Author Topic: Defending the pick and roll  (Read 9803 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Defending the pick and roll
« on: December 27, 2014, 11:03:56 AM »

Offline SCeltic34

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16005
  • Tommy Points: 1956
There has been a recent increase in the amount of criticism in regard to our guards' defense - specifically Rondo and Bradley - and their inability to stop dribble penetration (common in game threads). This criticism is unwarranted (or was, in Rondo's case), and eventually what is going to happen is people are going to start calling Smart an overrated defender as well.  What these critics don't understand is Steven's defensive philosophy when it comes to defending the pick and roll (PnR).

Earlier this year, Kevin O'Connor wrote a great series of six articles that goes in depth about defending the PnR.  This is a must read for all of you who have been overly critical of Rondo's and Bradley's (and soon to be Smart's) defense.  Read all six articles.

http://www.celticsblog.com/2014/2/27/5452558/assessing-the-boston-celtics-pick-and-roll-defense-advanced-sloan-analytics-stats-part-one-nba/in/5228575

http://www.celticsblog.com/2014/2/28/5456144/assessing-the-boston-celtics-pick-and-roll-defense-part-two-advanced-analytics-sloan-nba-ice

Quote
When asked about his team's defensive philosophy, Brad Stevens said, "We ice most of the time, our ideal is to ice as much of the time as possible." Coach isn't lying; in fact, during the month of February, the C's iced on 325 of the 441 pick and rolls run against them, which means they ice nearly 75 percent of the time.

But what does it mean if a team "ices" the pick and roll? To put it simply, the on-ball defender angles the ball-handler into the big man defender on "middle" pick and rolls. The big then sags down near the free throw line, which is meant to invite the offense into taking a low percentage mid-range jumper.

On "side" pick and rolls, the on-ball defender is supposed to angle the ball-handler towards the baseline, where the big man is there to corral him. Again, this is meant to force the ball-handler into trying a mid-range jump shot as opposed to a layup or a pass to an open teammate.

People who are whining that "Rondo or Bradley can no longer stay in front of their man" clearly do not understand what "icing" the PnR is.  If you looked at the way they would angle their bodies when a pick was coming, it was dead obvious that they weren't trying to lock the opposing guard down on the perimeter.  The dribble penetration to the mid-range area of the floor is by design, and ideally that is where the penetration is supposed to be contained.  Anyway, if you read Part 2, this should be clear.

Whether or not using "ice" is the best strategy to defend the PnR is the real question, and I gladly open this up for debate.  For our team, I believe it is because our bigs are so slow-footed.  The only person with the ability to "hedge" the PnR is consistently is Bass (and hedging was common under Doc), but even then it puts pressure on our young team to make the correct reads and rotations.   I've seen Green hedge the PnR a few times, which is perfectly fine if the other team is doing a 1:3 PnR. 

KG was a PnR defensive god and there's no surprise we've had a huge defensive dropoff following his deparature.   We were spoiled.  Our defensive struggles are primarily due to the fact that we do not have a quality defensive bigs.  Sully and KO are both subpar, and Bass and Zeller are mediocre at best. 

Quote
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=LroHhntL0Cc

On almost every example in the video above, the Celtics big man icing the pick and roll gets beat badly by the ball-handler. Occasionally, like the first and second plays, no teammates off the ball help on the drive. This is where the C's allow layups, which is the worst-case scenario when playing ice.

LOL at KO at 0:21 in the video above - not picking on him specifically, but that was bad.  So until we upgrade these positions defensively, we will never be a strong defensive team.  Wright could help us, but it's unclear whether he's in our long term plans.

The resources have been provided to you.  Stop whining about our guards allowing dribble penetration.

Re: Defending the pick and roll
« Reply #1 on: December 27, 2014, 11:20:06 AM »

Offline MBunge

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4661
  • Tommy Points: 471
Zone.

Use our depth to play more pressure and extend the defense to half or three-quarter court.

Pack the paint and dare teams to hit the outside shot.

Double teams to get the ball out of a player's hands and then deny him the ball.

I'm sure people could come up with other examples.

They are all basic basketball defensive strategies that can be employed during a game.

How many times has Stevens tried any of them this season?

Mike

Re: Defending the pick and roll
« Reply #2 on: December 27, 2014, 01:08:19 PM »

Offline SCeltic34

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16005
  • Tommy Points: 1956
Zone.

Use our depth to play more pressure and extend the defense to half or three-quarter court.

