Smallball

[Bricklayer]

This thread could alternately be titled either "An Analytical Overview of the Phenomenon of Smallball in the Western Conference", or "Hitching Your Cart to the Wrong Horse":

In any case, a month ago "smallball" was all the rage. Many a national reporter thought it was cute, and none other than Sacramento's own savant Jerry Reynolds looked at our roster, saw nobody who would particularly stand out at a jockey's club, and pronounced it the age of smallball -- big centers were passe you see.

Well, its a month later. Certain trends have become evident. One of them is that the Western Conference is kicking the living bejesus out of the East at an historic pace. Another is this: smallball is a myth amongst the better teams.

Just running through the West:

San Antonio (7'0 260lb Tim Duncan 22.7pts 11.3reb 1.7blk)
Dallas (6'11" 270lb Erick Dampier 9.3pts 8.4reb 1.2blk + 7'0" 280lb Desagana Diop 2.6pts 5.2reb 1.9blk)
Houston (7'5" 310lb Yao Ming 26.3pts 10.4reb 1.7blk )
New Orleans (7'1" 235lb Tyson Chandler 5.9pts 11.9rebs 0.9blk)
Lakers (7'0" 275lb Andrew Bynum 8.5pts 6.3reb 1.5blk + 6'11" 270lb Kwame Brown 8.1pts 6.9reb 1.1blk)
Golden State (6'11" 245lb Andris Biedrins 11pts 10reb 2.9blk)
Clippers (7'0" 270lb Chris Kaman)
Denver (6'11" Marcus Camby, 6'11" Nene)
Minnesota (7'0" Blount, 7'0" KG)
Portland (6'11" Aldrdige, 7'0" Magloire, 7'1" Pryzbilla)

That's a lot of beef.

Furthermore, if you were to accuse Utah (Okur, Boozer, Kirlienko) of smallballing just for a lack of 7 footers, Jerry Sloan would knock you alongside your noggin as he pounded the ball inside repeatedly and knocked your guys out of the way like bowling pins.

That leaves exactly 4 teams in the West truly smallballing -- us, the Suns, Memphis, and Seattle. And of those 4 teams, only 2, us and the Suns, are doing it intentionally. Memphis lost its 7'0 tall shotblocker (Gasol) for the first three months of the seasoon and are just trying to survive until they get him back, and Seattle lost its hoped for center this year in preseason against us (Swift) and still trot out a 6'10" PF (Wilcox) and 7'0" C (Petro) to start every game.

And while I am ignoring the bulk of the East as irrelevant and obviously flawed, it should be noted that the best teams in the East? Orlando (6'11" Dwight Howard, 6'11" Tony Battie, 7'1" Darko Milicic) Cleveland (7'3" Big Z) Detroit (7'0" Nazr Mohammed, 6'11" Rasheed Wallace) and maybe if they ever get their act together only the defending champs with Shaq and Zo.


So much for small ball.


And here is our counter:

 

[SacTownKid]

Alomost every team has a 7 footer or two on their team. Including us obviously. But even the teams you mentioned go small for portions of games. I rarely see any team go "small" for the whole entire game though.

We are not truly smallballing either. We have Brad Miller. Every team I have seen so far, give or take 1 or 2, have gone small throughout their games.

 

[piksi]

after watching another Magic game - smallball definitely sucks.

 

[SacTownKid]

For how we use it I would agree. We don't really even use it to our advantage. The small players we have play like big men.

 

[HndsmCelt]

Ok to be fair there ARE some match up situations where small ball might make some sense but most of the time it's either a bad stragagy or more often than not a way for a good coach to make the best of a bad situation. I'd say in general what Muss is doing is just that, trying to find a way to win games while his cneter is out. I jsut don't think SAR was ever anybodies idea of a center unless the next best option is Pot, or Corless...

 

[PieceOfStrange]

smallball =

 

[thatguy]

I think the Kings were playing with a lack of a 7 foot or taller gentlemen because they had to, not because it was ideal or part of their plan.

