Motion Offense Dead?

[Indiana_1993]

I can handle watching a developing team that moves and may not be in the right positions. What kills me is the team that dribbles at the top of the key until 10 seconds are left on the clock and one guy tries to be a hero. I remember a game where CBK was continuously yelling "three passes" where he was demanding three people touch the ball. He was forcing the motion offense until it became an ingrained way of playing for the team. My hope is CMW does the same thing.

The only good thing I saw from the first game was the focus on D for the first eight minutes. To give CMW credit, he did say that the offense was still not his focus and that he needed to get his team to a point where D was the focus for 40 minutes. If I were him and I saw the awful shooting we exhibited, I'd focus on D, too.

Fact: It's harder to guard a guy who is constantly in motion. If one guy is lazy, the machine can't work. All it takes is one guy to not be in motion and the machine breaks down to a lazy standstill. My hope is that CMW finds the lazy cog in the machine and benches his ass. We need open shots from guys who are getting the ball off a screen. Tripple teaming Trace and watching our standstill offense is a winning formula for the other guys - I hope we fix it soon!

 

[TR32]

Indeed, the motion offense is a great offense because it is unpredictable and it doesn't require super stars.

I think we would have seen it in game one if that was Woodson's goal.

Indiana didn't defend well in the second half. If that has been the focus then they simply aren't a very good team right now.

 

[EarlTubbs]

I don’t think they have any intention of ever running any motion offense that you remember.

 

[Indiana_1993]

I don’t think they have any intention of ever running any motion offense that you remember.

I think you are right. I'm not happy about it, but I think you are right.

 

[Victorbmyboy]

If anyone thought a Knight style reverse action offense was coming they haven’t been listening or paying attention. Woody isn’t going to run that or even thought of running it. 4 out is more likely and will probably happen. Motion isn’t easy to teach to kids that are used to just playing. Give him time.

 

[jacksback]

I simply can't stand watching guys stand around on offense when they should be trying to get open or help a team mate get open. I was at the EM game and was watching a certain newcomer who is supposed to be a scorer and he rarely worked to get open.

On one particular play when we were in-bounding the ball from under their basket he moved toward the ball to within 10 ft of our guy throwing it in. He was not open and did not receive the ball and then he literally just stood their in the corner not moving. Wtf? He just quit trying!

Hope I'm wrong or things change but we did a lot of standing around and settling for marginal 3 pointers on offense. I understand there are night when you don't shoot it well from deep but I thought a lot of our 3s were of the settling variety and way to early in the shot clock.

 

[TR32]

Agreed, and it shows that these kids don't understand the difference between a good shot and a bad shot. I hope that changes quickly.

 

[.Gerdis]

Caveat:

I did not watch the entire game.

An observation on the parts I did see:

Coach was expressionless, silent, and motionless. Perhaps someone that was there has a differing POV, but every time the camera panned his way I say the same poker face, a person that seemed to be watching intently, but I saw no evidence of coaching. I don’t mean this as criticism. Perhaps this game served a purpose of seeing the hand he has been dealt? In other words, let the players show what they can do offensively (even if it meant going outside his offensive schemes)?

Now, to the point of movement, specifically without the ball. I am 100% on board with that. For anyone that didn’t watch that Bellarmine video that was posted here, I strongly suggest you do. Imagine the benefit a player like Romeo could have received had he spent a week with Scott Davenport?

 

[Cavanagh]

Caveat:

I did not watch the entire game.

An observation on the parts I did see:

Coach was expressionless, silent, and motionless. Perhaps someone that was there has a differing POV, but every time the camera panned his way I say the same poker face, a person that seemed to be watching intently, but I saw no evidence of coaching. I don’t mean this as criticism. Perhaps this game served a purpose of seeing the hand he has been dealt? In other words, let the players show what they can do offensively (even if it meant going outside his offensive schemes)?

Now, to the point of movement, specifically without the ball. I am 100% on board with that. For anyone that didn’t watch that Bellarmine video that was posted here, I strongly suggest you do. Imagine the benefit a player like Romeo could have received had he spent a week with Scott Davenport?

