So what is a "Motion Offense" anyways?

[basketballjones]

Guys, I decided to throw this together for you because I see a lot of misinformation and lack of understanding what a "motion" offense is. Hope no one finds this arrogant or thinks I am a "know it all." Just wanted to provide some insight and some information for the board, because I feel as if a few of you would enjoy this breakdown.  

 

Let's first learn what ISN'T a motion offense: 

 

Revolving Pattern Offenses

Sometimes these can be hard to diagnose and catch onto, one, because if you do it right, you run them fast enough and with a solid enough pace that it just looks like good movement and good ball movement, and two, because with a shot clock and the 10,000 other sets teams have - a lot of the time teams don't flat-out get into their revolving pattern offense (I'll discuss this later). 

 

Every team has a revolving pattern offense installed one way or another. A revolving pattern offense is designed to give a coach an aspect of control, and players an aspect of familiarity. These are popular because it gives a great framework for coaches to plan practices around the types of shots they know they will get, the actions they will see, and points of emphasis to help develop players. 

 

Some examples.... :

 

Flex - we should all know flex. Back-screen from the block, down-screen from the elbow, pop when you come off the back-screen if you don't get it, etc.... It keeps going and going and going. I personally love a lot of aspects of Flex. You will see cross-sreen/down-screen options on A LOT of teams play-books. It becomes flex (or some variation of it), when you find a way for it to continually revolve into the same motions and patterns. 

 

What we run - if you watch closely, the primary offense that we go to is a 3 out, 2 in offense (the 2 in is a formality), where the posts pop and get reversal passes to a 2 man wing side, the first wing will fake like they are coming off of a hand-off and go back door, while the next guy will come up and either get a hand off, or get the pass and receive a ball screen. Guy who cuts, cuts to the opposite corner, other post player pops on this action, then repeats to his side. 

 

Strengths - You know what shots you are going to get, and can typically be very effective in placing rebounders in statistically opportunistic positions. Some players tend to thrive in offenses like this where they are able to practice a specific shot they get out of their offense, whether it be off of a down-screen that is set every time, or something along that lines. You can really build your team and how you transition defensively and offensively off of how you run your pattern. Also, it can run clock until you either get the shot you want or until you have established your goal of slowing the game down and making it a possession ball game. 

 

Weaknesses - It breaks down and humans are not perfect robots. No coach or player is good enough to perfectly adapt to what the defense takes away every time and hit them with the perfect counter. Therefore it can be unreliable because of the timing and high level of execution it requires. Second, players get lazy and go through the motions. Notice how we rarely every get the back-cut on our offense anymore? We got that all the time last two years... Not to mention the other weakness of this, you are scouted easily. Opposing coaches get to game-plan to take away specific things you want to do. Thus, making it a constant trial and error, adjustment chess game. 

 

Continuity/Hybrid Offenses

This is the middle ground between what is a pattern and what is motion. These offenses have a lot of guidelines, rules, and specific roles for players. The aspects and parts of these can be broken down and repped at practice very easily. 

 

A lot of teams offenses could be described in this way. Make this clear -- One could even argue what we run is more of a ball-screen continuity offense, which I would not totally disagree with. 

 

Some examples..... :

 

Ball-Screen Continuity - LOTS of teams run this. Their bigs pop and swing the ball into ball screens just like we do. It has become the go-to of most NBA teams, and most college teams. Heck, I see it mostly everywhere in the high school level also. Ball-Screen continuity comes from a background of the triangle offense (I'll discuss), 2-game offense (I'll discuss that too), and spacing the floor aspects of the dribble drive and NBA principles. 

 

I love Ball-Screen Continuity, especially if you space the floor properly and are patient with the ball screens. That creates the spacing you need for the ball screen action, and long help-distances for 3pt shooters. If you have guys who can really manipulate ball-screens (we don't), athletic bigs who can catch and finish really well in a multitude of ways (we don't), and a good 3pt shooter or two (we don't), ball-screen continuity is a great offense to run in the half-court. 

