Jaylen Brown, Year 7

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
5,005
Saint Paul, MN
Horford is one of the Top5 passing BIGs in the game
And at least on a couple of plays he made great passes to players for wide open corner threes. If BOS makes a few more of those nobody is bitching about player movement and lack of cutting. Just as if Braun got blocked at the rim a few times, people would be complaining that they didn't swing the ball to Murray for a wide open three
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,093
Ball movement is part of it, not all of it. See here, on how to beat a zone, number three especially:

#1 Don’t Stand, Move With a Purpose Against the Zone

#3 Hard Cuts Through the Zone
I should have been more detailed in my response. The core way to beat a zone is with sharp ball movement. When a player makes hard cuts that removes them from position it's akin to "going all in" on the possession as a failure to result in a pass/layup places them out of position and the entire set in chaos. So yes, hard cuts can be effective as a finishing technique but ball movement to exploit holes in the zone to create open threes is the most effective way to beat it....aside from having Jokic.
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
21,147
Row 14
I should have been more detailed in my response. The core way to beat a zone is with sharp ball movement. When a player makes hard cuts that removes them from position it's akin to "going all in" on the possession as a failure to result in a pass/layup places them out of position and the entire set in chaos. So yes, hard cuts can be effective as a finishing technique but ball movement to exploit holes in the zone to create open threes is the most effective way to beat it....aside from having Jokic.
Ha I was about to say haver Bill Walton or Jokic is the best way to beat the zone.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
12,095
around the way
I should have been more detailed in my response. The core way to beat a zone is with sharp ball movement. When a player makes hard cuts that removes them from position it's akin to "going all in" on the possession as a failure to result in a pass/layup places them out of position and the entire set in chaos. So yes, hard cuts can be effective as a finishing technique but ball movement to exploit holes in the zone to create open threes is the most effective way to beat it....aside from having Jokic.
Yeah we're kind of oversimplifying what it's like playing against a zone too. Depends on the athletes playing the zone and the ones attacking a zone. Depends on what kind of zone it is, what concepts are prioritized, etc. Most of the people here have played a zone or attacked one. It's not the same thing every time.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,946
Santa Monica
And at least on a couple of plays he made great passes to players for wide open corner threes. If BOS makes a few more of those nobody is bitching about player movement and lack of cutting. Just as if Braun got blocked at the rim a few times, people would be complaining that they didn't swing the ball to Murray for a wide open three
When a player cuts (Brown or Smart in this case), it doesn't mean they are giving up the chance for a wide-open 3, you realize that right?

You don't want a Potted Plant offense, regardless of what happened in Game7. You want players cutting and rotating when the ball gets to the nail.

People need to re-watch the video (turn off the volume), since they weren't WIDE OPEN 3s, Miami had a player challenge those jumpers.

Any offense that turns Jaylen Brown & Smart into a stationary spot-up 3pt Corner shooter, with no movement and nobody crashing the offensive boards against the zone is a mistake. That's exactly what Spoelstra wants to give up. I'm repeating myself, so I'm signing off here.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cC1ihhrz3M
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
10,246
San Francisco
Ball movement is part of it, not all of it. See here, on how to beat a zone, number three especially:

#1 Don’t Stand, Move With a Purpose Against the Zone

#3 Hard Cuts Through the Zone
I did devote an entire new thread to this. Your description of what the Celtics were doing against the zone is just not accurate.
 

m0ckduck

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,985
I've been trying to resist this post for a long time b/c it's clearly in fantasy / crazy town territory, but: isn't there at least a hypothetical basis for a JB for JJJ deal with Memphis?

If the Grizzles are uncertain about Morant and his maturity, his ability to lead a team and stop brandishing firearms on social media, then JB gives them the next best thing in terms of primary creator with Uber-athleticism and marketability. Between Steven Adams and Brandon Clarke, they have enough bigs to survive without JJJ and clearly need a injection of maturity into the locker room. From the C's perspective, I'm generally in favor of keeping Brown, but if there's one kind of deal that makes sense, it's trading him for an elite stretch-5-and-D to fill the looming hole when Horford retires and/or RWIII can't go any more. Maybe you then consolidate RWIII, Smart and Brogdan into a single 2-guard to replace JB, or maybe you just run it back as is and mix-and-match.
 

BigMike

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Sep 26, 2000
23,259
I've been trying to resist this post for a long time b/c it's clearly in fantasy / crazy town territory, but: isn't there at least a hypothetical basis for a JB for JJJ deal with Memphis?

If the Grizzles are uncertain about Morant and his maturity, his ability to lead a team and stop brandishing firearms on social media, then JB gives them the next best thing in terms of primary creator with Uber-athleticism and marketability. Between Steven Adams and Brandon Clarke, they have enough bigs to survive without JJJ and clearly need a injection of maturity into the locker room. From the C's perspective, I'm generally in favor of keeping Brown, but if there's one kind of deal that makes sense, it's trading him for an elite stretch-5-and-D to fill the looming hole when Horford retires and/or RWIII can't go any more. Maybe you then consolidate RWIII, Smart and Brogdan into a single 2-guard to replace JB, or maybe you just run it back as is and mix-and-match.
How well do you think Morant's antics would play in Boston?

Whoops thought you meant Morant for brown.

In terms of JJJ, I could see how that would be great for Boston. Unless you believe he can be the strict big Brother who will slap Morant around, and help get him under control i just don't see where it is a good deal for Memphis. That 30 million dollar gap in salary in 24 and 25 seasons is a lot
 
Last edited:

PRabbit

New Member
Apr 3, 2022
121
If Jaylen goes out..does anyone here think White or Brogdan are #2 options? They're #3s at best.

They'd need a scoring wing back. A third rotational big sould help too. Something like..to Brooklyn for Bridges and Claxton plus a pick or swaps.

Not that I'm actually advocating it.
 

BigMike

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Sep 26, 2000
23,259
If Jaylen goes out..does anyone here think White or Brogdan are #2 options? They're #3s at best.

They'd need a scoring wing back. A third rotational big sould help too. Something like..to Brooklyn for Bridges and Claxton plus a pick or swaps.

Not that I'm actually advocating it.
But I just don't see why the Nets would do that, other than NBA GM's are dumb. Obviously the play is to try and get Brown in hope you can also overpay for Mitchell, and then have stars, and wipe out all your depth around them to get them. then in 2 years you can blow that mess up.

Paying Brown 75 million more than Bridges for the next 3 years, seems like a terrible way to assemble a team in the modern CBA window. And then giving away a very solid big on top of that.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,946
Santa Monica
But I just don't see why the Nets would do that, other than NBA GM's are dumb. Obviously the play is to try and get Brown in hope you can also overpay for Mitchell, and then have stars, and wipe out all your depth around them to get them. then in 2 years you can blow that mess up.

Paying Brown 75 million more than Bridges for the next 3 years, seems like a terrible way to assemble a team in the modern CBA window. And then giving away a very solid big on top of that.
Depends on how attractive 26yr old 2nd team All NBA wings are?

Brown could probably be ~ 30ppg scorer as a #1. NBA teams pay for that.

The new CBA changed the equation, so picks & Claxton wouldn't be added. BUT Brown (he wouldn't get the Super Max on the Nets) for Bridges isn't out of line