[外電] Time to Mix It Up

看板Lakers作者Solid4 (豆腐)時間15年前 (2008/12/17 04:50)推噓18(18推 0噓 17→)

留言35則, 21人參與討論串1/1

糟糕我忘了縮起來的連結是啥= =a 等一下會補... 轉自Forum Blue and Gold Every Laker fan is also a Laker critic. It is a divine right of the Laker fan to complain if the team does not meet lofty expectations and blow out each opponent. Much has been said and written about the new Lakers defense. But the switch in performance and the magnified switch in fan sentiment regarding the Laker’s defense is probably unparalleled. At the beginning of the season, the new “strong-side zone” defense masterminded by the new Defensive Coordinator Kurt Rambis had lifted the team to #1 in total defense prompting national media attention and admiration. Recently, the same SSZ defense is prompting ridicule from the likes of perennial all-defensive-team stalwart, Mark Jackson: “The Lakers are a bad defensive team…” 每個湖人球迷都是湖人球評。上帝給了每個湖人球迷權利去抱怨湖人的表現達不到"標準"，沒辦法把每支球隊都打啪。最近湖人的防守整天被拿出來討論討論再討論，但防守進步的幅度跟粉絲們想像的防守進步幅度好像有點不太平衡....本球季開始時，被抓去當肯德基爺爺新防守教練的Kurt Rambis規劃出來的SSZ - Strong Size Zone (強邊/持球邊區域?)防守讓湖人防守數據爆竄到全聯盟第一，高調的吸引各界目光。而最近，同樣的SSZ策略卻卻被防守派人士如Mark Jackson(07年季後賽球評)批評說 "吼，湖人防守真的有夠爛的啦.." It is as if the ’74 Steel Curtain transformed into the ’08 Detroit lions in the span of 4 games. So it is time to strip away the rhetoric and opinions and try to examine this defense objectively and render a fair critique. In so doing, there are at least 3 separate components. (這邊不確定)一切就好像在四場比賽之內，湖人從1974年的Steelers(美式足球隊)鋼鐵防守變成2008年底特律Lions(也是美式足球隊，不過本季12敗。)一樣。該是時間把所有修辭啊，主觀的"我認為"撇開，用公正的角度來看評斷。以下分成三個主要部分來探討。 1. The strategy. The over-all structure of the defense. What is the scheme? What is the objective? 1. 策略。整體防守的組織。到底是什麼風格、什麼目標？ 2. Execution. Are the players executing the strategy with effort? 2. 執行。到底球員有沒有認真執行這個防守策略？ 3. The personnel. Do the players have the skills to execute the strategy? 3. 人才。球員們有這個策略/戰術需要的技巧、能力嗎？ The Strategy. The goal is to take advantage of the new zone defence rules to create a hybrid defense. The strong-side players actually play man-to-man. Ball placement in the wing area draws the weak-side post player to the strong-side mid post who zones off that region, preventing penetration and help either to the high or low post. As Frank Hamblen recently said, each player is playing his man and ½ of another by being ready to provide help for his team-mates. In the beginning of the season, the help was more judiciously applied such as when the opponent had picked up his dribble, or in the corners. This is a trap. The offensive player is put under pressure resulting in sub-optimal results such as errant passes. More recently the help has been coming at all times. This is doubling – not trapping. Doubling John Salmons when he is still has his dribble is not smart. This help is easy to beat with a quick pass out to the top, resulting in defensive scramble, and invariably, an open shot. 先談策略。SSZ的目標是利用聯盟放寬的區域防守規則來做一個混種的防守。強邊的球員事實上打的是一對一盯人防守。當球在左右兩翼的時候弱邊的禁區球員會移到強邊中位附近，阻斷切入和協防高位或低位。