So much has changed in the NBA in recent years. Beyond the obvious increase in 3-point shooting, the positional revolution stands out, as the league’s best team—having arguably the greatest season ever—uses conventional small forwards at both power forward and center in its dominant closing lineup. More than that, its nominal point guard leads the team in scoring by a wide margin, while that small-ball center leads the team in assists. The idea that lineups don’t need to conform to the PG/SG/SF/PF/C paradigm with its associated positional roles is a substantial change in thinking from a decade ago.
Setting screens is obviously still a big part of the game, but there’s such an incredible amount of variation in how screens are used now. The Stockton-Malone style pick-and-roll is comparatively rare, as teams more often use picks to force a mismatch off a switch or to generate an open jumper for either the screener or a shooter moving off the ball. This more strategic use of picks and increased off-the-ball movement indeed has fueled the trend toward somewhat positionless basketball, with teams striving to fill their lineups with players possessing the combination of quickness and size to switch and rotate more effectively. A typical NBA set has so much off-the-ball action that it’s virtually impossible to see everything that’s going on. Check out the phenomenal Explain One Play series for examples.
On the defensive side of the ball, Tom Thibodeau pioneered the very successful strategy of overloading the strong side, forcing ball handlers toward the baseline and sideline (away from the middle of the paint), and aggressively rotating to close out on 3-point shooters and concede the mid-range jumper. To combat that strategy, teams have focused more on ball movement and player movement, running sets like Hammer which results in a skip pass to the far corner accompanied by a weak side back screen preventing an effective close out.
An NBA playoff series is full of adjustments and counter-adjustments, and at this point there are so many strategies just to defend the pick and roll (plus counters like slipping the pick, using a shooter or ball handler as the screener, or initiating the play from a different area of the court) that decision trees for stringers are ridiculously complex. Then you have other teams that run mostly read-and-react or drive-and-kick schemes operating under a totally different model.
Another change in the NBA in recent years is the decreased emphasis on offensive rebounding in favor of getting back on defense. The Charlotte Hornets under Steve Clifford offer the ultimate example of a team that eschews offensive rebounding and in fact overwhelmingly gears its tactics on both sides of the ball toward preventing easy baskets. On offense they steadfastly avoid turnovers (fewest) and corner 3s (lowest % of total 3PA) that more readily lead to fast break opportunities, preferring above-the-break 3s (lead the league in such attempts) that ensure someone can get back in transition. They emphasize defensive rebounding (1st) to deny high-percentage put backs and kick-outs, and they don’t crash the offensive boards (2nd lowest OReb%). This strategy has enabled them to maintain a top-10 defense despite a lack of strong individual defenders.
My favorite team sports are basketball and baseball. Watching the Cubs-Dodgers game on ESPN, I am reminded of how my basketball fan experience differs from my baseball fan experience. As a basketball fan I have a much-preferred team but I also root for particular individuals and other teams based on style, potential, or perceived brilliance. Being from Chicago, I have mixed feelings about the Warriors breaking the Bulls’ record, but I still love watching the Warriors play. I feel the need to have NBA League Pass because I want to see what every team is doing and I don’t want to miss an epic finish or individual performance. As a baseball fan I care about the Cubs first, foremost, and nearly exclusively. I’ll certainly watch other teams, but I won’t seek out any other game in particular or feel much of a connection to it.
And even though the MLB playoffs yield more diverse results, I find the NBA playoffs more compelling. Having random teams win is great for those teams’ fans and for the idea that hope springs eternal, but it doesn’t really spark excitement for the games themselves, at least in my mind. In the NBA, Warriors-Cavs may be the Finals matchup that we all expected, yet I’ve still thoroughly enjoyed the journey in reaching this point, not only for the incredible Western Conference Finals but also for the strong showings by the up-and-coming Blazers and the Raptors finally getting the playoff monkey off their backs. For some teams the first or second round of the playoffs is their proving ground offering useful experience for the future, and in any event, those scenes of a packed “Jurassic Park” filled with screaming fans outside the arena in Toronto never get old.
Leave a Reply