I somewhat disagree with the assumption that a seven-footer or seven-footers on a roster is somewhat exclusive to "small ball." I'd be hard pressed to find a team that exemplifies the "small ball" ideal more than Golden State. Small ball, I think, should be considered a style of play not a function of the tallest player on the roster.

That said, even when Miller was out, I don't think the Kings really played small ball. And when they tried to, they got smoked.

 

[nbrans]

I think the Kings were playing with a lack of a 7 foot or taller gentlemen because they had to, not because it was ideal or part of their plan.

I somewhat disagree with the assumption that a seven-footer or seven-footers on a roster is somewhat exclusive to "small ball." I'd be hard pressed to find a team that exemplifies the "small ball" ideal more than Golden State. Small ball, I think, should be considered a style of play not a function of the tallest player on the roster.

That said, even when Miller was out, I don't think the Kings really played small ball. And when they tried to, they got smoked.

Yeah, I agree with this.

Also, I think the smallball is definitely overblown by the national media, but as with almost anything the media latches onto there's a grain of truth in it. Just four years ago the Kings had three seven footers on their roster, not because of a philosophy, but because of Shaq. And a couple of years before that you had Hakeem/Ewing/Robinson etc. etc. etc. It was absolutely essential to have multiple seven footers if you had a hope of contending. Now? It's definitely a plus, but hardly essential.

So today you can get away with playing 6'9" centers who aren't even particularly athletic. With the right mix of players it even works to a high degree. Had Phoenix been all healthy last year or the year before in the playoffs they might have done it.

Yao is good. But if you put a 6'9" player on Yao he's probably not going to go for 50/25, which is what would have happened if you tried that with Shaq five years ago. You can get away with a smaller lineup.

Now, I'm not saying that it's a viable strategy for an unathletic team like the Kings. Smallball takes the right mix of players, and you need guys like Marion and pre-injury Amare, who play a lot bigger because of their athleticism. But I don't think you can call smallball dead. Had the Suns been healthy in the playoffs the last two years we might have just seen a smallball team in the Finals.

Height helps and is a definite advantage, but until there are more/better centers out there size won't be at a premium like it used to be. No one embodies this more than the 2006/2007 Kings. The Kings are indisputably better with 7'0" Brad Miller. But they were able to get away with playing smallball until he returned. That wouldn't have been realistic five years ago.

 

[BawLa]

Nice post Nbrans.

The question that remains is in my signature....

Can our defense make up for our squeemish frontline?

Aside from the obvious fact that we only have one 7 footer, and he plays smaller than some 6'9" guys, we have no hope to play traditional basketball with all of these other seemingly giant teams. With that said, smallball is one of our only ways to go. Basically, the way I see it, is that our guard-play has to be significantly better than our opponents' guard-play, relative to how much better their bigs are better than ours.

Hard to put in words but the only way for us to win is to completely disrupt our opponents' guards. Which forces them to pound the ball inside, where we need to send their bigs to the line to earn their points. All the while we need to play smallball, and push the ball upcourt, wearing out opponents' bigs so that we can play against their backups.

So far we have been moderately successful with this strategy. Not to mention that we have had injuries, and we are still bonding as a unit. It is going to be interesting to see how this team shapes over the course of the season. Sadly, when we get to the playoffs, our style of play will not hold up again and hopefully GP will then pursue the big that we seriously need.

 

[Padrino]

Yeah, I agree with this.

Also, I think the smallball is definitely overblown by the national media, but as with almost anything the media latches onto there's a grain of truth in it. Just four years ago the Kings had three seven footers on their roster, not because of a philosophy, but because of Shaq. And a couple of years before that you had Hakeem/Ewing/Robinson etc. etc. etc. It was absolutely essential to have multiple seven footers if you had a hope of contending. Now? It's definitely a plus, but hardly essential.

So today you can get away with playing 6'9" centers who aren't even particularly athletic. With the right mix of players it even works to a high degree. Had Phoenix been all healthy last year or the year before in the playoffs they might have done it.

