grizzlies weren’t giving up on these plays.  They were determined to run the Spurs off of the line, and that is exactly what they were able to do:

In the above clip, the Spurs are running their bread and butter offensive set.  The pick and roll, with the ball going to the roll man and the quick kick out to the corner.  Instead of giving up the three, O.J. Mayo runs hard at George Hill.  He doesn’t care about stopping the drive, he just doesn’t want to give up that three point shot.  Hill isn’t able to take the shot right away, he is forced to put the ball on the floor, and eventually he missed a contested three point shot.

Here, Manu Ginobil attacks the block with Tony Parker in the short corner.  Mike Conley, Parker’s defender, jabs at Ginobili, forcing him to pick up the basketball and kick it out to Parker in the corner.  The problem is that Conley didn’t fully commit to helping and he was already on his way to close out before Parker even made the catch.

A lot of people (including myself) were scratching their heads when coach Lionel Hollins were tanking to get the Grizzlies.  Turns out, they knew that their ability to play the passing lanes would be able to stifle the Spurs and their offensive attack.  All the credit in the world goes to them.

  • Iubyont

    Why can’t the Lakers play Paul like how the Grizzlies have played Parker? Let the help defender come from the top. Although I have seen PGs stop, pivot, and make a pass backwards, seems like very few PGs ever pass directly behind themselves on a consistent basis. Not only is the three point percentage from the top significantly lower than from the corners, but making the pass is typically more difficult because of the increase in distance between the passer and the receiver and because the passer has to telegraph the pass by pivoting backwards.

  • Iubyont

    Why can’t the Lakers play Paul like how the Grizzlies have played Parker? Let the help defender come from the top. Although I have seen PGs stop, pivot, and make a pass backwards, seems like very few PGs ever pass directly behind themselves on a consistent basis. Not only is the three point percentage from the top significantly lower than from the corners, but making the pass is typically more difficult because of the increase in distance between the passer and the receiver and because the passer has to telegraph the pass by pivoting backwards.

  • http://www.basketusa.com/news/64816/les-grizzlies-ont-ils-larme-anti-spurs/ Les Grizzlies ont-ils l’arme anti-Spurs ? | Basket USA – Les news de la NBA au quotidien

    [...] Partager TweetC’est une nouvelle fois l’indispensable NBA Playbook qui nous propose cet article sur la défense des Grizzlies face aux Spurs. Avant la série, [...]

  • Iubyont

    Why can't the Lakers play Paul like how the Grizzlies have played Parker? Let the help defender come from the top. Although I have seen PGs stop, pivot, and make a pass backwards, seems like very few PGs ever pass directly behind themselves on a consistent basis. Not only is the three point percentage from the top significantly lower than from the corners, but making the pass is typically more difficult because of the increase in distance between the passer and the receiver and because the passer has to telegraph the pass by pivoting backwards.

  • Anonymous

    I think the Grizz wanted the Spurs because they knew that they have the defenders (Battier / Young / Mayo / Allen) to handle Manu. They also had the bigs to overwhelm the Spurs.

    Also, as much as the Lakers look prime for the taking, you don’t want to take Kobe in the playoffs as early as possible.

  • Anonymous

    I think the Grizz wanted the Spurs because they knew that they have the defenders (Battier / Young / Mayo / Allen) to handle Manu. They also had the bigs to overwhelm the Spurs.

    Also, as much as the Lakers look prime for the taking, you don’t want to take Kobe in the playoffs as early as possible.

  • jpmanahan

    I think the Grizz wanted the Spurs because they knew that they have the defenders (Battier / Young / Mayo / Allen) to handle Manu. They also had the bigs to overwhelm the Spurs.

    Also, as much as the Lakers look prime for the taking, you don't want to take Kobe in the playoffs as early as possible.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Lee-Eric-Smith/6518606 Lee Eric Smith

    I don’t get it.

    Some more glamorous teams rest key players to protect them from injury. Coach is considered “smart.”

    Spurs PLAY Manu Ginobili in a season finale where he SPRAINS HIS ARM so bad he’s unavailable for Game 1 of the Playoffs. His team loses that game.

    Coach Lionel Hollins rests his players to prevent that very type of injury happening to his key players in a meaningless game. Those of us who watch the Grizzlies and Hollins know that he doesn’t mince words or play coy. If he wanted to lose games to play the Spurs he’d say it. Health was his main concern. And yet, it’s called TANKING.