 

2-Game - I'm not sure who "invented" this or who was the first to run it, but Bill Self comes to mind when I think of 2-Game (or whatever you want to call it). You might remember 2-Game.... cough cough Doc Sadler cough cough. 2-Game is the ultimate hybrid offense. It has motion-style screens, ball screen-continuity, triangle offense concepts, and NBA style spacing. It allows for post-ups on triangle sides and 2-man sides. Problem is, when you do not have the dudes to make the reads and the counters, it's super easy to defend. Kansas looks so good in it, because he does not run it to get shots, he only runs it to get separation for his stud basketball players. When Doc was here, we ran it to get specific shots out of specific aspects of 2-Game. Which, in turn, basically made it a pattern. 

 

Did you ever go to a Doc Sadler practice? Our entire offensive practice was breaking down and trying to beat the motions and movements into our players. Failed miserably, in my opinion. 

 

Triangle - I love the triangle. Tex Winter, Phil Jackson - you've heard those names. The triangle is founded on spacing and getting post entries. It is the foundation for 2-game, and the foundation of a lot of NBA spacing and ball-screen continuity offenses. Triangle side with your best post, back-side 2-man game with your stud scorer and athletic post. Think Shaq sitting in the triangle, with Jordan or Kobe getting ready to get the ball on the cleared out side. However, NBA analytics are finding out pretty quickly that this is a pretty inefficient offense if you don't have Shaq, MJ, or Kobe (go figure?). 

 

Strengths - Not as easy to scout since it's more based on reads, guidelines, and spacing. Allows players to make plays and cuts, without "breaking down" the offense, as you would in a continuity.

 

Weaknesses - If the coach wants too much control, these offenses just become patterns. See Doc, unfortunately. And, with every offense the book has, if you do not have the dudes that can fit these roles, well, duh, you know what happens. 

 

Have you made it this far? I'm sorry this has become so long-winded. 

 

Motion Offense

 

Oh the beautiful game of basketball.... Unselfish players, moving the ball, screening for one another to get open. Players sweeping around screens, giving space for one another, placing the perfect pass into a cutter for a wide open lay-up, or looking off the cutter and hitting a slip screen... Ah, just beautiful.

 

These things all developed from motion basketball. Basketball in it's simplest (yet hardest and most complex) form. No specific spots or patterns -- just rules, guidelines, spacing, and actions. Maybe some roles for players. Players playing to their strengths and what works best for them, and their teammates doing there's, hopefully all working together for the best result. 

 

Bobby Knight, Tony Bennett, Don Meyer, etc... Motion has a lot of forms, 3 Out - 2 in, dribble drive, 4 Out - 1 In, 5 Out, Princeton (kind of), Mover-Blocker (my favorite), read and react motion, etc... The primary and most simplest way to state what they are doing -- 5 players trying to figure out what the defense is trying to do, and doing the direct counter against it. Motion offenses can have people specifically designated to screen, some specifically designated to cut, some specifically designated to post or set ball-screens. Motion is free-lance that a coach can emphasize certain things he wants.

 

Strengths - Can't scout what isn't planned. You can only hope to take a way a few actions that they try to do. For instance, if a kid is really good at coming off down-screens, you can only hope that you've drilled it enough in practice to teach a couple defenders how to get through down-screens effectively. Problem is, most of the time they do not know when they are coming, or if they are coming at all. 

 

Weaknesses - It gets stagnant. Sometimes motion just does not work, sometimes it just does not jive. Like a band who just is not feeling each other that night and are off a beat. Switching defenses can also give your team a lot of trouble because it forces cutters to have to pop a lot, instead of getting to the hoop because the pass is denied, and slips are hard to hit. It also results in a lot of teams settling for shots they do not necessarily want. Eventually as you do become scouted, they may learn you cannot shoot the 3, so teams start going under every screen, pack it in, and give you a 3pt shot hoping they play the percentages right. And, obviously, with everything - you gotta have smart dudes that can make plays. Sometimes you do not have them. 

