No. Just likewise any other defensive system that stresses early help in the strongside and basically plays zones off-the-ball, the biggest vulnerability of the C’s defense are skip passes and good ball perimeter movement. Just see the way teams beat the Pacers.

The only team using the DDM as a primary offensive system are the Nets. A few teams use some sets, including Boston (the Hornets also come to mind) – when we played that Rondo/Ray/Pierce/Posey/Garnett lineup, for example (it’s a smart way of hiding Rondo’s terrible shooting). The reason why the DDM is difficult to work in the NBA is, I think, because you need the right personnel – guys who can handle and/or shoot the ball on the perimeter, including the 4 and, most importantly, a pg who can initiate the offense breaking down his defender without screens and also for physical reasons: it’s very tiring to execute and 82 games is a long season.

Sometimes team defense is overrated. The C’s aren’t the only team using this scheme. It’s all about the execution. It works well because they have good perimeter defenders, a good post defender and, the most important piece, Garnett. The better way to beat the C’s defense is beating one of the best help-defenders big man in the history of the game, forcing him to play far from the basket and tiring him with close outs if he doesn’t stay honest.

One of the reasons why Doc played that small line-up with Pierce at the 4 was precisely to protect Garnett and keep him as the inside help defender. That’s why he’s probably going to be forced to play Pierce at the 4 (and get criticized for it in this blog). One of the reasons I’ve always said it was critical to keep Posey was to guard perimeter-oriented 4s. Now, if we are going to use Garnett to do it, our help-defense will suffer; Powe and Baby are not mobile or quick enough to do it. Teams will try to take advantage of this next season, I’m pretty sure.

“One of the reasons why Doc played that small line-up with Pierce at the 4 was precisely to protect Garnett”

I meant “… with Posey at the 4…”

um, not to get picky but drive and kick is pretty much a staple offense too. I know the DDM is far more complecated version of the old “the PG gets to the paint and kicks to a shooter”, but a ton of teams drive with thier gaurds and kick to an open shooter… its not like its somethign we’ve never seen before.

not real impressed with his analysis.

I’ve now read the entire article and the author is basically right – like I said, the point is to force Garnett to play outside. But the DDM is not the only way of doing that (and probably not the better one), any 4 out/1 in set will do. But it’s all about the execution.

Also, it’s much harder to hit a 3-pointer in the NBA. Look at what Toronto did to us when they beat us last year, and they had to be almost perfect shooting wise. The other side of it is that usually by surrounding yourself with shooters, you usually sacrifice your defense, and the Celtics are quite good at exploiting bad defenses.

You can analyze the Celtic defense and ways to beat it to death. But what makes it work is the commitment of every player to work hard at playing defense. These guys take it as an insult when the opponent scores. But it also starts at the top with Thibideau as the architect and Doc as the motivator. Last nite’s game was a perfect example where the C’s played great defense in a game that didn’t matter. What also helps is that rookies come here and are forced to buy into it instead of trying to impress the coaches with their offense.

The value of a Greg Oden-type player is that it forces an opponent into a perimeter orientated offense where shooting efficiency drops. The premise that you live and die with the 3-point shot still prevails. The game still needs to be played at BOTH ends of the court and the more varied an offense the more likely its success.

With three “All Stars” in the Celtic’s lineup and a very good mix of shooters and defenders/rebounders, it will take more than one offensive system to displace last year’s champs! The offensive approach suggested has merit as well as the suggestion about good ball movement which fatigues defenses and helps create open looks in even the best defensive schemes. It still comes down to the proper mix of personnel and the quality of an opponent’s execution!

There isn’t one sure-fire way to beat the Celtics.

There are only a series of tactics that might or might not work on any given night. It depends on the personnel a team has available.

Some teams had success playing a two-man game, if they had a great point guard and a great forward shooting mid-range jumpers: Chris Paul and David West, and Deron Williams and Carlos Boozer come to mind. The guard penetrates by Rondo (keeping him honest with good long-range shooting) and then kicks to the forward when the help comes for a short 12 footer. We saw that over and over again against NO and Utah.

