Is "small ball" the future?

Ululating Daddy

Ululating Daddy

Elite Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Posts
2,391
Likes
6,755
I saw this article on FiveThirtyEight.com, and it struck me for two reasons. First because one of the examples they cited was the 2011 Final Four VCU team. And second was the way this year's team responded to the four-guard lineup towards the end of the season. Here's the link: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-warriors-convinced-big-schools-that-small-ball-works/

I don't know enough about the X's and O's to offer an opinion about whether this is really the future, but it seems to me we have several potential "mismatch 4's" on the roster now, with more to come. Thoughts?
 
Not for us unless the match up dictates. WW loves the paint. Also, we have a pretty big squad and it's getting bigger next year. We will be pounding the paint first and foremost.
 
If "small ball" is defined by style of play (i.e. 3 pt shooting, uptempo, stretch 4s) I have no problem with it. If it's defined by the height of players (i.e. this 4 guard lineup we used with a 6'7" center) I could do without it.
 
Unless we turn into the Warriors, I sure hope not.
 
The reason "small ball" works well is because the warrior have the best shooter in the history of the NBA. Dude is going to MAKE 400 3's this year. When you have a player like that you don't need a "big" in the middle.
 
9183_1047204125353349_1126681666453708755_n.jpg

It worked at Carver.
RIP Coach Reeves
 
Mistachill said:
If "small ball" is defined by style of play (i.e. 3 pt shooting, uptempo, stretch 4s) I have no problem with it. If it's defined by the height of players (i.e. this 4 guard lineup we used with a 6'7" center) I could do without it.
Click to expand...

This is actually a really important distinction. A lot of things get called "small ball" that don't necessarily go together. When KD plays the 4 people say they're "going small", but he's nearly 7' tall depending on what kind of tiles he stands next to.

"Small ball" doesn't even necessarily mean 4 shooters around a rim protector anymore. That's certainly not the GSW model, and it's the opposite of the recent good Bucks teams that basically involved rolling out a big guard, and a bunch of guys Justin's size who could switch everything on defense.

As far as I can tell, all "small ball" means anymore is that people realize you don't have to be the biggest. You just have to be big enough. After that, it's all about finding guys who maximize the number of kinds of plays you can defend, and maximize the number of plays you can run that other teams aren't used to defending. And that's absolutely not going away unless the NBA/NCAA adopt the old illegal defense rules and ban zones, so big guys can just post up endlessly one on one.
 
Small ball isn't the future, its the present. Duke won a national title last year playing small ball. Will small work for us? Well unless Jordan Burgess becomes a 40% 3pt shooter, then no. Otherwise, Jordan would be the perfect small ball 4 and we'd be on to something. However he can't shoot at all, so he's an undersized big and small ball DOES NOT work when that's the case.

But yes with guys like Treveon Graham and Bradford Burgess, you can easily get away with playing small ball, and give defenses nightmares.
 
Mistachill said:
If "small ball" is defined by style of play (i.e. 3 pt shooting, uptempo, stretch 4s) I have no problem with it. If it's defined by the height of players (i.e. this 4 guard lineup we used with a 6'7" center) I could do without it.
Click to expand...
I guess I saw it as a style of play that spreads the floor, creates a lot of space between offensive players, and forces the defense to come out and guard them rather than waiting in the paint for the offense to come to the defense. A 4 who has decent skills inside and outside, rather than excellent in one situation but no threat in the other, seems to be the key.
 
So how about Mo as a mismatch 4? Would adding a 10-12 ft jumper to his repertoire this offseason be enough to create the floor spacing? That should be possible, given the touch he showed at the FT line this season.
 
Ululating Daddy said:
So how about Mo as a mismatch 4? Would adding a 10-12 ft jumper to his repertoire this offseason be enough to create the floor spacing? That should be possible, given the touch he showed at the FT line this season.
Click to expand...

I think we need both Mo and Justin to be able to hit reliably both from 10-12 ft on the baseline, and from the elbow. Otherwise we're going to have a very hard time getting opposing bigs away from the hoop during non-Mike minutes. We don't have the personnel to play 4 out for 40 minutes unless something drastic happens to JB or Justin's shots. But that doesn't mean we can't play modern offense built around spacing and skilled medium size (6'6"-6'9") guys with lots of length.
 
VCU Heel said:
I don't think so. If you can find a 6'8 guy that can defend and run and shoot as well as the 6'3 guys, then I'll take the 6'8 guy every time. All teams won't have access to that 6'8 guy, but the team with him will be better.
Click to expand...

Yeh, I think one thing that gave Duke a little more success later in the season was Ingram's development in playing that stretch 4. Having a 6'10" guy who can play like a SG on offense and still get the job done (somewhat, not always) in rebounding and post defense if necessary has worked for them. Height wise that is not small ball, but style wise that is exactly what they are doing still. I think it is more realistic for us to look at some 6'6" to 6'8" guys for that stretch 4. Though our 6'10" Mike Gilmore certainly has potential there too. Coach seems to like having options in the post to pound the inside game, but I don't think that precludes small ball, in fact I think it is necessary for small ball to really work. Wade actually said something before the season started that he would like to play something like the GS Warriors, if I recall correctly. Of course it would be great if Steph Curry got a few more year eligibility and decided to transfer to VCU, but until then, I kind of like the direction I see us heading.
 
I think what the transition has been is more of a stretch four. Do you have someone who can shoot an open three and still bang down low and get rebounds? That's what people are looking for in this "small ball" concept. Personally, I love teams that play smaller especially in college. College isn't a back to the basket type of game. Are there guys that can do it? Absolutely. Look at Mo and AJ Hammonds at Purdue, but across the board I think a stretch four is an absolutely lethal advantage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top