PDA

View Full Version : We need more run and gun on all levels of basketball because it works



Young
06-07-2007, 01:37 AM
Don't know why but this has been on my mind.

Why oh why is there not more run and gun in todays basketball? Why?

To me, there are keys to the run and gun.

- Defense
- Rebounding
- Setting the tempo

So I read a lot about run and gun and that you give up to many points, uh yeah duh. But it's not about the points you give up, it's the FG% you allow your oppenants to shoot. That is the stat that really matters.

Some articles on it.

http://www.momentummedia.com/articles/cm/cm1306/runninggame.htm

Brad Smith, formly head Girl's basketball coach at Oregon City High School, said this that to me is exactly the type of thing you should look to do to generate fast break points.


“One of the big things with the fast break and press is showing kids that their purpose is not to steal the ball, it’s to make the other team make mistakes. That may turn into a steal, but more than likely it will turn into a forced shot or a straight turnover. The point is to get the ball back. If you go in thinking you’re going to steal every pass, you’re going to make a lot of mistakes.”

Another great article, this one focuses on the Boston Celtic's era that saw 11 championships.

http://basketball.suite101.com/article.cfm/fear_the_run_and_gun


The difference between the Celtics of Old and My Beloved Suns is, in fact, on the defensive end. The Suns, who play an even purer fastbreak style (they have only one half-court play) give up a lot of points, and are routinely out-rebounded, a situation unimaginable to a Bill Russell led team.

Boom. This right here is a perfect example of what I am talking about. You can run and win if you play defense. Sure, maybe the NBA didn't have the talent base spread out back then with fewer teams but that still doesn't mean those Celtic's teams weren't about as perfect team at running the fast break offense as there as ever been and I think it is because most teams don't apply themselves on defense like they need to.

Obviously the second key is to get the rebound, you can't run unless you have the ball so you must rebound.

Then you gotta set the tempo. Beat your man down court. The player with the ball must have his head up and look to pass the ball to an open teammate up court.

To me, it is not really rocket science. You don't have to score all of your offense off of the fast break. But why so few teams look to now a days just blows my mind.

I remember one of my friends talking about one of his JV games he played in a couple of years ago and he said they got killed only because the other team had a player beat them downcourt every time and the other team was alway had their heads up looking to pass to the player downcourt for an easy score. If teams did a simple thing like that more often they could get much easier baskets.

Check this out.

http://www.nba.com/statistics/sortable_team_statistics/sortable4.html?cnf=1&prd=1

Notice that there is only 2 teams in the whole league with a losing record when scoring 100 points, the Kings and Grizzles.

Now, reverse that, when teams allow 100 points per game there are only 2 teams with a winning record, the Suns and Nuggets and the Mavs were .500.

To me that shows you that teams can put the effort into pushing the ball but they won't put the effort into defense needed to run the fast break.

It seems like the teams that want to run won't put the effort into defense and the teams that put the effort into defense just want to walk the ball up the court instead of trying to score fast break points.

http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/2-9-2002-11366.asp

Now, this style would NEVER work in the NBA, ever. However, I don't understand why more D2 and D3 schools, and high schools, don't try this. Who cares if you don't win the national title or state championship. You will get more wins and much more excitment if you run to extremes. I can think of many high schools in this area who just always flat out suck and basketball and they really should think about trying something different instead of the classic motion offense or whatever they use because those seem to only work if you have the talent.

It just blows my mind that more teams don't try and run more. It's easy baskets. It's simple too. When I play pick up games and I get the defensive rebound I always push the tempo and we could get some easy baskets if I wasn't the only one on my team down there.

You have to play both sides of the court to run. It is a constant grind and effort to do it right. I don't know what made me bring this up so I am done with my rant.

Anthem
06-07-2007, 08:41 AM
Because teams playing run-and-gun always lose to the Spurs and Pistons?

LG33
06-07-2007, 10:40 AM
Because teams playing run-and-gun always lose to the Spurs and Pistons?

And Jazz and Cavs of late.

Hicks
06-07-2007, 10:52 AM
Because teams playing run-and-gun always lose to the Spurs and Pistons?

Who one between Spurs/Mavs when the Mavs started trying harder on defense?

I think balance is the key.