Some teams had success with a lot of athletic scorers playing a run and gun game (Golden State, Denver, Washington, Atlanta). It’s not a sure-fire strategy, but if a team can get the C’s in a running game there’s less time to set up the defense and more turnovers on offense.

Sagging off Rondo worked a bit for the Lakers. Getting KG in foul trouble if Perk is injured worked a bit. Using a speedy back-up point guard to attack House or Cassell worked a bit. Taking Ray out of the game with physical play and ball denial worked a bit. (Then the scoring load is placed on Pierce and you have to hope he tires by the 4th quarter.) If a guard is a 90% FT shooter, you might isolate for Billups or Joe Johnson and let them carry the team in the 4th quarter. Finally (as someone mentioned), if you have a 60% plus shooting night from 3-pt range (like Toronto), you also might win by a few points.

It depends on the personnel available. As a coach, I’d try to keep Ray and Perk from participating in the offense in the first quarter. On offense, I’d isolate for one or two guys, wherever I thought I had the biggest advantage, and try to get to the rim and rack up the foul shots. That takes away the Celtics advantage in team defense.

On a positive note, I think Doc will be more flexible this year in getting Ray involved on offense (this was one of the first statements out of traing camp), and using Pruitt for backup PG defense. The concerns I have about backup 3 and 5 on defense are relatively minor compared to these issues. So I think the C’s may have addressed my two biggest concerns from last year.

In any event, the team is better now than it was at this point last year. It will be difficult to repeat, but they have the potential. It should be a good year.

any defense can be beaten, this article is a joke….Effort is what makes the celtics successful on defense

Let’s not allow the desire/effort mantra to foul ourselves. Last season Pacers were playing with desire and effort on the defensive end. They had a Coach (O’Brien/Hartet) who held them accountable. They even had, for some games, a very good big man helper, to play Garnett’s role. Foster is as good as Perkins. However, teams creamed them. Their perimeter defenders (especially Tinsley, Diener, Dunleavy, Marquis; Granger was the only one passable but not that good), were constantly being broken down and forcing the early-help. In these conditions, at some point the help chain is going to break. Team defense is great as long as you have guys who can really defend. Effort is not enough, your guys must have technique and athleticism.

I get the funny vision of some NBA coach reading this article and slapping his forehead like Chris Farley and saying “Gawwwwd…..we only need to keep KG above the free throw line of defense…..I am an idiot!!!”

Master Po,

They already knew that. They’ve tried that. And they were pretty much successful. Doc’s typical counter-move was to play one of the best defenders of perimeter oriented bigs (a “Dirk stopper”) who’s also a great help-defender, Posey, that he was lucky to have on the bench, therefore limiting their success. What do you think he’s going to do this season?

Drive and dish can be stopped by stopping the ball at the point of attack— as the Celtics did repeatedly against NJ during the preseason.

Also, you will not beat teams consistently shooting from the outside. Basketball games are won (or lost) in the paint, at every level.

If you want to beat good defenses you have to move the ball and move yourself. No offense based on putting the ball on the floor will be consistently successful. A defender can move just as fast as a dribbler, but cannot outrun a pass.

Calderon and the Raps killed the C’s with dribble drive in one game last year… of course, they all had the hottest hands on earth and still barely won.

As far as why dribble drive isn’t as prevalent in the NBA? Well, myself, always the cynic, can account some of it to two things – money and cred. For the most part, and young players growing up recognize this, scoring gets the contracts from teams and endorsements. And scoring or clowning someone on the court gets the cred with the people. A lot of college players no they will never be an NBA star or even player, it’s much easier to buy into a team concept in that situation.

D’oh!… “know”.

I have been in read only mode for some time on the site but as a coach this topic is of great interest to me.

First, this seems to be another member of the media trying to disguise himself as a coach with his terminalogy. Now there is no doubt the Celtics defensive strategy is top notch but it is just as much about communication and effort as it is anything else.