    Given that the Grizz are up 3-1 and romperstomping the Spurs, I’d say resting the players was “smart.”

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Lee-Eric-Smith/6518606 Lee Eric Smith

    I don’t get it.

    Some more glamorous teams rest key players to protect them from injury. Coach is considered “smart.”

    Spurs PLAY Manu Ginobili in a season finale where he SPRAINS HIS ARM so bad he’s unavailable for Game 1 of the Playoffs. His team loses that game.

    Coach Lionel Hollins rests his players to prevent that very type of injury happening to his key players in a meaningless game. Those of us who watch the Grizzlies and Hollins know that he doesn’t mince words or play coy. If he wanted to lose games to play the Spurs he’d say it. Health was his main concern. And yet, it’s called TANKING.

    Given that the Grizz are up 3-1 and romperstomping the Spurs, I’d say resting the players was “smart.”

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Lee-Eric-Smith/6518606 Lee Eric Smith

    I don't get it.

    Some more glamorous teams rest key players to protect them from injury. Coach is considered “smart.”

    Spurs PLAY Manu Ginobili in a season finale where he SPRAINS HIS ARM so bad he's unavailable for Game 1 of the Playoffs. His team loses that game.

    Coach Lionel Hollins rests his players to prevent that very type of injury happening to his key players in a meaningless game. Those of us who watch the Grizzlies and Hollins know that he doesn't mince words or play coy. If he wanted to lose games to play the Spurs he'd say it. Health was his main concern. And yet, it's called TANKING.

    Given that the Grizz are up 3-1 and romperstomping the Spurs, I'd say resting the players was “smart.”

  • http://www.48minutesofhell.com/approaching-things-from-a-different-angle Approaching things from a different angle

    [...] always, Sebastian Pruiti of NBA Playbook expertly breaks down how Memphis is disrupting the San Antonio Spurs pick and roll attack and preventing open three-pointers: This camera angle gives us a perfect view of the Grizzlies and [...]

  • username

    San Antonio and Memphis’ situations were quite different at the end of the season. Memphis had much more to play for, with the possibility of their moving up in the seedings very real. If you still have something to play for, but you sit players who “back in the regular season or a playoff game…would have tried to play” (Hollins), that is tanking. Just because it worked out and you can now call it smart doesn’t change the fact that they TANKED. And the Spurs *did* rest Manu the previous game before the one where he got hurt, but didn’t want him sitting out for too long and losing his rhythm going into the playoffs.

  • username

    San Antonio and Memphis’ situations were quite different at the end of the season. Memphis had much more to play for, with the possibility of their moving up in the seedings very real. If you still have something to play for, but you sit players who “back in the regular season or a playoff game…would have tried to play” (Hollins), that is tanking. Just because it worked out and you can now call it smart doesn’t change the fact that they TANKED. And the Spurs *did* rest Manu the previous game before the one where he got hurt, but didn’t want him sitting out for too long and losing his rhythm going into the playoffs.

  • username

    San Antonio and Memphis' situations were quite different at the end of the season. Memphis had much more to play for, with the possibility of their moving up in the seedings very real. If you still have something to play for, but you sit players who “back in the regular season or a playoff game…would have tried to play” (Hollins), that is tanking. Just because it worked out and you can now call it smart doesn't change the fact that they TANKED. And the Spurs *did* rest Manu the previous game before the one where he got hurt, but didn't want him sitting out for too long and losing his rhythm going into the playoffs.

  • Mista

    “Memphis had much more to play for”…..what are you taking about and then trying to rationalize playing Manu by claiming he might lose his rhythm is beyond weak. The fact that you actually think that moving up one or two seed spot changes the degree of difficulty only proves your lack of objectivity. The bottom line is that between taking advantage of certain matchups, good scouting and execution; Memphis has earned this 3-1 lead.

  • Mista

    “Memphis had much more to play for”…..what are you taking about and then trying to rationalize playing Manu by claiming he might lose his rhythm is beyond weak. The fact that you actually think that moving up one or two seed spot changes the degree of difficulty only proves your lack of objectivity. The bottom line is that between taking advantage of certain matchups, good scouting and execution; Memphis has earned this 3-1 lead.

  • http://nba-point-forward.si.com/2011/04/26/common-thread-in-spurs-struggles-bonner/ The Point Forward » Posts Common thread in Spurs’ struggles: Bonner «

    [...] have taken away the outside shots that fueled San Antonio’s elite offense all season. Sebastian Pruiti analyzes this issue with handy video here, but I wanted to zero in on Bonner and all the non-obvious ways he represents several of the key [...]