Unclebuck
06-07-2007, 11:02 AM
I don't really know what you mean by run and gun. Do the Warriors play a run and gun style. Do the Suns play a run and gun style. (I think those two teams actually play a different style of basketball even though most people who argue with me on that)

The Warriors I would say play a run and gun style. Meaning they will take any shot at any time they want to and there isn't much organization to it. The Suns play a fastbreak style of basketball - but they play a lot less one-on-one than the Warriors do - the Suns are much more organized in what they do.

beast23
06-07-2007, 11:02 AM
You have included a few articles that are mainly about what is accomplished in college and high school ball, and have stated that their methodologies should be applied in professional ball.

The NBA has seen the run and gun style. And it's not really the Suns or the Warriors that I'm talking about. In the old ABA and continuing for several years into the NBA, Denver provided the fastest paced game in the league. By far. Their players were athletic shooters who were encouraged to run their butts off... and they did.

Their entire philosophy was to out-run and out-score their opponents. Defense, be damned.

Through the years, I believe that teams have discovered a few things about the nature of the modern NBA player. They realize that they play 8 preseason games, 82 regular season games, and if they are lucky, several additionl post-season games. A player on a successful team is likely to play in more than 100 games during a season.

If you were to ask a player to run his butt off offensively, then to also put in maximum effort defensively, even players that are in the best of condition would get run down before the end of the season. I believe we would probably see an increase in injuries as well.

IMO, the only hope you would have to put a run-and-gun offense/in-your-face defensive team on the court would be if you had an extremely strong bench capable of enabling your starters to play 30 minutes or less.

I believe that players might buy into the philosophy initially, but probably would not stick with it on a continued basis. If you look at the teams that have been runners, particularly Denver, they always seem to enjoy much more success during the regular season than they do during the playoffs. And that's basically because much more effort is put into defense during the playoffs than in the regular season.

Opponents find ways to make you run your offense slower than you did in the regular season, especially since they are willing to put more effort into getting back on defense. So you find that your team is running a much greater percentage of possessions as half-court offense, something that you are just not used to doing.

IMO, from a standpoint of fan satisfaction, as well as overall team success, I believe I will enjoy a coach whose philosophy more coincides with that of O'Brien... run when you can but also be prepared to grind it out in a half court offense when running opportunities do not develop. In other words, a "more disciplined" run-and-gun.

But, there is one thing that I know for certain at this time. The Pacers do not have the athletes, nor do we have the bench strength, to run a full-fledged run-and-gun offense.

bread
06-07-2007, 11:17 AM
To me the bottom line is that you must be able to rebound and play good team defense. Without that you only get the ball after the other team scores. On offense you take the opportinuties to run when you can and attack the other teams weakness. You can't win consistently by simply trying to run every time because as beast says, you'll be to worn out to make it through the playoffs. And isn't winning the title what it's all about?

JayRedd
06-07-2007, 11:29 AM
It seems like the teams that want to run won't put the effort into defense and the teams that put the effort into defense just want to walk the ball up the court instead of trying to score fast break points.

http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/2-9-2002-11366.asp

Now, this style would NEVER work in the NBA, ever. However, I don't understand why more D2 and D3 schools, and high schools, don't try this. Who cares if you don't win the national title or state championship. You will get more wins and much more excitment if you run to extremes. I can think of many high schools in this area who just always flat out suck and basketball and they really should think about trying something different instead of the classic motion offense or whatever they use because those seem to only work if you have the talent.

It just blows my mind that more teams don't try and run more. It's easy baskets.

My closest friend played at Grinnell College a few years back for this Coach Arsenault guy.

I've seen a few of their games and it's the most crazy brand of basketball imaginable. They essentially full-court press the whole game and just swipe at the ball matador-style and rush into potential passing lanes. Generally it doesn't cause a turnover and the team gets a wide-open, 2 on 0 lay-in.

But that's what this dude Coach Arsenault wants. Just so they can get the ball back and launch a three. They literally just inbound the ball after a make and push it up court with a few passes and take a three. It's unusual that they have the ball for more than 5-7 seconds.

And he runs in shifts of 5 new players every 2 minutes like it's hockey (which of course benefits his style but also allows everyone on the team to play, which the coach thinks should really be the case in D-III basketball where no one's there on scholarship and everyone essentially just joined the team because they love basketball).

The first star they had under this guy was a player named Jeff Clement. He holds the school records for points in a game (77), three-pointers made in a game (19!!!), FGs attempted in a game (68...52 of them were threes), three pointers attempted in a season (511 in 22 games), three pointers made in a season (186 in 22 games).

And they probably have five players a year that attempt 200 threes in a season.

