Late Defensive Breakdown Sinks Milwaukee Bucks Against Atlanta Hawks
During the Milwaukee Bucks' 97-92 home loss to the Atlanta Hawks, a late three by Josh Smith broke an 88-88 tie with less than one minute remaining and put the Hawks up for good. While most of the focus post-game turned to Scott Skiles' wacky decision to abstain from substitution in the final quarter, this defensive possession featured a terrible breakdown in pick-and-roll defense. It might generally be acceptable to let Josh Smith take a three pointer in the late game situation, there is no way the decision was defensible in this scenario. Not only was Smith wide-open and comfortable taking the shot, Jeff Teague passed up his own wide open three-point attempts in favor of the assist to Smith. How is it that no Bucks defender came within 10 feet of Teague and J-Smoove on such an important play? Let's take a closer look...
Veteran guard Stephen Jackson focused on his defensive role on Monday night, taking only one shot and committing zero turnovers for the first time since December of 2010. He did a fine job bothering Joe Johnson, but couldn't prevent him from scoring 14 fourth-quarter points. With Johnson getting what he wanted, the Hawks went to 2-1 pick-and-roll with Johnson and Jeff Teague, isolating Jackson and Brandon Jennings on defense. It looked like the two Bucks defenders tried to work something out in their approach when the offensive strategy crystallized, but as Skiles said after the game "we had a breakdown there."
From there, Teague bluffed the screen on Jackson's right hip and quickly reset on the opposite side. Jennings overreacted to the bluff and hedged to his left, forcing a late recover to the pick-and-roll action on the other side of the play.
Doing his best to recover and make the proper hedge, Jennings left enough room for Johnson to split the show and force both defenders to follow behind him as he made a move towards the paint unimpeded.
As Jennings gets behind the play, Teague sets another screen on Jackson to provide Joe Johnson with the angle and then pops to the top of the key to space the offense properly.
S-Jax fights hard through the Teague screen and somehow gets in position to cut off Johnson at the right elbow, but Jennings followed the ball as well and left Teague alone on the arc.
From here Johnson kept the defense committed to him by rising for a faux shot attempt and quickly reversing the ball to a wide open Teague. I estimate the nearest defender is 15 feet away, which is a completely unacceptable outcome from the S-Jax-Jennings duo on defense.
The bumbled pick-and-roll defense leave Ersan Ilyasova in what I like to call Screwed City. He has to make a rotation on Teague to force a decision, while trying to stay in some type of position to bother Smith in the corner. Good offensive spacing on the secondary action prevents Ersan from doing either, and neither Jennings nor Jackson made a serious effort to recover to the weak side of the play.
From there Smith hit the three to put the Hawks up 91-88 with 41.9 seconds left, and they never looked back. The Bucks had to play chase and foul and Johnson sealed the game at the line. I, for one, found it to be the biggest play of the game. Unfortunately, the Bucks didn't exactly show off any defensive discipline on the play and got burned.
8 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
At least Ersan forced Smith to take the wide open jumper instead of Teague
J-Smoove is an awful spot-up shooter.
Ugh, that was the hardest I ever had to try to find a silver lining.
http://twitter.com/WhalesLarry ...but only if you want to see someone still trying to figure Twitter out.
by Mitchell Maurer on Jan 24, 2012 3:00 PM CST reply actions
I'm impressed though. That's a good point you make. Can always make the best of a bad situation, I suppose.
New Brew Hoop mantra?
SB Nation Brew Hoop - Editor | SB Nation Midwest - News Desk Contributor | SB Nation Chicago - Writer | SB Nation Basketball - Scores & More | Twitter: @stevevonhorn
by Steve von Horn on Jan 24, 2012 3:11 PM CST up reply actions
I'll try to limit my posting of these to when they are relevant to the Bucks, but if anyone wants to know how the Rockets are looking I recapped their game last night.
SB Nation Brew Hoop - Editor | SB Nation Midwest - News Desk Contributor | SB Nation Chicago - Writer | SB Nation Basketball - Scores & More | Twitter: @stevevonhorn
At the time, that play felt heavy on our fortunes.
