A blend of objectivity and subjectivity confers advantages. Set criteria to filter offensive actions possession by possession. What went well? What went poorly? What can we fix?
Process/Outcome matrix from Farnam Street
Step 1. "Wrong at a glance"...e.g. inattention, low effort, bad spacing, "shot turnovers"
"DUMB BASKETBALL"
"DUMB BASKETBALL"
Step 2. Missed opportunity...open passes not made, turnovers, mediocre shot quality
"DO IT BETTER"
"DO IT BETTER"
Step 3. Acceptable...proper spacing, good vision, passes executed, better shot quality
RIGHT DIRECTION
RIGHT DIRECTION
Step 4. Desirable...crisp cutting, screening, passing leading to highest quality shots ("easy shots") WHAT WE WANT
Track each possession. "What are we trying to accomplish?" If we can't discern intent, there probably isn't any. Purposeless play drives me batty.
Track each possession. "What are we trying to accomplish?" If we can't discern intent, there probably isn't any. Purposeless play drives me batty.
- Organization of each play
- Options available
- Decisions in the context of options
- Execution of cuts, screens, passes, shots
Play intentionally. Encourage "hard to guard" opportunities like pick-and-roll, mismatches, closeouts, various off-the-ball screens (screen-the-screener, staggered screens, Spain pick-and-roll).
Finish quality opportunities (layups and putbacks, open drives, free throws, open shots.)
We can't control outcomes but control practice of executing fundamentals and implementing better choices.
Lagniappe: I've recently shared some UCONN zone offense run through the high post and related actions for high low run by Syracuse's Jim Boeheim.
Via @RadiusAthletics. Here's video from Oregon emphasizing ball movement with quick passing and selected penetration by passing or drawing 2. Running plays through Sabrina Ionescu has merits. Note the '2 second rule' of catch, decide, pass. And Oregon has finishers.