For what it is worth, I remember in a TO him being very animated and seeing all the players have eye contact. Night and day from when Archie was “coaching” in a TO

 

[Courtsensetwo]

Caveat:

I did not watch the entire game.

An observation on the parts I did see:

Coach was expressionless, silent, and motionless. Perhaps someone that was there has a differing POV, but every time the camera panned his way I say the same poker face, a person that seemed to be watching intently, but I saw no evidence of coaching. I don’t mean this as criticism. Perhaps this game served a purpose of seeing the hand he has been dealt? In other words, let the players show what they can do offensively (even if it meant going outside his offensive schemes)?

Now, to the point of movement, specifically without the ball. I am 100% on board with that. For anyone that didn’t watch that Bellarmine video that was posted here, I strongly suggest you do. Imagine the benefit a player like Romeo could have received had he spent a week with Scott Davenport?

If you watched MW as a Coach in the NBA he had the same demeanor,

There was a Nicks facebook site called the "death stare" IIRC

 

[jacksback]

Caveat:

I did not watch the entire game.

An observation on the parts I did see:

Coach was expressionless, silent, and motionless. Perhaps someone that was there has a differing POV, but every time the camera panned his way I say the same poker face, a person that seemed to be watching intently, but I saw no evidence of coaching. I don’t mean this as criticism. Perhaps this game served a purpose of seeing the hand he has been dealt? In other words, let the players show what they can do offensively (even if it meant going outside his offensive schemes)?

Now, to the point of movement, specifically without the ball. I am 100% on board with that. For anyone that didn’t watch that Bellarmine video that was posted here, I strongly suggest you do. Imagine the benefit a player like Romeo could have received had he spent a week with Scott Davenport?

Woody is rather calm but I thought he was up coaching much more than Archie ever was. There were multiple times when he directly got on players for things he didn't like. He doesn't make a big screaming orchestration of it but he definitely gives them the stare and sat guys on a few occasions or went directly after them in timeouts. He gets his point across.

 

[IUNorth]

Caveat:

I did not watch the entire game.

An observation on the parts I did see:

Coach was expressionless, silent, and motionless. Perhaps someone that was there has a differing POV, but every time the camera panned his way I say the same poker face, a person that seemed to be watching intently, but I saw no evidence of coaching. I don’t mean this as criticism. Perhaps this game served a purpose of seeing the hand he has been dealt? In other words, let the players show what they can do offensively (even if it meant going outside his offensive schemes)?

Now, to the point of movement, specifically without the ball. I am 100% on board with that. For anyone that didn’t watch that Bellarmine video that was posted here, I strongly suggest you do. Imagine the benefit a player like Romeo could have received had he spent a week with Scott Davenport?

Every coach is different. Crean was a pacing manic on the sidelines, and I'd bet the players tuned him out for the most part. Stevens was very quiet and stoic, but I'd bet his players at Butler were very much on the same page as he was. And always knew what he expected of them. Izzo yells and screams, probably has their attention most years. Coach K is much quieter and less active.

The most important things are that the players know what you expect of them, that they're prepared adequately heading into the games, and that however you communicate during the game, that you have their ear and they respond and react to it. The style and approach to accomplishing those things aren't important, as long as your team responds well to it.

 

[Indiana_1993]

If anyone thought a Knight style reverse action offense was coming they haven’t been listening or paying attention. Woody isn’t going to run that or even thought of running it. 4 out is more likely and will probably happen. Motion isn’t easy to teach to kids that are used to just playing. Give him time.

I’m afraid you are correct. Wishful thinking from me, I guess. Ugh.

 

[Victorbmyboy]

I’m afraid you are correct. Wishful thinking from me, I guess. Ugh.

It doesn’t work with a short shot clock. You ever notice nobody runs it? Bob Knight is gone.

 

[T.M.P.]

Imagine the benefit a player like Romeo could have received had he spent a week with Scott Davenport?

Probably none.

Meh it's a gimmick that he recruits for. There's no magic wand system. What matters is if the players buy in and how proficient they are doing it. The only reason that system would give anyone trouble is because it's very non standard, (ie a gimmick) it has nothing to do with any glaring degree of systemic based strategic or tactical advantage. Everything has a counter move....