I congratulated the Hawks. Great execution. Wondered what we might have done. Interesting to read your account, but I still wonder.
I can see Jennings feeling he had to stop Johnson. But, yes, Teague and Smith both being so alone let them do whatever they chose, and let them get comfortable in doing it.
Were the Hawks just capitalizing on Johnson’s previous dominance? Can the Bucks be expected to decide Johnson is faking (if he was) and cover the alternatives?
Was what Skiles called a “breakdown” worth pointing a finger at any Buck individually? Or was it just too clever an offensive play for us to figure out on first exposure? [Some dudes dream of a perfect Bucks tanking. Not me. This dude dreams of a TV broadcast that analyzes plays like that right after they happen (delaying the action) so I learn. Neither are realistic.]
Would Moute have done anything differently?
(I promise not to go after Skiles even if your words provide an excuse.)
It's photo number three that represents the big mistake.
Jennings clear wanted to show hard on the screen and roll (as evidenced by his premature movement in the wrong direction in photo number one), but what should happen on a hard show is that the ballhandler is forced to flatten out his route. In other words, Johnson should have been forced to move laterally as Jennings pushed him towards the sideline or forced him to pick up his dribble.
Instead, Jennings gave Johnson too much room to split the show (which defeats the purpose of the tactic and leaves the show defender way out of position with regards to his own man). Skiles is one who almost never double teams, instead opting for “stunts” (hard show and then recover), so I have a hard time believing he called for a double team. The lack of movement by the back end of the D also shows there was no plan to double, in my opinion.
So that leaves Jennings responsible for Teague (especially because he trailed Johnson anyways and wasn’t in a position to defend the drive). I think Jennings gambled for the steal and it just didn’t pay off. Instead it backfired horribly. His gamble worked against the Knicks when he trailed Toney Douglas on a similar play, but Joe Johnson is not Toney Douglas. It was a rough possession, and I think it had more to do with execution than scheme.
SB Nation Brew Hoop - Editor | SB Nation Midwest - News Desk Contributor | SB Nation Chicago - Writer | SB Nation Basketball - Scores & More | Twitter: @stevevonhorn
by Steve von Horn on Jan 24, 2012 5:05 PM CST up reply actions
Man...as soon as both of them followed Johnson I started to freak out...
But I thought Teague was just gonna drain it. Think some credit needs to go to him for making a seriously brave pass in looking for Josh Smith to close out a game on a three pointer.
I then screamed and raged at the screen at the burning injustice of Josh Smith torching Milwaukee with a three pointer. As pointed out above…he is awful at 3’s…uncontested or otherwise.
But then I remembered Drew Gooden had just hit a three at the other end in actually the same situation…and realised…this was simply karmic repayment…although remarkably fast. I felt ok after that.
Nice job by S-Jax allnight – that was a seriously disciplined defensive performance for him on JJ…he mighta got his 26 or whatever but he could’ve filled his boots with bad defensive coverage. If he can accept a ‘role’ regularly (whatever it may be) he will be an asset to the team.
I'll take a wide open Josh Smith 3 any day
It happened to fall, likelihood of him making that 3 was probably worse than JJ making one double teamed. Same shot as Drew Gooden taking the 3 in the corner, it’s just not the shot ATL wanted. Nothing in the paint, nothing from the hot hand, nothing from their plan, looks like fairly good D to me.
Nobody within 10 feet of the shooter and assister is never good D.
The point is that nobody had to be wide open. A guarded shot always has a lower percentage. That’s why they guard people.
SB Nation Brew Hoop - Editor | SB Nation Midwest - News Desk Contributor | SB Nation Chicago - Writer | SB Nation Basketball - Scores & More | Twitter: @stevevonhorn
by Steve von Horn on Jan 24, 2012 6:59 PM CST up reply actions

by 



