Pack the paint and dare teams to hit the outside shot.

Double teams to get the ball out of a player's hands and then deny him the ball.

I'm sure people could come up with other examples.

They are all basic basketball defensive strategies that can be employed during a game.

How many times has Stevens tried any of them this season?

Mike

I certainly don't disagree with changing up defensive strategies when needed.  There were a few games where we definitely should have employed double teams down the stretch.  I'm not opposed to zone either, even though I hate it in the NBA.

But it's besides the point of the post, which I imagine will be willfully ignored by people who won't take the time to read Kevin O'Connor's articles.


Re: Defending the pick and roll
« Reply #3 on: December 27, 2014, 01:35:57 PM »

Offline TheFlex

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2791
  • Tommy Points: 367
Bump because this contains actual analysis which is a nice break from posters mouthing off on what they think they see, then calling someone who posts stats to prove the opposite a nerd or some childish junk like that. TP.

It seems like no matter how conservatively we defend the PnR our bigs are just too athletically inadequate to get the job done. The PnR is especially lethal for us when one of the opposing bigs is a long-range shooter, thus dragging a big body out of the heart of the paint and onto the perimeter, where even the most athletic big men in the league struggle recovering to play help D at the rim. In cases where there is a stretch 4 or stretch 5 on the opposing team, the only way our team can stop a roll down the middle is to bring a weakside perimeter defender into the middle of the paint which leaves the corner three wide open. The only way to prevent a kickout is if the guard plays a free safety of sorts and hovers behind the guard, essentially rendering him useless in terms of preventing a backdoor cut or other forward-moving passes, leaving the big man responsible for both the ball handler and the roller vulnerable. The only way to prevent a largely uncontested midrange jumper is to trap the ball handler, which then leaves someone wide open, likely rolling hard down the middle lane. Essentially, we have to aggressively inhibit the opposing team's ability to 1) drive the ball via dribble or pass to the basket, 2) pass out for an open three or 3) pull up for a jumper, and then hope they don't recognize our vulnerability to be scored on by nature of the remaining two methods.

If we plan on keeping Sully and KO we really need a rim protector with mobility. Sullinger is not as bad as KO but he's not a world beater on defense either. If we go with KO I don't even think a cement-footed rim protector like Hibbert or Perkins would get the job done. I think we'd need an athletic freak that could fly in from the weak side or the top of the key and pin the ball to the backboard.


Draft: 8 first rounders in next 5 years.

Cap space: $24 mil.

https://www.reddit.com/r/dkcleague/

Re: Defending the pick and roll
« Reply #4 on: December 27, 2014, 01:39:51 PM »

Offline hwangjini_1

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17835
  • Tommy Points: 2661
  • bammokja
thanks for the threads and links. i had read these before, but enjoyed reading them again.

let me state here and now that i dont know a hill of beans about Xs and Os and PnR and such in the nba. that is one reason why i like this thread, i learned a lot.

so, let me pose a question to you and the board...from watching how the celtics ice pick and rolls, i see the logic and recall how side pick and roll players are funneled to the baseline in a number of games.

yes, obviously this is not producing the desired results since the celtics' points per game on defense is near the bottom of the league.

my question is this.... would a good defensive center clean up most of the problems cited, or, do the celtics need to shift their defensive philosophy?
I believe Gandhi is the only person who knew about real democracy — not democracy as the right to go and buy what you want, but democracy as the responsibility to be accountable to everyone around you. Democracy begins with freedom from hunger, freedom from unemployment, freedom from fear, and freedom from hatred.
- Vandana Shiva

Re: Defending the pick and roll
« Reply #5 on: December 27, 2014, 01:53:22 PM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8825
  • Tommy Points: 289
Well just my opinion on defending the it. You need to switch up strategies more in a game. If you defend it the same exact way every time down no matter what your strategy is an NBA team will break it. You have to keep an offense off balance.  You have to show different looks much the same way a NFL defense does. Even people in pick up games adjust. C's have to do better. At least next year
 when tanking is done.

Re: Defending the pick and roll
« Reply #6 on: December 27, 2014, 02:26:34 PM »

Offline MBunge

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4661
  • Tommy Points: 471
Zone.

Use our depth to play more pressure and extend the defense to half or three-quarter court.

Pack the paint and dare teams to hit the outside shot.

Double teams to get the ball out of a player's hands and then deny him the ball.

I'm sure people could come up with other examples.

They are all basic basketball defensive strategies that can be employed during a game.