 

[.Gerdis]

Probably none.

Meh it's a gimmick that he recruits for. There's no magic wand system. What matters is if the players buy in and how proficient they are doing it. The only reason that system would give anyone trouble is because it's very non standard, (ie a gimmick) it has nothing to do with any glaring degree of systemic based strategic or tactical advantage. Everything has a counter move....

Oh,I agree. I wasn’t trying to suggest that it wasn’t a gimmick offense.

IMO, Romeo did a poor job of moving without the ball. He was good driving with the ball. Too often, it seemed to me, that he was just standing outside the arc waiting for the ball.

I don’t blame him, I blame the staff. Even if the staff had the tactical/strategic schemes and Romeo just wasn’t buying in or executing, the staff was responsible (ie hold the player accountable).

What I was suggesting was that Davenport might be able to show Romeo the value of moving to get open. That he didn’t need the ball in his hand to imitate the offense. I wouldn’t want to see IU run his offense. I would like to have seen Romeo if he has spent a day doing some drills, watching some tape, etc. in a practice setting with him. A different mindset would have made him more dangerous as an offensive player, and also helped the entire team flow better on offense.

 

[T.M.P.]

IMO, Romeo did a poor job of moving without the ball. He was good driving with the ball. Too often, it seemed to me, that he was just standing outside the arc waiting for the ball.

Maybe that's where the coach wanted him. If you watch him with the Celtics, he stands in the weak side corner knocking down threes or driving. Who knows .. But ya know he still managed 17 per game and a 20 PER. which for freshman that year at his position ..... wasn't too shabby.

 

[Fpeaugh2]

The key is having the best players, not the best system. There’s no magical offense or defense. You try to create mismatches when possible. You can manage minutes and rotations. But at the end of the day players decide outcomes. That’s why the best coaches are the best recruiters.

 

[Victorbmyboy]

Maybe that's where the coach wanted him. If you watch him with the Celtics, he stands in the weak side corner knocking down threes or driving. Who knows .. But ya know he still managed 17 per game and a 20 PER. which for freshman that year at his position ..... wasn't too shabby.

People get to caught up in movement. It’s all about matchups. Romeo is smart and I guarantee he was doing what he was supposed to do.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

People get to caught up in movement. It’s all about matchups. Romeo is smart and I guarantee he was doing what he was supposed to do.

Plus he needed surgery the entire time he was here.

 

[T.M.P.]

People get to caught up in movement. It’s all about matchups. Romeo is smart and I guarantee he was doing what he was supposed to do.

Movement and picks can be countered by switching.

 

[Bippy]

Caveat:
I did not watch the entire game.
An observation on the parts I did see:
Coach was expressionless, silent, and motionless. Perhaps someone that was there has a differing POV, but every time the camera panned his way I say the same poker face, a person that seemed to be watching intently, but I saw no evidence of coaching. I don’t mean this as criticism. Perhaps this game served a purpose of seeing the hand he has been dealt? In other words, let the players show what they can do offensively (even if it meant going outside his offensive schemes)?
Now, to the point of movement, specifically without the ball. I am 100% on board with that. For anyone that didn’t watch that Bellarmine video that was posted here, I strongly suggest you do. Imagine the benefit a player like Romeo could have received had he spent a week with Scott Davenport?

The mental is to the physical as 4 is to 1. That applies to the coach too

 

[TomEric4756]

Lots of teams played a stall or semi stall offense before the shot clock took them out of the game.

The Tarheels’ 4 corners at UNC was the ‘original‘ stall that many of you may recall.

The three man weave is a stall. Princeton’s offense was a stall/semi stall.
I’d say that the ‘motion offense’ was a semi stall… Woody ran through a number of two man screens for a jumper in the corner, when he played in Assembly Hall. It wasn’t all motion all the time.

The shot clock places an emphasis on high levels of execution early in the shot clock.

One of most interesting stall games was Clemson (I believe) v. Kentucky in the NCAA tourney.
The Clemson offense was a 1 4 with an NBA draft pick at the top of the key.
Halftime score a schocking KY 11 Clemson 10. Clemson lead much of the first half.