  • Mista

    “Memphis had much more to play for”…..what are you taking about and then trying to rationalize playing Manu by claiming he might lose his rhythm is beyond weak. The fact that you actually think that moving up one or two seed spot changes the degree of difficulty only proves your lack of objectivity. The bottom line is that between taking advantage of certain matchups, good scouting and execution; Memphis has earned this 3-1 lead.

  • Chris

    Excellent article. Problem for the Spurs is Memphis has been very well coached, and have been able to read our tendencies better than any other team I’ve seen.

    I’m guessing Memphis really did want this matchup, and have been preparing for itat least a week before the season ended. Give ‘em credit for that. Spurs have disappointed in not being able to counter what the Grizzlies are doing; I suppose its easier said than done when you’ve been doing things the same way for 82 games, then asked to change it overnight.

  • Chris

    Excellent article. Problem for the Spurs is Memphis has been very well coached, and have been able to read our tendencies better than any other team I’ve seen.

    I’m guessing Memphis really did want this matchup, and have been preparing for itat least a week before the season ended. Give ‘em credit for that. Spurs have disappointed in not being able to counter what the Grizzlies are doing; I suppose its easier said than done when you’ve been doing things the same way for 82 games, then asked to change it overnight.

  • Chris

    Excellent article. Problem for the Spurs is Memphis has been very well coached, and have been able to read our tendencies better than any other team I've seen.

    I'm guessing Memphis really did want this matchup, and have been preparing for itat least a week before the season ended. Give 'em credit for that. Spurs have disappointed in not being able to counter what the Grizzlies are doing; I suppose its easier said than done when you've been doing things the same way for 82 games, then asked to change it overnight.

  • quincyscott

    On that first sequence, I think Parker is still capable of penetrating to the basket rather than giving to Duncan. But once he does, Duncan can still get the ball back to Parker who is being covered only by Conley. If Memphis is going to leave a man out on the perimeter, then the Spurs have more room to play this two man game in the paint.

    It seems to me the Spurs have been way too slow to make such adjustments to counter what the Grizzlies are doing in this series.

  • quincyscott

    On that first sequence, I think Parker is still capable of penetrating to the basket rather than giving to Duncan. But once he does, Duncan can still get the ball back to Parker who is being covered only by Conley. If Memphis is going to leave a man out on the perimeter, then the Spurs have more room to play this two man game in the paint.

    It seems to me the Spurs have been way too slow to make such adjustments to counter what the Grizzlies are doing in this series.

  • JD Vitadox

    Seems to me that we won 4 Championships by pounding the ball into Tim for a score, or if he’s doubled, Tim kicks it out for an open deuce or trey!

    Ever since Popovich got frustrated with Nesterovich and Naz’ Muhammad in the Dallas series several years back, opting for fast small ballers, we have failed to bring home another title.

    The current Spurs configuration worked well in the first half of the regular season before the level of intensity picked up. Play-off basketball requires a better half court game. Our team has returned to the days of softness … it is time to return to our tough half court configuration! Pop has allowed our greatest strength, the power of DUNCAN to be relegated to a team of mediocrity. It’s the play-offs Pop’! Time to return to the half court greatness … you can still mix it up and rotate to the pansy finesse during transitions and Tim’s bench breaks.

    I am embarrassed for you Mister Pop’ … I thought you were a thinkin’ man! Turns out you have just out thunk yourself!

    It is NOT TOO LATE! Go Spurs Go! See Tip …err, Tim run! (a new reading primer of the SPURS to replace Tip and Jane! .. My idea! )

    JD Vitadox

  • JD Vitadox

    Seems to me that we won 4 Championships by pounding the ball into Tim for a score, or if he’s doubled, Tim kicks it out for an open deuce or trey!

    Ever since Popovich got frustrated with Nesterovich and Naz’ Muhammad in the Dallas series several years back, opting for fast small ballers, we have failed to bring home another title.

    The current Spurs configuration worked well in the first half of the regular season before the level of intensity picked up. Play-off basketball requires a better half court game. Our team has returned to the days of softness … it is time to return to our tough half court configuration! Pop has allowed our greatest strength, the power of DUNCAN to be relegated to a team of mediocrity. It’s the play-offs Pop’! Time to return to the half court greatness … you can still mix it up and rotate to the pansy finesse during transitions and Tim’s bench breaks.