 

---------------

 

What I haven't talked about yet (and this is important), and where it starts to get confusing for a lot of people -- most teams run sets plays or specific actions in the half-court, that when they do not work, they naturally evolve into their go-to half-court offense.  

 

Therefore, a lot people get confused because they see a team come down the court, run something that they do not know what it is, and their team gets a shot. What offense was that? It wasn't "their offense," per say, it was a quick-hitter, or set that a team runs to get into their offense. This might get them a look early in the possession, or create separation for drives and kicks. 

 

2-game is notorious for having thousands of sets and formations that end up right back into the continuity. Quick-hitters are the types of things that are in teams play books. These are one to two screens and passes, designed to get a specific person a specific shot. Good quick hitters are typically designed to allow teams to easily get back into their spacing and spots for their continuity offense or revolving offense or motion. 

 

On the flip side - a lot of teams like to run their transition offense right into their continuity or revolving offense (or even motion), if transition didn't score, and in the waining seconds of the shot clock - they will call a quick hitter or call for a high ball-screen (like we do nearly every possession). 

 

 

 

Would anyone like to hear more? As in what our typical possession looks like from an X's and O's perspective? Teams that just run transition breaks and run and guns? Let me know, I'm getting tired of typing and I should be working.... If you disagree with anything I said in here, I'd love to discuss it, go easy on me please.

[Norm Peterson]

Norm says more.

[basketballjones]

I think I spent too much time describing what motion isn't, next time I'll do more of what it is.

[swoof]

Do you have a copy of this DVD?

 

http://www.syskos.com/product/333/motionoffense

 

Good stuff, by the way. Thanks.

[swmckewon]

I think I spent too much time describing what motion isn't, next time I'll do more of what it is.

You did a really good job. 

 

Doc attributed his offense to Eddie Sutton. 

 

I will ask: You think Doc's offense was worse than what you've seen this year? When Nebraska scores this year, it's usually because Petteway went off or Shields had a matchup. 

[basketballjones]

I think I spent too much time describing what motion isn't, next time I'll do more of what it is.

You did a really good job. 

 

Doc attributed his offense to Eddie Sutton. 

 

I will ask: You think Doc's offense was worse than what you've seen this year? When Nebraska scores this year, it's usually because Petteway went off or Shields had a matchup.

Impossible question for me personally to answer, swmckewon. Doc's talent was so poor. Docs offense had much better spacing to the wings and corners, and was built to have much more action to the hoop off of screens. I will say, I think TP and SS would have a lot more success coming off of Doc's backside (2 man side) down screen. Make defenders decide how they're gonna guard that gives us a ton of option.

The biggest issue in my opinion? Both are terrible at creating advantages and help situations right away in transition... That's a whole other post.

[basketballjones]

Do you have a copy of this DVD?

http://www.syskos.com/product/333/motionoffense

Good stuff, by the way. Thanks.

Yes I've watched that and I've seen the 1-4 high playbook we have.

"Coach Tim Miles shows the various alignments he uses in order to control his motion offense. The five alignments include 4-out/1-in, high post set, one and two-guard fronts, 3-out/2-in, and a five-out set. He also includes four drills he uses in order to teach motion. Coach Miles also discusses motion rules and the trademarks of his motion offense. Each alignment has various options and is demonstrated on-court and with game footage. Coach Miles emphasizes touching the post, shot selection, and crashing the offensive boards."

We rely heavy on what (I believe) he calls his high-post sets and/or what I would call his 3 out 2 blockers (a bastardized version of mover and blocker with just ball screens). Typically our possession goes 1. High post set into 2. Ball-screen revolving pattern into 3. TP calling for a high ball screen to chuck up a prayer.

[arliepro]

 

Do you have a copy of this DVD?

http://www.syskos.com/product/333/motionoffense

Good stuff, by the way. Thanks.

Yes I've watched that and I've seen the 1-4 high playbook we have.

