Kerr's view on smaller lineups & forcing Spurs to go small

[Statmaster]

This a bit dated but probably very much still Steve Kerr's thinking. It is from one of his "Yahoo Sports" question & answer articles dated October 11, 2006. The link is: http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=sk-mailbag101106&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

What I find interesting is the comments he made 7+ months later as a commentator for our Spurs-Suns games. Maybe someone else can locate his playoff quotes and post them to compare....but I remember it as something to the effect of: "Suns must get bigger & tougher to get past the Spurs". It appears his thinking has reverted to what he wrote back in October 2006.

Intersting that he seems to give Dallas credit for forcing the Spurs to go small in 2006 playoffs and for whatever reason(s) Mavs did win the series 4-3. I suppose all things considered now....this is what the Suns will try to do? I am still not giving up hope that one or two interior guys will be added....maybe both would be guys that can play the 4 AND the 5 positions...for maximum flexibility.

Here is the question he was asked and his response: ( bolds are mine)


"Do you think the East will be more defensive-minded now, and the West less so? It seems with both the San Antonio Spurs and Los Angeles Lakers relying less on very physical centers that a lot more scoring will be going on in the Western Conference."
Thomas Hall
San Antonio

Thomas, I think the entire league is trending toward smaller lineups and more scoring. One reason is that there just aren't that many good big men anymore, but also the recent rules changes have encouraged a more perimeter-oriented game. The closely called hand check means it's very difficult to cover someone like Dwyane Wade, for example. That's why Wade, LeBron James, Kobe Bryant and others had games where they shot 20-plus free throws last season. You just can't put a hand on perimeter players anymore. The allowance of zones, too, means that teams can play smaller guys and get away with it. Dallas forced the Spurs to change their style in the playoffs last season by going small, and the scores of the games were much higher than the Spurs were used to. This season, San Antonio is planning on playing Tim Duncan more at the five and going small around him because the Spurs are trying to adjust to the league's trend. Regardless, I think it has made for a more entertaining style of play."


I'm thinking Grant Hill will get alot of free throws for us for sure. Tucker & DJ, even though they aren't that good at outside shooting....if they can stick to taking it inside and drawing contact for free throws, that they might be better additions than we expect....on top of their hustle & perimeter defense (especially DJ).

Comments?

 

[elindholm]

No one would say that after watching the recent playoffs. Referees are permitting just as much perimeter fouling as ever.

 

[SunsTzu]

Didn't the Mavs beat the Spurs with having 2 7 footers on the court at the same time for nearly the entire game? And I don't think Dampier and Diop were out there because of their offense.

 

[azirish]

Didn't the Mavs beat the Spurs with having 2 7 footers on the court at the same time for nearly the entire game? And I don't think Dampier and Diop were out there because of their offense.

If anything, it was the Spurs that went small, not the Mavs. Granted, Dirk is a seven footer, his game is more like that of a big SF than a big man. None the less, but during the 2005-06 series it was the Spurs that played small and nearly won while the Mavs did not go small.

The Mavs never went small (either Dmapier or Diop almost all the time), but that the Spurs did. Mohamed averaged only 5.0 minutes per game in three games and Oberto averaged only 6.0 minutes in three games. Horry averaged 15.0 minutes.

Oddly enough, despite the Spurs small ball, the series went to seen games including a one point win by Dallas in game 3 in Dallas. Overall, the Mavs outscored the Spurs by 4.0 ppg, but the Spurs shot a higher percentage at 47.5% versus 46.7% for the Mavs. The Spurs did this despite some poor shooting by Horry 2.7 ppg on 25.0% and 14.3% for three and limited offense from Barry (5.3 ppg) and Bowen (4.7 ppg).

The decision to go small by the Spurs was tactical and not due to injuries. In their previous series against the Kings, Nesto averaged 17 minutes a game and Mohamed averaged 15.8 minutes a game. But a couple of weak games in losses in Sacramento led Pops to go small to win the last two games.

Kerr may be right about the trend toward small and speed, but his example does not support his conclusion.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

No one would say that after watching the recent playoffs. Referees are permitting just as much perimeter fouling as ever.

This was the number one issue that killed me during the playoffs. You call the game one way during the regular season, making sure to not allow the mugging on the outside, then when the playoffs start the rules are completely changed. If they really were calling fouls, Bowen would have fouled out of every game.

 

[azirish]

This was the number one issue that killed me during the playoffs. You call the game one way during the regular season, making sure to not allow the mugging on the outside, then when the playoffs start the rules are completely changed. If they really were calling fouls, Bowen would have fouled out of every game.

Dealing with Bowen is the primary issue for the Suns offense against the Spurs. What is amazing is that despite repeated fouling, Nash still averaged 21.3 ppg and 12.4 assists per game. What is intriguing for this season is that adding Hill may force the Spurs to pull Bowen off Nash.