How many times has Stevens tried any of them this season?

Mike

I certainly don't disagree with changing up defensive strategies when needed.  There were a few games where we definitely should have employed double teams down the stretch.  I'm not opposed to zone either, even though I hate it in the NBA.

But it's besides the point of the post, which I imagine will be willfully ignored by people who won't take the time to read Kevin O'Connor's articles.

No, the point is that our pick-n-role defense sucks.  It's not really important if we know whether it sucks because of the scheme or the players.  What's important is whether Stevens knows why it sucks and, due to the lack of adjustments or changes, I'm not sure he does.

Mike

Re: Defending the pick and roll
« Reply #7 on: December 27, 2014, 02:26:44 PM »

Offline GetLucky

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1760
  • Tommy Points: 349
TP! I've been dying to make a thread about this, but I haven't had the time.

I always thought the bigs should hedge instead of ice because given the Celtics' current big rotation, they're giving point guards space to work with only the not-so-physically-imposing Kelly O or Sully in front of them. I always thought Rondo and Bradley expected a hedge (like the KG days) and were looking for the bigs to impede progress rather than give space. I don't get why Stevens insists on going over screens if the team is just going to ice. Go under, save energy, save drives, and give up jumpers all the same.

If guards are going over, hedge with the big man because going over slows down the guard. This shuts down a shot, slows down a drive, and allows the guard more time to recover. The only real disadvantage is a slip by the roll man, but the rest of the team should help on that. I feel like Stevens is trying to cover up a deficiency (our bigs' lack of athletisism) but is really exacerbating the issue and getting the worst of both worlds. Going over screens without a hedge is a death sentence. So is giving some of the best ball handlers in the world space with only a slow-footed big in front of them. That invites a drive instead of discouraging it.   

Re: Defending the pick and roll
« Reply #8 on: December 27, 2014, 02:50:35 PM »

Offline KeepRondo

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5161
  • Tommy Points: 215
Bump because this contains actual analysis which is a nice break from posters mouthing off on what they think they see, then calling someone who posts stats to prove the opposite a nerd or some childish junk like that. TP.

It seems like no matter how conservatively we defend the PnR our bigs are just too athletically inadequate to get the job done. The PnR is especially lethal for us when one of the opposing bigs is a long-range shooter, thus dragging a big body out of the heart of the paint and onto the perimeter, where even the most athletic big men in the league struggle recovering to play help D at the rim. In cases where there is a stretch 4 or stretch 5 on the opposing team, the only way our team can stop a roll down the middle is to bring a weakside perimeter defender into the middle of the paint which leaves the corner three wide open. The only way to prevent a kickout is if the guard plays a free safety of sorts and hovers behind the guard, essentially rendering him useless in terms of preventing a backdoor cut or other forward-moving passes, leaving the big man responsible for both the ball handler and the roller vulnerable. The only way to prevent a largely uncontested midrange jumper is to trap the ball handler, which then leaves someone wide open, likely rolling hard down the middle lane. Essentially, we have to aggressively inhibit the opposing team's ability to 1) drive the ball via dribble or pass to the basket, 2) pass out for an open three or 3) pull up for a jumper, and then hope they don't recognize our vulnerability to be scored on by nature of the remaining two methods.

If we plan on keeping Sully and KO we really need a rim protector with mobility. Sullinger is not as bad as KO but he's not a world beater on defense either. If we go with KO I don't even think a cement-footed rim protector like Hibbert or Perkins would get the job done. I think we'd need an athletic freak that could fly in from the weak side or the top of the key and pin the ball to the backboard.
Olynyk is more athletic then Sullinger.

I did see Sullinger moving that big body of his a lot better last game. It was nice to see him lead a break and he was hustling to his spots better. Perhaps Stevens benching him may have worked. Hopefully we see more of it.

Re: Defending the pick and roll
« Reply #9 on: December 27, 2014, 02:53:30 PM »

Offline SCeltic34

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16005
  • Tommy Points: 1956
Zone.

Use our depth to play more pressure and extend the defense to half or three-quarter court.

Pack the paint and dare teams to hit the outside shot.

Double teams to get the ball out of a player's hands and then deny him the ball.

I'm sure people could come up with other examples.

They are all basic basketball defensive strategies that can be employed during a game.

How many times has Stevens tried any of them this season?

Mike

I certainly don't disagree with changing up defensive strategies when needed.  There were a few games where we definitely should have employed double teams down the stretch.  I'm not opposed to zone either, even though I hate it in the NBA.