"Coach Tim Miles shows the various alignments he uses in order to control his motion offense. The five alignments include 4-out/1-in, high post set, one and two-guard fronts, 3-out/2-in, and a five-out set. He also includes four drills he uses in order to teach motion. Coach Miles also discusses motion rules and the trademarks of his motion offense. Each alignment has various options and is demonstrated on-court and with game footage. Coach Miles emphasizes touching the post, shot selection, and crashing the offensive boards."

We rely heavy on what (I believe) he calls his high-post sets and/or what I would call his 3 out 2 blockers (a bastardized version of mover and blocker with just ball screens). Typically our possession goes 1. High post set into 2. Ball-screen revolving pattern into 3. TP calling for a high ball screen to chuck up a prayer.

 

 

Great stuff on this thread. If any of you guys could implement the ideal offense for the Huskers, what would it be and why?

[Dean Smith]

For me it would always be a motion. I'm a big believer in not teaching plays but how to play. In the purest sense it is Pete Newell's who taught Bobby Knight. The Newell/Knight book is the "bible" of motion offense. It does take a long time for players to learn the language of the motion. You can scout players but the offense is unscoutable. If I had a program right now I'm sure I'd be running some of the read and react layers in jr high and adding more layers while moving more and more to a "real" motion as they get older.

To be truly a good motion offensive player you have to be a good basketball player, meaning you have to understand the "why's" of the game and not just the "how's" Without trying to start a flame war I see that as TP's problem. He works incredably hard and is very skilled at certain aspects if the game but he doesn't seem to undestand the game. That's why he never seems to get any real easy shots in the half court. He doesn't understand how or he just won't move with any purpose without the ball. He doesn't seem to know how to read screens well and he just doesn't score off of cuts because he lacks intelligent movement. That in no way is implying he is not intelligent. He gives the ball up and then stands around until he get the ball back and then He is forced to use some of his great 1 v1 skills. He is terrific at making tough shots, but with better knowledge of movement he would get some easier ones.

So I vote the beautiful game - motion. If it strengthens my arguement for some of you, McDermitt doesn't like the motion.

[Norm Peterson]

I'm sorry, but Jones's treatise deserves much more than 3 up arrows.

[Handy Johnson]

Very informative, but here's our version of the "motion": without a Center, 3 guys who can't shoot pass the ball around the 3 point line until the clock runs out, then the last one with the ball fires away!

[basketballjones]

Do you have a copy of this DVD?http://www.syskos.com/product/333/motionoffense

Good stuff, by the way. Thanks.

Yes I've watched that and I've seen the 1-4 high playbook we have.

"Coach Tim Miles shows the various alignments he uses in order to control his motion offense. The five alignments include 4-out/1-in, high post set, one and two-guard fronts, 3-out/2-in, and a five-out set. He also includes four drills he uses in order to teach motion. Coach Miles also discusses motion rules and the trademarks of his motion offense. Each alignment has various options and is demonstrated on-court and with game footage. Coach Miles emphasizes touching the post, shot selection, and crashing the offensive boards."

We rely heavy on what (I believe) he calls his high-post sets and/or what I would call his 3 out 2 blockers (a bastardized version of mover and blocker with just ball screens). Typically our possession goes 1. High post set into 2. Ball-screen revolving pattern into 3. TP calling for a high ball screen to chuck up a prayer.

 

If any of you guys could implement the ideal offense for the Huskers, what would it be and why?

In my opinion, that's not the right question. Tim Miles is an incredible coach and he knows more about basketball and the different options he has than I do x10.

Our problem threefold in my opinion.

1. Fundamentals - DeanSmith nailed it about TP (I'd even say Shavon too). What vs Why is the biggest difference in OK teams and good/smart teams. But we go through the what our motions are supposed to be, but do not know why, and do not read and react to what our teammates are doing and what the defense is giving us. I don't know if these guys could play motion basketball if Miles wanted to... Which might be the answer to all of this. Personnel.

