
Washington had three main scorers who could all put the ball on the floor, Arenas, Jamison and Butler. Whatever motion the Wizards ran, one of those 3 guys was going to get the shot - and usually ended up putting the ball on the floor to get that shot. Nash's primary benefit for a team is that he enables ball players who don't put the ball on the floor well to get wide open shots (read: Howard, Gasol, and World Peace) off his masterful use of the pick-and-roll. I don't see a motion offense making better scorers of these three. And by going with it, much like with the triangle, you de-emphasize the ability of the point guard to put perimeter dribble pressure on the defense. But isn't putting perimeter dribble penetration pressure on the defense precisely why you would want a Steve Nash? A Chris Paul? A Deron Williams?
Like I said, Nash can run any kind of offense. But there is such a thing as highest and best use. I don't see that principle being served in the decision to run the Princeton Offense with this Laker team.
Here's a link to an article in YAHOO Sports regarding the decision
May Your Point Guard Flow...
The PG will discuss this subject in more depth on the upcoming THE POINT GUARD Internet Radio Program, Saturday, October 6, 2012 at 6:30pm Eastern/5:30 Central on BLOG TALK RADIO.
No comments:
Post a Comment