    I am embarrassed for you Mister Pop’ … I thought you were a thinkin’ man! Turns out you have just out thunk yourself!

    It is NOT TOO LATE! Go Spurs Go! See Tip …err, Tim run! (a new reading primer of the SPURS to replace Tip and Jane! .. My idea! )

    JD Vitadox

  • quincyscott

    On that first sequence, I think Parker is still capable of penetrating to the basket rather than giving to Duncan. But once he does, Duncan can still get the ball back to Parker who is being covered only by Conley. If Memphis is going to leave a man out on the perimeter, then the Spurs have more room to play this two man game in the paint.

    It seems to me the Spurs have been way too slow to make such adjustments to counter what the Grizzlies are doing in this series.

  • JD Vitadox

    Seems to me that we won 4 Championships by pounding the ball into Tim for a score, or if he's doubled, Tim kicks it out for an open deuce or trey!

    Ever since Popovich got frustrated with Nesterovich and Naz' Muhammad in the Dallas series several years back, opting for fast small ballers, we have failed to bring home another title.

    The current Spurs configuration worked well in the first half of the regular season before the level of intensity picked up. Play-off basketball requires a better half court game. Our team has returned to the days of softness … it is time to return to our tough half court configuration! Pop has allowed our greatest strength, the power of DUNCAN to be relegated to a team of mediocrity. It's the play-offs Pop'! Time to return to the half court greatness … you can still mix it up and rotate to the pansy finesse during transitions and Tim's bench breaks.

    I am embarrassed for you Mister Pop' … I thought you were a thinkin' man! Turns out you have just out thunk yourself!

    It is NOT TOO LATE! Go Spurs Go! See Tip …err, Tim run! (a new reading primer of the SPURS to replace Tip and Jane! .. My idea! )

    JD Vitadox

  • username

    I didn’t say anything about degree of difficulty. I was talking about the objective measure that is seeding. Memphis could change theirs; the only thing the Spurs had to play for was home court in the unlikely event they ended up playing the Bulls. Say whatever you want about the intelligence of the Spurs’ logic in resting or not resting their players, their hope was never to intentionally lose any games–which is the definition of tanking and exactly what Memphis did.

  • username

    I didn’t say anything about degree of difficulty. I was talking about the objective measure that is seeding. Memphis could change theirs; the only thing the Spurs had to play for was home court in the unlikely event they ended up playing the Bulls. Say whatever you want about the intelligence of the Spurs’ logic in resting or not resting their players, their hope was never to intentionally lose any games–which is the definition of tanking and exactly what Memphis did.

  • username

    I didn't say anything about degree of difficulty. I was talking about the objective measure that is seeding. Memphis could change theirs; the only thing the Spurs had to play for was home court in the unlikely event they ended up playing the Bulls. Say whatever you want about the intelligence of the Spurs' logic in resting or not resting their players, their hope was never to intentionally lose any games–which is the definition of tanking and exactly what Memphis did.

  • Mista

    Your explanations are like missed jumpers…BRICKS…..Memphis was not WORRIED about moving up one or two spots. They had their work cut out for them no matter what…so why not make the most of the downtime.(which in retrospect I’m guessing the Spurs wished they had done)The fact u can’t get passed this so called tanking is too funny, but it’s a moot point seeing how Memphis went out and owned the Spurs and on that point there is no dispute.

  • Mista

    Your explanations are like missed jumpers…BRICKS…..Memphis was not WORRIED about moving up one or two spots. They had their work cut out for them no matter what…so why not make the most of the downtime.(which in retrospect I’m guessing the Spurs wished they had done)The fact u can’t get passed this so called tanking is too funny, but it’s a moot point seeing how Memphis went out and owned the Spurs and on that point there is no dispute.

  • Mista

    Your explanations are like missed jumpers…BRICKS…..Memphis was not WORRIED about moving up one or two spots. They had their work cut out for them no matter what…so why not make the most of the downtime.(which in retrospect I'm guessing the Spurs wished they had done)The fact u can't get passed this so called tanking is too funny, but it's a moot point seeing how Memphis went out and owned the Spurs and on that point there is no dispute.

  • username

    Blah blah blah… I’m not offended that they tanked, just explaining that they clearly did.

  • username

    Blah blah blah… I'm not offended that they tanked, just explaining that they clearly did.