2. Spacing - our spacing is jacked for 75%-90% of the possession. You've GOT TO get guys spaced in the corners and in the low post (ball side or even away from the ball). But we go through the motions and do not read and react to what our teammates are doing and what the defense is giving us. Of course, back to personnel, we don't have a guy or two who can sit in the corners and knock down 50% of their corner 3's on kick-outs... Which is saaaaadddd.... (Take note, I'm not saying shooting 50% from 3, I'm saying - on standing in the corner, with a kick out pass, you should hit nearly 50-60% of those)

3. Transition Offense - Benny actually does a fairly decent job of getting some high outlet passes, on the move, and kicked ahead to players with an advantage. Problem is we NEVER take advantage of those opportunities. This happens because SS and TP only seem to know how to drive as if they are playing one-on-one. They're the guys who get the ball kicked ahead to them, but if they see they do not have open lanes to the hoop, they'll stop their drive and pull back, which stops everything you got because of the kick ahead. And stalls us, allowing the defense to take hold and push back. Sometimes you have to drive knowing you are not going to score, and you have to take a different angle that draws other defenders. Webster actually does a good job of this in theory, but he's not confident yet and his pace and pound of the ball is too slow and hesitant right now. TW is actually the guy who has shown me a ton this year, but has just not capitalized on much. All potential at this point, but I feel like the instincts and thought process are there.

[basketballjones]

Very informative, but here's our version of the "motion": without a Center, 3 guys who can't shoot pass the ball around the 3 point line until the clock runs out, then the last one with the ball fires away!

Sorry but I disagree with you.

No one should take away from all this that I'm questioning Miles or the staff, or bashing our players. We have some pieces... A lot of our issues are mental. But it's up to a team and the coaches to take the pieces they have and do the best with what we have. We shouldn't be getting beat like we are, regardless of personnel. It's the 6" between the ears that is getting us beat by 20+ and only scoring in the teens in the first half.

[GATA]

A lot of this stuff is beyond my basketball knowledge, so that was really fun to read.

[Huskerpapa]

The best offense puts the talent in position to score, correct?  That sounds simple, but so much goes into getting that right person to the right spot.  What is frustrating this year, especially over the past month, is that nobody seems to be the right person, and nobody seems to be at their right spot. 

 

Again, this oversimplifies the offensive mindset, but I am not sure it is the offensive sets, or the mental gymnastics that is creating the issues.  BJones, are we not running a very similar offense as we ran last year?  

[basketballjones]

BJones, are we not running a very similar offense as we ran last year?

Correct.

Except last year we played out of our a**es and just had a special attitude and aura about ourselves. We snuck up on teams, played with an unmatched passion and energy, and played as a team.

This year it's seems like we thought we were completely different and could just get by being a normal team. When, quite frankly, it required everything we did last year from an intangible perspective.

Subtract the one dude who seemed to be able to make an open 3, take away our mental/passion edge, and just go through the motions - you're 13-15 with no shot at decent post season play.

However, neither team is/was particularly impressive offensively, fwiw.

[Handy Johnson]

Listen, our issues have nothing to do with talent or X & Os. We are suffering from a Crisis of Confidence. We have lost the joy you need to play this game with.

[basketballjones]

Listen, our issues have nothing to do with talent or X & Os. We are suffering from a Crisis of Confidence. We have lost the joy you need to play this game with.

Don't disagree there. I'd say there's a few things that could be changed to get us more in games, expo facto creating energy because it's competitive, but nonetheless, correct, X's and O's only matter when the intangibles have been taken care of.

[huskerbaseball13]

 

Listen, our issues have nothing to do with talent or X & Os. We are suffering from a Crisis of Confidence. We have lost the joy you need to play this game with.

Don't disagree there. I'd say there's a few things that could be changed to get us more in games, expo facto creating energy because it's competitive, but nonetheless, correct, X's and O's only matter when the intangibles have been taken care of.

 

 

Jones you probably know a lot more about basketball than I do...but just going off the eye test it appeared our action was improved on offense last night.  But, we are a poor shooting and passing team..combine those two and it leads to trouble.  We can only hope that an added year of experience, and the incoming talent can change that next year. 