 

[Crayfish57]

Lots of teams played a stall or semi stall offense before the shot clock took them out of the game.

The Tarheels’ 4 corners at UNC was the ‘original‘ stall that many of you may recall.

The three man weave is a stall. Princeton’s offense was a stall/semi stall.
I’d say that the ‘motion offense’ was a semi stall… Woody ran through a number of two man screens for a jumper in the corner, when he played in Assembly Hall. It wasn’t all motion all the time.

The shot clock places an emphasis on high levels of execution early in the shot clock.

One of most interesting stall games was Clemson (I believe) v. Kentucky in the NCAA tourney.
The Clemson offense was a 1 4 with an NBA draft pick at the top of the key.
Halftime score a schocking KY 11 Clemson 10. Clemson lead much of the first half.

The problem came when the ''stall'' was a strategy vs just getting a good shot. I don't think Knight ever took the air out aside from maybe a short stint for foul troubles he wanted a good shot. In HS I can understand going against a bigger school . The idea is to win

 

[Spartans9312]

Movement and picks can be countered by switching.

Movement and picks can be used to cause switching….leading to the matchup you want.

 

[abraxis]

The problem came when the ''stall'' was a strategy vs just getting a good shot. I don't think Knight ever took the air out aside from maybe a short stint for foul troubles he wanted a good shot. In HS I can understand going against a bigger school . The idea is to win

Under Knight's tutelage, I remember IU, with a slight lead, dribbling and passing the ball around for about 10 minutes before Iowa was forced to come out of their zone. Knight told everyone on his Sunday morning show exactly how the motion offense and switching man-to-man defense worked. He was comfortable in teaching it to others, including many coaches who tuned in, because he knew his teams were going to better prepared in discipline to execute it properly.

 

[Chicago-bound Hoosier]

Under Knight's tutelage, I remember IU, with a slight lead, dribbling and passing the ball around for about 10 minutes before Iowa was forced to come out of their zone. Knight told everyone on his Sunday morning show exactly how the motion offense and switching man-to-man defense worked. He was comfortable in teaching it to others, including many coaches who tuned in, because he knew his teams were going to better prepared in discipline to execute it properly.

yep remember that Iowa game well. They had to squeeze 3 TV timeouts into the last 2 minutes of the game, they were so far behind. Dean Smith used to do the same thing, the 4 corner stall. Shot clock killed that forever.

 

[abraxis]

yep remember that Iowa game well. They had to squeeze 3 TV timeouts into the last 2 minutes of the game, they were so far behind. Dean Smith used to do the same thing, the 4 corner stall. Shot clock killed that forever.

The shot clock and three points awarded for the long ball killed a lot of things. It evens out the playing field, giving lesser teams a fighting chance on occasion. That Iowa game scenario took things to the extreme, the price we paid for victory. Since the powers that be don't seem to mind tinkering with things, maybe its time they make dunks worth just 1/2 points, now that so many players are taller and more athletic.

 

[benhyoung14]

Yes, the motion offense has been dead for 20 years. He's not going to implement a motion offense that he hasn't played or coached for 40. Give it a rest. Just because he's a Knight product doesn't mean he needs to coach like Knight.

 

[rickster24]

Caveat:

I did not watch the entire game.

An observation on the parts I did see:

Coach was expressionless, silent, and motionless. Perhaps someone that was there has a differing POV, but every time the camera panned his way I say the same poker face, a person that seemed to be watching intently, but I saw no evidence of coaching. I don’t mean this as criticism. Perhaps this game served a purpose of seeing the hand he has been dealt? In other words, let the players show what they can do offensively (even if it meant going outside his offensive schemes)?

Now, to the point of movement, specifically without the ball. I am 100% on board with that. For anyone that didn’t watch that Bellarmine video that was posted here, I strongly suggest you do. Imagine the benefit a player like Romeo could have received had he spent a week with Scott Davenport?

You missed it then...Woody was up in guys faces a few times and he was not praising them whatsoever...He gnawed on their backside like a hungry wolf!