It's really not even basketball as you've ever seen it played.

But it is really, really cool to watch.

beast23
06-07-2007, 01:04 PM
It's really not even basketball as you've ever seen it played.

But it is really, really cool to watch.

I might be fun to watch.... one time.

As a fundamentalist, I'd probably puke my guts out if forced to watch it more than just the one time.

If all teams were playing this style, I guess I'd have to take up the hobby of just watching grass grow or cloud formations forming, because I'd have to give up basketball.

Oneal07
06-07-2007, 01:09 PM
I don't really know what you mean by run and gun. Do the Warriors play a run and gun style. Do the Suns play a run and gun style. (I think those two teams actually play a different style of basketball even though most people who argue with me on that)

The Warriors I would say play a run and gun style. Meaning they will take any shot at any time they want to and there isn't much organization to it. The Suns play a fastbreak style of basketball - but they play a lot less one-on-one than the Warriors do - the Suns are much more organized in what they do.


Yeah I agree with you on that

carpediem024
06-07-2007, 01:13 PM
I don't really know what you mean by run and gun. Do the Warriors play a run and gun style. Do the Suns play a run and gun style. (I think those two teams actually play a different style of basketball even though most people who argue with me on that)

The Warriors I would say play a run and gun style. Meaning they will take any shot at any time they want to and there isn't much organization to it. The Suns play a fastbreak style of basketball - but they play a lot less one-on-one than the Warriors do - the Suns are much more organized in what they do.

Buck is 1000% correct.

BoomBaby31
06-07-2007, 02:24 PM
I don't really know what you mean by run and gun. Do the Warriors play a run and gun style. Do the Suns play a run and gun style. (I think those two teams actually play a different style of basketball even though most people who argue with me on that)

The Warriors I would say play a run and gun style. Meaning they will take any shot at any time they want to and there isn't much organization to it. The Suns play a fastbreak style of basketball - but they play a lot less one-on-one than the Warriors do - the Suns are much more organized in what they do.

Warriors play like a pick up game at Ruckers Park and Venice Beach. Really uptempo and a lot of 1 on 1. The Suns play more like a top tournament team in Venice or Ruckers, still Run and Gun with more passing, more unselfish play but still keeping the crazy fast pace. Both have near no defense, and no post play (what use to separate a pro team and a park team).

The suns will keep getting "upset" year after year. At least Dallas is starting to realize and slowing it down. The problem Dallas ran into is they built a Run N Gun team then made them play Defense and try to Post up. lol

JayRedd
06-07-2007, 03:13 PM
I might be fun to watch.... one time.

As a fundamentalist, I'd probably puke my guts out if forced to watch it more than just the one time.

If all teams were playing this style, I guess I'd have to take up the hobby of just watching grass grow or cloud formations forming, because I'd have to give up basketball.

Yeah....it's more neat-o than good.

indyman37
06-07-2007, 03:42 PM
To me, there are keys to the run and gun.

- Defense
- Rebounding
- Setting the tempo
I wanted to make two points about this statement:
1) I think that UB mentioned this earlier, but run-and-gun can be taken a lot of different ways. I don't know if I necessarily want to just run down the court and take a jump shot, thought I know there is a lot more to the style than that. But I would rather prefer a running teama that could play defense, force turnovers, get easy points in transistion, and have good ball movement that also opens up scoring opportunites.

2) I believe that if you are going to run, it is essential to play defense and rebound. If not, you'll be just like last season's Indiana Pacers. Yes, they didn't want to become a run-and-gun team, but they did want to run more and become more up-tempo. That plan failed miserably becasue we had absolutely no defense other than JO's shot blocking. I have never seen the Pacers as a good rebounding team either. You either need to get a rebound, force a turnover, or something along those lines to start a fastbreak. If not, you'll be stuck in a half-court offense.

Slick Pinkham
06-07-2007, 03:57 PM
I think teams should try to be as good as possible in 4 categories.

(In my Hubie Brown voice)

You strive to:

1) shoot as high a FG percentage as possible (actually a high efficiency, as in points per posession)
2) make the opposition shoot a low FG percentage (actually a low efficiency, as in points per posession)
3) get more total scoring opportunities than the opponent through winning the rebound differential.
4) gain more scoring opportunities than the opponent by winning the turnover differential


Taking advantage of open court opportunties helps with #1, especially if you are a poor jump-shooting team or lack a dominant inside presence who shoots well over 50% from the field (JO = 43.6%).