[basketballjones]

 

 

Listen, our issues have nothing to do with talent or X & Os. We are suffering from a Crisis of Confidence. We have lost the joy you need to play this game with.

Don't disagree there. I'd say there's a few things that could be changed to get us more in games, expo facto creating energy because it's competitive, but nonetheless, correct, X's and O's only matter when the intangibles have been taken care of.

 

 

Jones you probably know a lot more about basketball than I do...but just going off the eye test it appeared our action was improved on offense last night.  But, we are a poor shooting and passing team..combine those two and it leads to trouble.  We can only hope that an added year of experience, and the incoming talent can change that next year. 

 

I did not get a chance to watch last night, was at district hs games. Good to hear, though (I trust your eyeball). Question to ask yourself -- assuming these guys are all capable basketball players and were solidly recruitable division one talent - what all of the sudden made them unable to shoot a basketball or create for others?

[Red Don]

  bump

[hal9000]

Listen, our issues have nothing to do with talent or X & Os. We are suffering from a Crisis of Confidence. We have lost the joy you need to play this game with.

Eh, well it's partly talent, but would agree it is mostly confidence. 

[49r]

 

Listen, our issues have nothing to do with talent or X & Os. We are suffering from a Crisis of Confidence. We have lost the joy you need to play this game with.

Eh, well it's partly talent, but would agree it is mostly confidence. 

 

 

 

Kind of hard to believe now that this is the same team that opened up a 17 point lead at home against Michigan State just over a month ago.

 

That's why most of us believe it's mostly confidence.

[AuroranHusker]

 

 

Listen, our issues have nothing to do with talent or X & Os. We are suffering from a Crisis of Confidence. We have lost the joy you need to play this game with.

Eh, well it's partly talent, but would agree it is mostly confidence. 

 

 

 

Kind of hard to believe now that this is the same team that opened up a 17 point lead at home against Michigan State just over a month ago.

 

That's why most of us believe it's mostly confidence.

 

 

Mostly confidence as far as never seeming to get leads... and not having a post to get easy buckets & not having a true PG get us easy buckets, either. But, really, it's a whole slew of issues that have reared their ugly head.  Not getting an early lead & playing from out in front is probably as big of an issue as anything, IMHO.

[hal9000]

What we run - if you watch closely, the primary offense that we go to is a 3 out, 2 in offense (the 2 in is a formality), where the posts pop and get reversal passes to a 2 man wing side, the first wing will fake like they are coming off of a hand-off and go back door, while the next guy will come up and either get a hand off, or get the pass and receive a ball screen. Guy who cuts, cuts to the opposite corner, other post player pops on this action, then repeats to his side. 

 

Strengths - You know what shots you are going to get, and can typically be very effective in placing rebounders in statistically opportunistic positions. Some players tend to thrive in offenses like this where they are able to practice a specific shot they get out of their offense, whether it be off of a down-screen that is set every time, or something along that lines. You can really build your team and how you transition defensively and offensively off of how you run your pattern. Also, it can run clock until you either get the shot you want or until you have established your goal of slowing the game down and making it a possession ball game. 

 

Weaknesses - It breaks down and humans are not perfect robots. No coach or player is good enough to perfectly adapt to what the defense takes away every time and hit them with the perfect counter. Therefore it can be unreliable because of the timing and high level of execution it requires. Second, players get lazy and go through the motions. Notice how we rarely every get the back-cut on our offense anymore? We got that all the time last two years... Not to mention the other weakness of this, you are scouted easily. Opposing coaches get to game-plan to take away specific things you want to do. Thus, making it a constant trial and error, adjustment chess game. 

As I'm reading this I'm saying, "YES" out loud, because I see it so many times when Petteway (not to pick on him specifically, because other guys do it too) is on the wing waiting for the reversal pass from the big up top, but he has to come so far out because his man is defending him so close.  I can see it so much better live than on TV, but when it happens I'm thinking if he would just cut back he'd be wide open for a pass and layup.  Actually one time at a game I yelled "GO BACK DOOR ON HIM!!"  Couldn't figure out why my wife was laughing so hard.