Yao is good. But if you put a 6'9" player on Yao he's probably not going to go for 50/25, which is what would have happened if you tried that with Shaq five years ago. You can get away with a smaller lineup.

Now, I'm not saying that it's a viable strategy for an unathletic team like the Kings. Smallball takes the right mix of players, and you need guys like Marion and pre-injury Amare, who play a lot bigger because of their athleticism. But I don't think you can call smallball dead. Had the Suns been healthy in the playoffs the last two years we might have just seen a smallball team in the Finals.

Height helps and is a definite advantage, but until there are more/better centers out there size won't be at a premium like it used to be. No one embodies this more than the 2006/2007 Kings. The Kings are indisputably better with 7'0" Brad Miller. But they were able to get away with playing smallball until he returned. That wouldn't have been realistic five years ago.

size is at a HUGE premium right now. its a simple matter of supply and demand. there are a lack of legit big men in the nba right now, and i think the point brick is making is that the best teams in the nba happen to be the teams with talented bigs. that's not to say that you throw any 7-footer on the kings and they become a contender, but even getting a young big like andris biedrins wouldn't sound so bad right about now. its too bad that nellie runs his guys into the ground, cuz golden state could be a legitimate defensive team with all their athleticsm. small ball isn't a fad, its a last resort for teams lacking size.

 

[PieceOfStrange]

Smallball takes the right mix of players who play a lot bigger because of their athleticism.

Unfortunately, our guys seem to play smaller.

 

[nbrans]

size is at a HUGE premium right now. its a simple matter of supply and demand. there are a lack of legit big men in the nba right now, and i think the point brick is making is that the best teams in the nba happen to be the teams with talented bigs. that's not to say that you throw any 7-footer on the kings and they become a contender, but even getting a young big like andris biedrins wouldn't sound so bad right about now. its too bad that nellie runs his guys into the ground, cuz golden state could be a legitimate defensive team with all their athleticsm. small ball isn't a fad, its a last resort for teams lacking size.

That's a very good point. I guess ultimately smallball is something that you can get away with and be a middling team like the Kings, and it's something you can succeed with with an entire team built around the concept, like the Suns (although we'll see). The fact that it even works to any effect at all, though, is a novel development. I don't know any other time since the 50s when a team could even dare try it, which is probably why the media has taken it and run with it. But the sun still sets in the west, 1+1 still equals 2, etc. etc. Size still matters.

 

[BawLa]

Size still matters.

Thats what she said.

 

[VF21]

You do realize, BawLa, that any number of people here avoided making the obvious comment, right?

 

[GoGoGadget]

You do realize, BawLa, that any number of people here avoided making the obvious comment, right?

And it was killin' me!

 

[VF21]

As evidenced by your avatar, G3?

I have to admit - that's one of my favorite pics of Angie. Do you know who took it?

 

[GoGoGadget]

As evidenced by your avatar, G3?

Yep. I chose the avatar as an inspiration -- I think I could probably stand to hold it in a bit more than I do.

I have to admit - that's one of my favorite pics of Angie. Do you know who took it?

I don't. I'd be able to figure it out if I knew which magazine it was from, but I don't know that either.

 

[BawLa]

You do realize, BawLa, that any number of people here avoided making the obvious comment, right?

I avoided....for 2 1/2 hours.

Then in one quick moment I lost it like the fat boy in willy wonka.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Yep. I chose the avatar as an inspiration -- I think I could probably stand to hold it in a bit more than I do.

:: turns avatars back on ::

:: looks at G³'s avatar ::

:: is mildly disappointed ::

:: turns avatars back off ::


You know, I could probably stand to get my head out of the gutter...

 

[KingKong]

:: turns avatars back on ::

:: looks at G³'s avatar ::

:: is mildly disappointed ::

:: turns avatars back off ::


You know, I could probably stand to get my head out of the gutter...

I'm still trying to figure out your avatar Mr. S£im. But perhaps that is your intention.

 

[GoGoGadget]

You know, I could probably stand to get my head out of the gutter...

Never!