This seems to be our situation, so we either need to get better jump shooters, get more efficient low post scorers, or be more opportunistic by seeking points in transition.

You don't need to be good at all 4 to win. You better do two of these (at least) pretty well. Our 2000 finals team was great at #1 (high offensive efficiency by excellent jump shooting, not transition offense), was pretty good at #2, and hoped and prayed to hold their own on #3 and #4.

beast23
06-07-2007, 04:33 PM
I think teams should try to be as good as possible in 4 categories...
1) shoot as high a FG percentage as possible (actually a high efficiency, as in points per posession)
2) make the opposition shoot a low FG percentage (actually a low efficiency, as in points per posession)
3) get more total scoring opportunities than the opponent through winning the rebound differential.
4) gain more scoring opportunities than the opponent by winning the turnover differential

With FG% being relatively equal in any given game, I have always felt as though the team that did not give up any offensive rebounds has an excellent chance of winning as long as they take care of the ball.

The only thing that change that is an absolutely horrendous FT disadvantage.

Young
06-07-2007, 05:43 PM
The suns will keep getting "upset" year after year. At least Dallas is starting to realize and slowing it down. The problem Dallas ran into is they built a Run N Gun team then made them play Defense and try to Post up. lol

This is my whole point of this thread.

I feel there is a myth if you will that run and gun or fastbreak style ball can't win in the playoffs. That is so far from the truth.

The Suns were so close to beating the Spurs. You could easily say that with Amare and Diaw they beat the Spurs in Game 5 I think it was. But anyways that isn't my point here. My point is that the Suns could really be in the Finals right now if they played some defense.

Those Mavs teams with Nash, Finley, Dirk and Nellie as the coach didn't play defense worth a lick. The Mavs didn't get to the Finals because they slowed it down, they did it because they played defense and were being aggressive.

My whole point isn't that the Pacers should do this or that every team in the NBA should just be the Phoenix Suns or Golden State Warriors.

I guess if you want to be technicaly correct, then my whole point here is that teams need to look to get more "fastbreak" points as opposed to run and gun.

It seems like the game in general, especially in the NBA, has gone away from looking to advance the ball and push the tempo a little bit. It's like teams don't even try to get fastbreak points now a days.

The Celtics teams of the Bill Russell era, I posted an article regarding them, are a perfect example of what teams should do. Play defense, rebound, and look to score points off the break first. Heck I don't even know if those Celtics teams really had a half court offense or not.

Most people don't associate defense with the run and gun or fastbreak style of play. Truth is that is should be the foundation of any team especially the ones that want to score a lot of points off the fastbreak. The problem is that few teams that play this style try and play any defense.

BoomBaby31
06-07-2007, 08:37 PM
This is my whole point of this thread.

I feel there is a myth if you will that run and gun or fastbreak style ball can't win in the playoffs. That is so far from the truth.

The Suns were so close to beating the Spurs. You could easily say that with Amare and Diaw they beat the Spurs in Game 5 I think it was. But anyways that isn't my point here. My point is that the Suns could really be in the Finals right now if they played some defense.

Those Mavs teams with Nash, Finley, Dirk and Nellie as the coach didn't play defense worth a lick. The Mavs didn't get to the Finals because they slowed it down, they did it because they played defense and were being aggressive.

My whole point isn't that the Pacers should do this or that every team in the NBA should just be the Phoenix Suns or Golden State Warriors.

I guess if you want to be technicaly correct, then my whole point here is that teams need to look to get more "fastbreak" points as opposed to run and gun.

It seems like the game in general, especially in the NBA, has gone away from looking to advance the ball and push the tempo a little bit. It's like teams don't even try to get fastbreak points now a days.

The Celtics teams of the Bill Russell era, I posted an article regarding them, are a perfect example of what teams should do. Play defense, rebound, and look to score points off the break first. Heck I don't even know if those Celtics teams really had a half court offense or not.

Most people don't associate defense with the run and gun or fastbreak style of play. Truth is that is should be the foundation of any team especially the ones that want to score a lot of points off the fastbreak. The problem is that few teams that play this style try and play any defense.

Yeah, if a team could play uptempo run N gun/Fast break ball then play good defense and throw in a post game, heck yeah, that would be a perfect team. The problem is when you play a superfast Run N Gun/ Fast Break it is near impossible to get back on defense consistently. I agree with you, if we could only combine--say, the Suns offense and the Jazz's Defense wouldn't that be nice.