I have seen Coach Calipari two different times at clinics where he spends an hour (he admits that is not nearly enough time to show coaches close to everything about the offense) talking about his dribble drive/“Princeton on steroids” offense. First, it is based on spacing, but then it is based on the players ability to drive the ball at the middle of the defense and beat your man. How many people beat Rajon Rondo off the dribble and get where they want to go early in the shot clock? Not many.

Next, the NBA since the end of the Jordan era has been a league based on pick and roll and isolation whether it be in the post or one on one from the wing. There is little chance teams are going to adopt this drive and kick only style in an effort to beat the Celtics.

A friend of mine trains some NBA guys and was a part of the coaching staff on the 1995 Orlando Magic. We have some very indepth NBA conversations and he made some great points last year about players that give the Celtics fits defensively, big athletic guards that can knock down shots and create with the dribble. Two that come to mind immediately are Joe Johnson and Jason Richardson. Joe Johnson gave the Celtics fits in the first round as we all remember and Jason Richardson torched the Celtics in Boston last season. But in the Finals the Celtics TEAM defense topped anything Kobe threw at them.

Randy Hill also talks about pick and roll in his article. What many don’t realize about pick and roll is that if run and spaced properly it opens up your shooters after the initial penetration (ie Steve Nash in Phoenix)
What the Celtics do so well against the pick and roll game is jam the ball handler as the big defending the screener plays on the high side and then the rest of the team rotates over to cover the three most dangerous players without the ball leaving one man temporarily open on the weak side. But what the Celtics also do a great job of is identifying that player and then busting their ass to close out and contest the jump shots.

As I write this I am getting extremely excited for the season.
6 Days!!!

Very good points, Brickowski. I completely agree, with one refinement.

Move the ball and move yourself (i.e. multiple passes leading to the highest percentage shot, preferably in the paint) works best when you have 3 all-stars on the floor and a good ball-handler, and if they are unselfish and can score in a variety of ways from all over the floor.

Most other teams don’t have this, so they have to rely much more heavily on a 1 or 2 man game to try and level the playing field.

You can see the beauty of the Celtics system. They have the best five guys, so they make it a five-on-five on offense and defense, which should usually give them an advantage. Other teams are going to try to negate that advantage by making it a smaller game and winning the one-on-one or two-on-two.

I am a big believer in matchups. I saw the Celtics set the record for points (156) against the Knicks and then saw the Celtics lose the series because Ewing switched to McHale and Oakley to Parrish.
To beat the Celtics you need a short quick but super strong guy move Garnett out of position (think Powe), a lanky tall 3 to shoot over Pierce in the post, quick short players to make Rondo and R.Allen move out of position. Basically Pierce wants to physically dominate and Garnett doesn’t want to bang and Rondo and Allen expect to be quicker than their opponents. You basically have to make them guard those they don’t want to guard. Almost every teams matches up with the Celtics based on size. That is a serious mistake and yet I saw it time and time again. You should match up based upon taking advantage of every defensive players weakness (everybody has a weakness when compared to their strengths).
(by the way, the same reasoning is true on defense for the opponent. I would have had Bryant guard Garnett).

Well apart from the mechanics, it seems to me that Thibodeau’s philosophy is: all hands to the paint and to the three point line. We’ll give you contested mid-range jumpers and we’ll concede an uncontested three pointer to your worst three point shooter, but only if you are willing to swing the ball to the weak side. Everything else we will try to shut down. This applies to defending the pick and roll as well as defending penetration.

So it follows that the Celtics will have trouble defending players with a good midrange game, e.g. Richard Hamilton and Jason Richardson. They have even had difficulty with lesser players like Bonzi Wells and Antonio Daniels. The Celtics do not double team these players, preferring to concede two points rather than three.

Yes, they had trouble with Joe Johnson (who does not have much of a midrange game), but there were complicating factors in that series, starting with the officiating.

For the most part, the midrange game is a lost art, so I expect the Celtics and other good defensive teams (e.g. San Antonio) to continue to defend this way.

i worry most about rebounding and feel the c’s are vulnerable in that department. their rebounding savior last year was rondo and pruitt looks like he can gather them as well. if you can keep the c’s pgs away from the boards, they look weak to me.