But it's besides the point of the post, which I imagine will be willfully ignored by people who won't take the time to read Kevin O'Connor's articles.

No, the point is that our pick-n-role defense sucks.  It's not really important if we know whether it sucks because of the scheme or the players.  What's important is whether Stevens knows why it sucks and, due to the lack of adjustments or changes, I'm not sure he does.

Mike

I meant the point of my post, not yours. 

In fairness to Stevens, our defense has improved over the course of the season.  But that could just be due to the fact that it probably couldn't have gotten much worse.  I'm too lazy to look up the stats, but I imagine having Zeller in the starting lineup in place of KO is a big reason for the improvement. 

Whether or not I trust Stevens to make the appropriate in-game defensive adjustments... well, I'm hoping he'll improve.


Re: Defending the pick and roll
« Reply #10 on: December 27, 2014, 02:54:14 PM »

Offline TheFlex

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2791
  • Tommy Points: 367
Bump because this contains actual analysis which is a nice break from posters mouthing off on what they think they see, then calling someone who posts stats to prove the opposite a nerd or some childish junk like that. TP.

It seems like no matter how conservatively we defend the PnR our bigs are just too athletically inadequate to get the job done. The PnR is especially lethal for us when one of the opposing bigs is a long-range shooter, thus dragging a big body out of the heart of the paint and onto the perimeter, where even the most athletic big men in the league struggle recovering to play help D at the rim. In cases where there is a stretch 4 or stretch 5 on the opposing team, the only way our team can stop a roll down the middle is to bring a weakside perimeter defender into the middle of the paint which leaves the corner three wide open. The only way to prevent a kickout is if the guard plays a free safety of sorts and hovers behind the guard, essentially rendering him useless in terms of preventing a backdoor cut or other forward-moving passes, leaving the big man responsible for both the ball handler and the roller vulnerable. The only way to prevent a largely uncontested midrange jumper is to trap the ball handler, which then leaves someone wide open, likely rolling hard down the middle lane. Essentially, we have to aggressively inhibit the opposing team's ability to 1) drive the ball via dribble or pass to the basket, 2) pass out for an open three or 3) pull up for a jumper, and then hope they don't recognize our vulnerability to be scored on by nature of the remaining two methods.

If we plan on keeping Sully and KO we really need a rim protector with mobility. Sullinger is not as bad as KO but he's not a world beater on defense either. If we go with KO I don't even think a cement-footed rim protector like Hibbert or Perkins would get the job done. I think we'd need an athletic freak that could fly in from the weak side or the top of the key and pin the ball to the backboard.
Olynyk is more athletic then Sullinger.

I did see Sullinger moving that big body of his a lot better last game. It was nice to see him lead a break and he was hustling to his spots better. Perhaps Stevens benching him may have worked. Hopefully we see more of it.

He's more mobile than Sully but he has T-Rex arms which prevent him from playing as big as his height suggests. Sully has longer arms which is why I like him more on the defensive end.

I agree the benching was the right move. Let's hope he keeps it up.


Draft: 8 first rounders in next 5 years.

Cap space: $24 mil.

https://www.reddit.com/r/dkcleague/

Re: Defending the pick and roll
« Reply #11 on: December 27, 2014, 02:54:54 PM »

Offline KeepRondo

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5161
  • Tommy Points: 215
Zone.

Use our depth to play more pressure and extend the defense to half or three-quarter court.

Pack the paint and dare teams to hit the outside shot.

Double teams to get the ball out of a player's hands and then deny him the ball.

I'm sure people could come up with other examples.

They are all basic basketball defensive strategies that can be employed during a game.

How many times has Stevens tried any of them this season?

Mike

I certainly don't disagree with changing up defensive strategies when needed.  There were a few games where we definitely should have employed double teams down the stretch.  I'm not opposed to zone either, even though I hate it in the NBA.

But it's besides the point of the post, which I imagine will be willfully ignored by people who won't take the time to read Kevin O'Connor's articles.

No, the point is that our pick-n-role defense sucks.  It's not really important if we know whether it sucks because of the scheme or the players.  What's important is whether Stevens knows why it sucks and, due to the lack of adjustments or changes, I'm not sure he does.

Mike
I think you missed the point he was making. Whether both options suck, it's not a bad idea to switch it up to give the other team a different look. It almost looks like the other teams point guards are on auto pilot against us. They pretty much know we are giving up the paint on every pick and roll.

