A Few Thoughts on Mavs 107, Jazz 112

[mavsluvr]

Five out is great to get your team to the 4th quarter (as a majority play), at that point, it's not against the best teams.

Carlisle talked a little bit about the five out offense after the game. He likes it as an offensive tool, but thinks it tends to put the team at a disadvantage in other respects, such as rebounding and transition D.

[ItsGoTime]

but thinks it tends to put the team at a disadvantage in other respects, such as rebounding and transition D.

Tell that to those who don't care about D (we just need to hit more shots and get better offensive players) and think Rebounding is overrated.

[omahen]

Tell that to those who don't care about D

What has a five out offense to do with bad defense and rebounding? KP and Kleber can be excellent members of five out offense as well as good defense and rebounding.

[ItsGoTime]

What has a five out offense to do with bad defense and rebounding?

Ask RC, he's the one who said it.

[dirkfansince1998]

Tell that to those who don't care about D

What has a five out offense to do with bad defense and rebounding? KP and Kleber can be excellent members of five out offense as well as good defense and rebounding.

Kleber for example spends most of his time on offense in the corner. Basically the max possible distance to get back on defense. Frome my eyetest I would say that the initial transition defense isn´t the problem. Meaning that the opponents don´t score fastbreak points. The problem is that more often than not the Mavs already start the defensive possession with mismatches all over the floor.

[mavsluvr]

Tell that to those who don't care about D

What has a five out offense to do with bad defense and rebounding? KP and Kleber can be excellent members of five out offense as well as good defense and rebounding.

Kleber for example spends most of his time on offense in the corner. Basically the max possible distance to get back on defense. Frome my eyetest I would say that the initial transition defense isn´t the problem. Meaning that the opponents don´t score fastbreak points. The problem is that more often than not the Mavs already start the defensive possession with mismatches all over the floor.

Good points. The five-out lineups probably had a lot to do with Utah's 28 second-chance points. Rick also said something about the five-out units usually being small, or even super-small. They don't require physicality and power to score, but they have the rebounding and defensive disadvantages typical of small lineups.

[omahen]

Rick also said something about the five-out units usually being small

This is the problem, that our 5 out is small, not the 5 out in general. That about transition defense is not correct. Some players are in the corners and some are on the top of the field in 5 out, just like in any other offensive scheme.

[mavsluvr]

but thinks it tends to put the team at a disadvantage in other respects, such as rebounding and transition D.

Tell that to those who don't care about D (we just need to hit more shots and get better offensive players) and think Rebounding is overrated.

A lot of interesting points have been raised about the offense, and those points are well worth considering and discussing.

Having said that, it didn't seem to me that the offensive scheme was much of a problem in this game. The system was getting the Mavs good looks, and they shot well on the whole -- the shots they missed or declined to take were often open or lightly contested.  However, on the defensive end, the Mavericks sent the Jazz to the line for 22 foul shots, and gave up 28 second-chance points. There's your subpar performance.

I guess one could view the use of the five-out offense as partially responsible for the poor defense. It is employed as a way to make it easier for small lineups to score, and small lineups in general tend to perform worse on defense and rebounding than bigger ones do. And on the offensive side, all those missed free throws did hurt.

[omahen]

A lot of interesting points have been raised about the offense, and those points are well worth considering and discussing.

Having said that, it didn't seem to me that the offensive scheme was much of a problem in this game. The system was getting the Mavs good looks, and they shot well on the whole -- the shots they missed or declined to take were often open or lightly contested.  However, on the defensive end, the Mavericks sent the Jazz to the line for 22 foul shots, and gave up 28 second-chance points. There's your subpar performance.

I guess one could view the use of the five-out offense as partially responsible for the poor defense. It is employed as a way to make it easier for small lineups to score, and small lineups in general tend to perform worse on defense and rebounding than bigger ones do. And on the offensive side, all those missed free throws did hurt.

All true. But change Curry with Kleber and you still have a 5 out offense and a much better defense. The problem was that we only had two bigs and we didn't play them at the same time.

[mavsluvr]

Rick also said something about the five-out units usually being small

This is the problem, that our 5 out is small, not the 5 out in general. That about transition defense is not correct. Some players are in the corners and some are on the top of the field in 5 out, just like in any other offensive scheme.

I believe the theory is that the five-out offense makes it easier for the defense to grab all those long rebounds and run. Even short rebounds can be problematic if no Mav is around the basket and/or the perimeter guys are not well-positioned to box out. All exacerbated by the small units. The performance in this game tends to bear all that out.

---

A lot of interesting points have been raised about the offense, and those points are well worth considering and discussing.

Having said that, it didn't seem to me that the offensive scheme was much of a problem in this game. The system was getting the Mavs good looks, and they shot well on the whole -- the shots they missed or declined to take were often open or lightly contested.  However, on the defensive end, the Mavericks sent the Jazz to the line for 22 foul shots, and gave up 28 second-chance points. There's your subpar performance.

I guess one could view the use of the five-out offense as partially responsible for the poor defense. It is employed as a way to make it easier for small lineups to score, and small lineups in general tend to perform worse on defense and rebounding than bigger ones do. And on the offensive side, all those missed free throws did hurt.

All true. But change Curry with Kleber and you still have a 5 out offense and a much better defense. The problem was that we only had two bigs and we didn't play them at the same time.

Maybe. Two things. 

Curry hit four threes, and Maxi missed six of his eight attempts. Curry makes for a stronger offense in the five-out, with the tradeoff being better defense from Maxi.  

If Carlisle had elected to play two bigs at the same time, I think they would have gone to their usual PNR offense, rather than resorting to five-out. That might well have been a better scheme, but that's another question. There were three big men available. KP is evidently on some kind of minutes watch. Maxi got into foul trouble a couple of times, which I think limited his time on the court, and he wasn't having a good night in general. Boban has always been a low-minute player, so they fielded units with only one big man, and played five out. Not saying I think Rick made all the right choices in retrospect, just saying I think I understand where he was coming from.