Im hearing a lot about this, about the fact dat d net's offense wud be somewat similar to this but it wud lyk to raise some questions: wat will dis spell to our players stat-wise and mentally? wat pieces does it require to run this type of offense and do we have the pieces? will it require "full motion" offense such dat d depth of d team wud make it efficient (full motion wud require more effort hence fatigue, fatigue spells substitutions)? did the management build this team in the goal of implementing this system (2 pf dat can shoot 3 pts)? wat defense will dis not work against and wat defense is its "partner"? nwei, im not really sure dey wud fully implement it.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting the_game:</div><div class="quote_post">Im hearing a lot about this, about the fact dat d net's offense wud be somewat similar to this but it wud lyk to raise some questions: wat will dis spell to our players stat-wise and mentally? wat pieces does it require to run this type of offense and do we have the pieces? will it require "full motion" offense such dat d depth of d team wud make it efficient (full motion wud require more effort hence fatigue, fatigue spells substitutions)? did the management build this team in the goal of implementing this system (2 pf dat can shoot 3 pts)? wat defense will dis not work against and wat defense is its "partner"? nwei, im not really sure dey wud fully implement it.</div> Your grammar makes it kind of hard to understand what you are trying to ask..but I will do my best to answer you questions.... First, off let me tell you that the Princeton offense is nothing new to the Nets coaching staff(mostly coach Franks) and the general core of guys like Jason Kidd, Richard Jefferson, Jason Collins even Zoran Planinic. The Nets used the Princeton style offense during both our finals runs under Byron Scott. And we also used it when Coach Franks first took over for B.Scott. Only reason the Nets didnt use it last year was because the faces in the lineup kept changing and the system takes time for unfamiliar guys to learn it.... The Princeton offense is just an offense that creates alot of ball movement off of alot of body movement. The Princeton offense requires alot of backdoor cuts without the ball. And alot of screens with handoff passes out on the perimeter. The one thing I think Princeton offsense requires most is a bigman who can pass the basket. In Princeton sets the bigman is require to make alot more passing decsions out on the high-post...think Sacromento with Brad Miller, Divac and Webber...they ran the princeton offsene down in Arco. Jason Collins has been that type of passing bigman for us in the princeton offsense under B.Scott to a lesser degree. Scott Padgett, is said to be an decent passer for a big body as well...he will have to prove it this year. I think the other key ingrediant to the Princeton offsense is unselfishness ...you have to be willing to give the ball up as soon as you see the cutter cutting in the lane to take full advantage of the easy half-court hoops the Princeton sets can produce. The best thing about this style of offense is that it can give you a good illusion of points in the paint, for a team that doesnt have an over dominate post player.....soething that the Nets exactly lack. Will it effect players stats..somewhat. If you are going with the princeton style then you are taking some of the one on one play out of your half-court style. So for example seeing a guy like Vince hold the ball for 15 second of the 24 second shot clock like he did at times last year probably wont happen as much. But trust me Carter's ablity to create is own shot is so undeniable that Coach Franks will throw in some plays just to let him free lance...also the he will have the ball in his hands with the shot-clock going down almost everytime. So Carter's game/stats wont be a huge adjust as some make think. I personally think that if Carter is willing to move without the ball cutting and popping out to the perimeter, it will add even more success to his personal game. Does the Princeton style require great shooters....not really but it is a plus....under B.Scott the only thing close to a great/above average shooter shooter we had was Kerry Kittles(after Van Horn got traded after 02' finals). Guiys like Lu, Scali, and Rodney were very inconsistent...but we were still able to run our Princeton sets pretty efficiently. But I think now with Murray, Scott Padget and our bigs have range its going to make the Princeton that much harder for teams to matchup against...if you have Padgett consistently drawing bigs out to guard him at the 3-stripe then that leaves the lanes wise open for cutters and slashers. Did the front office build the right team for the princeton, we will see like I said the Princeton is best when your 4's and 5's can pass and make decisions distributing the basketball..we know JC has done this in the past, its up to the knew guys to prove they can make the right pass consistently from the high post. Scott Padgett and Marc Jaskson even Krstic, who isnt use to this offsense. Detriot(not a shocker) exposed the Nets version of the pricneton two-years ago in the playoffs. He never really guarded anybody specifically pretty much just room the paint and always picked up the guy that was cutting whether it be Kittles at the 2 or K-mart at the 4....so I say if you have a versatile defender who can rome loke that without getting called on voilationals consistently then you force the Princeton set more to the perimeter and take away some of those easy backdoor cuts. Buyt that is where having more shooters on this years version comes in handy...we get closer to the Sacromento style of years past.....which creates good looks for shooters(Peja, Bibby) as well as wing players who can slash and move without the ball(B.Jaskson, Doug Christie).....But for us it would be Padgett, Murray, Vince as the shooters..... Jefferson, Vince, Planinic ect as the cutters, So it should be interesting to see how much success this years team can have compared to the 02-04 Nets as well as the Kings ever since Rick Adelman got there.
