Since I spent many hours on the court by myself, to
me it seems interesting that the basketball skill that I most admire,
is one of the few that is impossible to practice alone. Sadly it, good or
great passing, is also one that is seen less and less. In this
modern era of ME basketball, the mano-a-mano duel has relegated
passing to secondary skill status. Teams are lucky to have one
good/great passer and even then, a lot of the top-notch point guards
are shooters first (and sometimes second and third).
Celtics
fans have been spoiled for most of the past six decades. Two of the
all-time best point guard passers bookend Celtics' history. Most of
you readers will know Bob Cousy only through grainy images but he was
the first truly great passer as well as introducing passing with
flair. While I quite agreed with moving Rajon Rondo (who was
expecting a max salary, which he did not receive in any of his
subsequent stops; and whose ball-dominant game would never be
conducive to Brad Stevens' ball-and-player-movement and pace and
space strategy), he was the best pure passer in recent history. Nor
has Celtics' passing excellence been limited to point guards. Larry
Bird was a master, as was Bill Walton. Bill Russell made the outlet
pass (often while still in the air from a rebound, or even off a
block of a shot) a quick strike weapon that initiated Boston's
running game for 15 years. More recently Kevin Garnett made the '08
Championship team sizzle with his crisp accurate passes in the front
court.
Often
a team's passing gets a sudden boost with Cousy, Rondo, and Bird as
prime examples. For most of their history passing has been
emphasized by Celtics' coaches. I see this as a push/pull phenomenon
with leadership encouraging and the one superlative passer leading by
example. Red, Heinsohn, K. C. Jones, Doc, and Brad Stevens have all
been adamant proponents of unselfish sharing of the ball. But just
moving the ball isn't enough alone.
It's
how you move the ball. Are the passes thrown at the right time, to
the open player, and on target? One of my pet peeves with the
current club is their propensity to swing the ball around the
periphery with predictable passes thrown inaccurately. Yes, moving
the ball from one side of the court to the other is an excellent ploy
to force the defense to move and adjust which often offers
opportunities to the offense. However if the passes are always in a
chain, wing to top to wing, it is an invitation for a defender to
jump the passing lane. If the pass is at the man rather than to his
side away from the defender, the invitation is gilded. If the pass
causes the receiver to stoop or stretch, then the pace of ball
movement is crippled and the player catching the ball is not ready to
do anything other than recover his balance. Has the passer been
aware of his receiver's defender? Is that defender already leaning
toward an interception point? How about the next receiver over
(inside or on the other side)? And their defender(s)? If you fake
the pass (or did last time), what was the reaction of the defenders?
Those steal-crazy guys are just begging to be back-door'ed. On
Celtics' teams familiar with one another, often a nod or even an eye
movement was enough to trigger a to-the-basket pass that left the
potential thief lunging helplessly while their assignment coasted in
for an easy layup.
I
started this breakdown with a perimeter pass but most of the tenets
are similarly valid for most other passes. A good pass accomplishes
something—shifting angles, forcing movement, leading a teammate
toward a good situation; and does not hinder focus, balance, or
movement by being off target or poorly timed. Rondo had great
shooters to feed but the accuracy of his passes was so good that
those scorers were actually led into the shot by receiving Rajon's
delivery. I'm going to contrast that with the following line of
thought.
Think
back to last year's team. Who were the worst passers on that team?
Who garnered the most assists? The greatest percentage of assists
per touch? Who were the best passers?
If
you have not already done so I encourage to reread the questions and
reflect on them.
I'll
make a side trip while you ponder. The Celtics want to run. They
want to generate early offense before the defense has a chance to get
set. They want to push the ball up court. Heinsohn talks about the
Celtics of his playing/coaching days practicing in-bounding the ball
in order to fast break after a made shot or even a free throw. He
discusses practicing to make the outlet after a rebound—get it into
a guard's hands quickly, and preferably with the guard already moving
up court. Seldom during this century has there been a rebound after
which the outlet was either immediate or up the court. This is one
of the things that left me in sad agreement with letting Sullinger
leave. I though one of the most promising things about the big guy's
rebounding and strength was how much of a difference he could have
made shifting the team from defense to offense with an aggressive
outlet pass.
I'm
tempted to offer the lack of rapid D-to-O emphasis as a reasonable
criticism of Brad Stevens. Tempted, that is, until I reflect on how
many new players he was trying to work into the team, and how many
raw rookies he was shepherding through their deer-in-the-headlights
days. This year promises to be far more stable, with the addition of
the excellent passing big man (Horford) and only one rookie to the
rotation, so I am hoping (actually expecting) that progress on this
front, as well as ball movement in general, will be forthcoming.
As
for those questions, this posting has grown too long already so I
will tackle them next time. Hopefully you will have thought them
through and be ready to call me out for my mis-conclusions.
[Discuss on CG Forums!]
I agree that quick outlet passes upcourt to move the ball quickly on offense is key. If Kelly would be more aggressive on the boards, he could do that, having played point guard for much of his high school career. Al Horford may also help in that area. We also had another of the all time great passers for a short time - Pistol Pete was a Celtic for half a season and his passes were amazing. But then again, a lot of times his passes were too good and bounced off their unsuspecting target :) Another great piece to get us thinking.
ReplyDeleteGood article. Last year at times they passed the ball and had a lot of assists and most of the time they won those games and then other games they all tried to make the big play themselves and they usually lost those games. They need to be more consistant with the attitude to find the open man. I don't reemember anyone that was a great passer last year.
ReplyDeleteI certainly agree with the passing-activity/success correlation (and causation). I don't think there is a problem with unwillingness to pass, but there is a lot of progress needed in awareness and execution. Indeed there was no great passer on last year's team, but who were their best ones.
DeleteRondo was a great passer - problem was he couldn't hit the shots when he needed to so they could double off of him. A pg needs to be thinking pass first but also has to be able to shoot when they are open. passing for passings sake isn't good either. passes have to be made with a plan to get a player an open shot or as you said they are just passing around the outside.
ReplyDeleteYour only point which I might counter is passing for passing's sake. If there is no "loss," sometimes there is a gain in making the pass (like Rondo often did on fast breaks) just to reward the teammate for running or perhaps to let a struggling player get to see his ball go through the basket. Over-sharing can encourage others on the team to also share but that is a slippery slope to be sure, and Rondo occasionally gave teammates a much poorer attempt at the basket than the one he already had.
Delete