It is one thing for Bowen to play physical with Nash, who is listed at 195 pounds versus Hill who is 227 and finishes well at the basket. Using Parker on Nash is not quite as effective. In Game 1 of the series before Bowen was moved over onto Nash, Steve scored 31 points on 11 of 18 shooting when Jones scored no points.

 

[Joe Mama]

This was the number one issue that killed me during the playoffs. You call the game one way during the regular season, making sure to not allow the mugging on the outside, then when the playoffs start the rules are completely changed. If they really were calling fouls, Bowen would have fouled out of every game.

It also makes absolutely no sense from an NBA marketing standpoint. I mean in the past I've been willing to bite on some of the conspiracy theories that had the referees "helping" big market teams like the Lakers come and I definitely think they've protected the superstars. However if the league marketers wanted to influence that series they would have called the games tightly, especially on the perimeter.

Nobody outside of San Antonio could have wanted the Spurs to win that series. Phoenix has a bigger market. They have a big following around the league because of Nash and their style of play. Certainly there would have been a much bigger audience for a Phoenix Suns - Cleveland Cavaliers finals.

Now before people start pointing towards the crooked referee please remember that they called the defense on Steve Nash the same way for virtually the entire series. No, this was an overall officiating philosophy as opposed to a handful of bad calls.

I'll continue to beat this dead horse because it really just baffles my mind.

Joe

 

[Mainstreet]

It also makes absolutely no sense from an NBA marketing standpoint. I mean in the past I've been willing to bite on some of the conspiracy theories that had the referees "helping" big market teams like the Lakers come and I definitely think they've protected the superstars. However if the league marketers wanted to influence that series they would have called the games tightly, especially on the perimeter.

Nobody outside of San Antonio could have wanted the Spurs to win that series. Phoenix has a bigger market. They have a big following around the league because of Nash and their style of play. Certainly there would have been a much bigger audience for a Phoenix Suns - Cleveland Cavaliers finals.

Now before people start pointing towards the crooked referee please remember that they called the defense on Steve Nash the same way for virtually the entire series. No, this was an overall officiating philosophy as opposed to a handful of bad calls.

I'll continue to beat this dead horse because it really just baffles my mind.

Joe

Your right this makes no sense from a marketing standpoint. However, this does not matter if, one say, is placing a bet.

IMO, it would be very easy to make bets on a team that is easily on one of the best teams in the NBA and then for someone just to provide them a little insurance to make sure they get there. Someone didn't care if Nash got manhandled or questionable calls were made, because.... so long as the team won that was supposed to win, the quality of the game really doesn't matter. Who enforces how fouls are called in the playoffs?

 

[azirish]

From what I can tell, the issue of the hand checking rule is the most difficult. My read on it is that the league office keeps giving mixed signals. They don't want the game stopped by an infinite number of ticky tack fouls, but still ding the refs some of the time when they don't call them (hello flopperino). Since they don't define what it incidental contact, they go through swings between stupid touch calls and permitting muggings.

This is especially tough on the Suns because they explicitly try to avoid fouling. This means when the refs going a chorus of "anything goes", the Suns are not prepared for it. At the same time, the Suns have not had the depth to go through foul'em defense when the refs decide to go after ticky tacks.

 

[Lorenzo]

who cares about marketing when it comes to the playoffs. I hope that the nba or any other professional sports orginzation never influences actual games based on marketing decisions. as a true fan why would you want illegitimate help from the refs anyway? Any time you have a close series like spurs vs. suns last season or mavs vs. spurs the year prior, you are going to have bad calls. people are going to micro-manage the nba refs when the series is hard fought. there are some spurs fans who feel they were cheated by the refs when the mavs beat them. I'm sure there are some suns fans who feel the same way now. The best team always wins in a 7 game series.

 

[azirish]

The NBA rules committee changed the hand checking and obstruction rules explicitly to open the game up and encourage more scoring. It was explicitly part of an overall rule change which included new defensive three second rule, rules ending the endless dribbling in the post waiting on the double team (Sir Charles style), new zone rules, etc.

The goal was more movement, more passing, and more scoring which has proven popular with the fans. So while it has been resisted by many coaches and too many officials, the overall effect has been to the good. But it is hard when the rules are not applied consistently.

 

[Covert Rain]

Funny how a bigger paycheck can change a persons mind. Kerr did in fact say that the Suns needed to get tougher and play more defense to get past San Antonio. I guess the off season acquisitions have shored that up in his mind.

Kerr is either:

A. A complete hypocrite

B. Suffering from post playoff memory loss

C. Toeing the company line and doesn't believe what he is saying

 

[Joe Mama]

who cares about marketing when it comes to the playoffs. I hope that the nba or any other professional sports orginzation never influences actual games based on marketing decisions. as a true fan why would you want illegitimate help from the refs anyway? Any time you have a close series like spurs vs. suns last season or mavs vs. spurs the year prior, you are going to have bad calls. people are going to micro-manage the nba refs when the series is hard fought. there are some spurs fans who feel they were cheated by the refs when the mavs beat them. I'm sure there are some suns fans who feel the same way now. The best team always wins in a 7 game series.