Re: Defending the pick and roll
« Reply #12 on: December 27, 2014, 03:01:59 PM »

Offline Chris22

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5081
  • Tommy Points: 460
Zone.

Use our depth to play more pressure and extend the defense to half or three-quarter court.

Pack the paint and dare teams to hit the outside shot.

Double teams to get the ball out of a player's hands and then deny him the ball.

I'm sure people could come up with other examples.

They are all basic basketball defensive strategies that can be employed during a game.

How many times has Stevens tried any of them this season?

Mike

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

Playing exclusively man to man is stupid.

You have to mix it up.

Re: Defending the pick and roll
« Reply #13 on: December 27, 2014, 03:04:33 PM »

Offline SCeltic34

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16005
  • Tommy Points: 1956
thanks for the threads and links. i had read these before, but enjoyed reading them again.

let me state here and now that i dont know a hill of beans about Xs and Os and PnR and such in the nba. that is one reason why i like this thread, i learned a lot.

so, let me pose a question to you and the board...from watching how the celtics ice pick and rolls, i see the logic and recall how side pick and roll players are funneled to the baseline in a number of games.

yes, obviously this is not producing the desired results since the celtics' points per game on defense is near the bottom of the league.

my question is this.... would a good defensive center clean up most of the problems cited, or, do the celtics need to shift their defensive philosophy?

That's a good question.  I think acquiring a strong defensive center/PF would go a long way, especially if they are long, athletic, and have good defensive instincts (get in a time machine KG, thanks).  But defense is obviously a team concept.  Right now, I think Stevens and the rest of the coaching crew need to do a better job.  I still see too many plays where players are not rotating properly or not communicating with each other.

I'm a fan of blitzing the pick and roll if you have a veteran squad that knows where they need to be on the court, for reasons that have been well described by GetLucky above. 

To me, watching the Big 3 era Celtics was incredibly enjoyable because I love watching good defense.  Nothing excites me more as a basketball fan than watching the opposing team struggle to get a good shot off or committing a shot clock violation.  Will these days ever be back?  Gotta wait until Stevens has better personnel I suppose, but he could stand to do a better job as well.

Re: Defending the pick and roll
« Reply #14 on: December 27, 2014, 03:05:14 PM »

Offline KeepRondo

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5161
  • Tommy Points: 215
Bump because this contains actual analysis which is a nice break from posters mouthing off on what they think they see, then calling someone who posts stats to prove the opposite a nerd or some childish junk like that. TP.

It seems like no matter how conservatively we defend the PnR our bigs are just too athletically inadequate to get the job done. The PnR is especially lethal for us when one of the opposing bigs is a long-range shooter, thus dragging a big body out of the heart of the paint and onto the perimeter, where even the most athletic big men in the league struggle recovering to play help D at the rim. In cases where there is a stretch 4 or stretch 5 on the opposing team, the only way our team can stop a roll down the middle is to bring a weakside perimeter defender into the middle of the paint which leaves the corner three wide open. The only way to prevent a kickout is if the guard plays a free safety of sorts and hovers behind the guard, essentially rendering him useless in terms of preventing a backdoor cut or other forward-moving passes, leaving the big man responsible for both the ball handler and the roller vulnerable. The only way to prevent a largely uncontested midrange jumper is to trap the ball handler, which then leaves someone wide open, likely rolling hard down the middle lane. Essentially, we have to aggressively inhibit the opposing team's ability to 1) drive the ball via dribble or pass to the basket, 2) pass out for an open three or 3) pull up for a jumper, and then hope they don't recognize our vulnerability to be scored on by nature of the remaining two methods.

If we plan on keeping Sully and KO we really need a rim protector with mobility. Sullinger is not as bad as KO but he's not a world beater on defense either. If we go with KO I don't even think a cement-footed rim protector like Hibbert or Perkins would get the job done. I think we'd need an athletic freak that could fly in from the weak side or the top of the key and pin the ball to the backboard.
Olynyk is more athletic then Sullinger.

I did see Sullinger moving that big body of his a lot better last game. It was nice to see him lead a break and he was hustling to his spots better. Perhaps Stevens benching him may have worked. Hopefully we see more of it.

He's more mobile than Sully but he has T-Rex arms which prevent him from playing as big as his height suggests. Sully has longer arms which is why I like him more on the defensive end.

I agree the benching was the right move. Let's hope he keeps it up.
Olynyk's standing reach is 2 and a half inches higher then Sullinger.