12-29-2021, 03:23 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-29-2021, 03:25 PM by dirkfansince1998.)
Passing topic is interesting.
Just looking at the top 10 in passes per game and the offensive rating.
1. Warriors 4th OFFRTG
2. Nuggets 20th OFFRTG
3. Pacers 12th OFFRTG
4. Pistons 30th OFFRTG
5. Pelicans 24th OFFRTG
6. 76ers 14th OFFRTG
7. Cavs 13th OFFRTG
8. Hornets 2nd OFFRTG
9. Heat 7th OFFRTG
10. OKC 29th OFFRTG
Actually suggesting the opposite. Especially if we also look at the bottom three in passes per game. Suns, Hawks and Bucks. All top ten in O-rating.
There are many different ways to run a successful offense. For teams with multiple ballhandlers and good passers a high passing volume can be beneficial. For others with more limited players it can also lead to problems.
I don´t think more passing automatically translates to better offense. I do think that more passing with a purpose leads to better offense. Simply passing the ball around the perimeter isn´t challenging the defense. Needs inside-out, outside-in movement from players and the ball to create better scoring opportunities.
The Warriors build a succesful offense around off ball movement and screens. A lot of playmaking and passing from bigs (small ball bigs). A stationary passer surrounded by players that are running around off ball screens or cutting to the basket. Not sure if any other team has the players to replicate their system. Curry and Draymond are unique.
Most teams are playing a more pick and roll heavy offense. Be it the heliocentric RC/D´Antoni style that features a high usage player like Harden/Doncic or multiple ballhandlers. Some with more off ball movement. Some focusing on the max amount of spacing.
The heliocentric style is more or less the opposite of the Warriors style. A moving ballhandler passing the ball to stationary receivers.
Bottom line for me. Making the connection to the current Mavs. Right now I am not sure if the coaches have a clear idea how they want the Mavs to play. As long as that isn´t the case it is difficult to say if more passing would help the team.
Leaves us with a couple of questions. First. Would a more pass heavy approach lead to better results with the current roster. If the answer is yes. Are we talking about a more diversified flow offense or a completly different scheme?
If the answer is no. Should the Mavs go back to the low passing volume offense that lead to great offensive numbers in the previous two seasons? Should the Mavs make roster adjustments to improve the passing?
That goes along with some of the questions we asked in other threads. If the plan was to run a switch and rotation heavy offense why did they resign THJ? If the plan was to run a more pass heavy offense why did they add Bullock?
Just looking at the top 10 in passes per game and the offensive rating.
1. Warriors 4th OFFRTG
2. Nuggets 20th OFFRTG
3. Pacers 12th OFFRTG
4. Pistons 30th OFFRTG
5. Pelicans 24th OFFRTG
6. 76ers 14th OFFRTG
7. Cavs 13th OFFRTG
8. Hornets 2nd OFFRTG
9. Heat 7th OFFRTG
10. OKC 29th OFFRTG
Actually suggesting the opposite. Especially if we also look at the bottom three in passes per game. Suns, Hawks and Bucks. All top ten in O-rating.
There are many different ways to run a successful offense. For teams with multiple ballhandlers and good passers a high passing volume can be beneficial. For others with more limited players it can also lead to problems.
I don´t think more passing automatically translates to better offense. I do think that more passing with a purpose leads to better offense. Simply passing the ball around the perimeter isn´t challenging the defense. Needs inside-out, outside-in movement from players and the ball to create better scoring opportunities.
The Warriors build a succesful offense around off ball movement and screens. A lot of playmaking and passing from bigs (small ball bigs). A stationary passer surrounded by players that are running around off ball screens or cutting to the basket. Not sure if any other team has the players to replicate their system. Curry and Draymond are unique.
Most teams are playing a more pick and roll heavy offense. Be it the heliocentric RC/D´Antoni style that features a high usage player like Harden/Doncic or multiple ballhandlers. Some with more off ball movement. Some focusing on the max amount of spacing.
The heliocentric style is more or less the opposite of the Warriors style. A moving ballhandler passing the ball to stationary receivers.
Bottom line for me. Making the connection to the current Mavs. Right now I am not sure if the coaches have a clear idea how they want the Mavs to play. As long as that isn´t the case it is difficult to say if more passing would help the team.
Leaves us with a couple of questions. First. Would a more pass heavy approach lead to better results with the current roster. If the answer is yes. Are we talking about a more diversified flow offense or a completly different scheme?
If the answer is no. Should the Mavs go back to the low passing volume offense that lead to great offensive numbers in the previous two seasons? Should the Mavs make roster adjustments to improve the passing?
That goes along with some of the questions we asked in other threads. If the plan was to run a switch and rotation heavy offense why did they resign THJ? If the plan was to run a more pass heavy offense why did they add Bullock?
![[-]](https://www.mavsboard.com/images/collapse.png)