Please understand that I wasn't suggesting that the NBA should or even does influence the officiating. I don't buy into the NBA conspiracy theories. The only thing I only if the league might do is encourage the referees to keep the star players in the game.

That's what is so crazy to me. It just doesn't make sense.

Again, I'm not talking about a few bad calls. I'm talking about an overall officiating philosophy throughout the playoffs. I'm not only talking about the Phoenix Suns games either. I'm talking about all the games.

Did they actually change the rules, or did they just mandate that the referees start interpreting the rules more strictly? I had always thought it was the latter. Regardless, it does not make any sense to change the officiating to open up the game and make it more enjoyable only to go back to the ugly 1995-2003 style play for the playoffs. It doesn't make any sense for the referees to allow the defense to constantly clutch, crab, and molest the two-time MVP point guard of the league's most exciting team.

Joe

 

[Errntknght]

Did they actually change the rules, or did they just mandate that the referees start interpreting the rules more strictly? I had always thought it was the latter. Regardless, it does not make any sense to change the officiating to open up the game and make it more enjoyable only to go back to the ugly 1995-2003 style play for the playoffs. It doesn't make any sense for the referees to allow the defense to constantly clutch, crab, and molest the two-time MVP point guard of the league's most exciting team.

I've made this very point myself a number of times but there is a way that it makes sense. The individual owners each have a say in what the league does and while they all concerned about what is good for the league, each is more concerned about what is good for his team. How many of them figure that breaking with the tradition of the playoffs being much more physical than regular season will benefit their team? Its probably a growing number but until its a majority of them, the league isn't likely to do anything dramatic.

BTW, more physical play in the playoffs is a long tradition - when I started watching the NBA over fifty years ago it was already a tradition. You heard announcers say things like, "This is the playoffs - no blood, no foul!" or "No layups - we're in the playoffs now!"

 

[azirish]

"No layups - we're in the playoffs now!"

There are a lot of teams with this theory during the regular season. "Make them earn it at the line", which is why then need five or six bigs. The result is that they hold opponents shooting percentages down, but not necessarily their scoring.

This is one of the reasons the Suns end up with an odd stat of permitting a fairly average opponent shooting percentage, but a below average number of points per opponent's possession. It is a calculated risk to simply let opponents have their sure layups in order to keep five offensive players on the floor.

Unfortunately, against hte Spurs it is often a good idea to foul since Dincan is so bad at the tline.

On the other side of the court, the Suns free throw shooting is a huge advantage. The Suns averaged 80.8% from the line last season. Hill will actually pull the average down (he's a career 76% free throw shooter but makes up for it by taking a lot of them).

BTW, one of the reasons the Suns have targeted PJ is that he is a career 79.5% free throw shooter (78.7% last season but well over 80% since 2000). By contrast, Skinner is only a career 56.4% free throw shooter.

 

[Errntknght]

BTW, one of the reasons the Suns have targeted PJ is that he is a career 79.5% free throw shooter (78.7% last season but well over 80% since 2000). By contrast, Skinner is only a career 56.4% free throw shooter.

Good catch, George. I usually check out guys FT% but in this case I overlooked them.

 

[azirish]

Good catch, George. I usually check out guys FT% but in this case I overlooked them.

It had been brought up before, but got buried. Hoopshype mentioned it:

http://www.hoopshype.com/players/pj_brown.htm

 

[Lorenzo]

Please understand that I wasn't suggesting that the NBA should or even does influence the officiating. I don't buy into the NBA conspiracy theories. The only thing I only if the league might do is encourage the referees to keep the star players in the game.

That's what is so crazy to me. It just doesn't make sense.

Again, I'm not talking about a few bad calls. I'm talking about an overall officiating philosophy throughout the playoffs. I'm not only talking about the Phoenix Suns games either. I'm talking about all the games.

Did they actually change the rules, or did they just mandate that the referees start interpreting the rules more strictly? I had always thought it was the latter. Regardless, it does not make any sense to change the officiating to open up the game and make it more enjoyable only to go back to the ugly 1995-2003 style play for the playoffs. It doesn't make any sense for the referees to allow the defense to constantly clutch, crab, and molest the two-time MVP point guard of the league's most exciting team.

Joe

right on man. that's a good question. I think that the most important thing is consistent calls. The only thing i can thing of is that teams play harder and it puts more pressure on the refs. I remember back to that S.A./Dallas series. Every game but one came down to the last possesion. The refs were called out by both teams when they lost. TD complained to the media. Avery Johnson said Bowen's defense of dirk is called bear hug defense. The officiating is usually always worse in a close series. Back to nash. I remember back to his days with dallas. S.A. always was his worst matchup. It seemed like he had to pick up his level just to have a good game. They have always been very physical.