就像Frank Hamblen最近說的，一個球員要守 1.5個球員，除了自己該守的還要隨時準備去協防。球季初期，協防的球員來的時機比較正確，通常是當對手停止運球或站在角落。這樣的陷阱包夾讓對方容易做出錯誤的判斷，如亂傳球之類的。最近，協防的球員則是一直協防。這不是陷阱，這只是包夾。在鮭魚還在運球的時候這是一個很靠盃的決定，只要快速傳球給弧頂就能讓湖人防守崩潰，進而出現空檔。 The result of this constant helping? Reduced steals, open looks and wide open lanes for dribble penetration. If the strategy is of the defense is to pick and choose trap opportunities, the team has not been executing it. 這些隨時隨地的協防讓湖人抄截變少、對方空檔、切入變多。如果球隊的策略是在正確的時機做陷阱包圍的話，球員們並沒有做到。下面這部分關於Bigs "show"的部分我解讀成站出來壓迫對方PG 有錯請指證 On high screen and rolls, the strategy seems to be, with no regard for the opposition, a hard show by the bigs with the man covering the ball (usually Fisher or Farmar) NOT fighting through or going under the screens but covering the zone between Bynum/Pau and their men until the bigs begin their retreat back to the basket at which time, Fisher/Farmar re-engage with their men. Because they have constant “show” help, Fisher/Farmar are playing their men very tight, trying to disrupt the offense. 對付高檔拆，策略似乎是不管對方球員是誰，禁區球員會壓迫對方持球員，而防守持球球員的那個人(通常Farmar 跟Fisher)不推過檔拆或是走下位，而是站在Bynum / Pau跟對方禁區球員的中間，直到Bynum / Pau後退去防守對方禁區球員才重新對對方PG做貼身防守。 There are two issues problems with this strategy. Any move played without variation, whether in chess, or baseball pitches, will be beaten. The bigs should sometimes NOT show, just to change the rhythm. Second, the tight play by Fisher/Farmar (not the quickest of guards anyway – more later) only make them easier to beat off the dribble even without the aid of a pick. 這個策略造成了兩個問題。任何沒有做修正的策略，不管是下棋、棒球投手投球，都一定會被看破、打敗。或許，有的時候我們的C/PF不應該站出來壓迫，改變一下節奏。第二，Farmar跟Fisher兩人的貼身防守(兩個人都不算高速的控衛，後面會講)只讓對方更容易加速一下，不用檔拆就就繞過他們了。 My observation is that if you had to pick one strategic move causing the Lakers the most problems is their tight-coverage/constant-show on the screen and roll. This strategy is the wrong one for this team and because of it the entire defense breaks down due to the resulting dribble penetration. Dribble penetration exposes the bigs who have to help, bring their man toward the hoop and whether the outcome is a layup, foul, open 3, or offensive rebound, the chances are that the results are not good. 我的觀察是這種貼身防守/每次都壓迫是湖人最大的問題。對湖人來說，這個策略是錯誤的，也因為他整個防守會因為切入而崩潰。禁區球員會因為切入而必須過來協防，放他們守的球員空檔，不管最後結果是上籃、三分空檔、還是進攻籃板對湖人來說都不是好結果。 Execution. I don’t believe that the execution has really changed much throughout the year. Defensive execution is about coaching and basketball IQ. By the time a player has made the NBA and he still has not learned to keep between his man and the hoop while keeping an eye on the ball, it is probably too late for him to learn. There are several Lakers who apparently have not learned this simple skill. One of the reasons for the benching of the stronger, quicker, taller Vlade for Luke is that Luke has these fundamental skills while Vlade does not. Farmar never had these skills and Lamar seems to have lost his. 執行。我不認為在戰術執行上面沒有變化太大，因為這是關於教練的指揮跟籃球智商。當一個球員到達了NBA等級，卻還沒有學會如何同時看著該防守的人跟球的話他大概是沒救了。可惜的是，似乎不少湖人球員還沒有領悟這個簡單的技巧...讓更大更快更高的狼人(更快..嗯，有待傷榷?)去溫板凳，把藍藍路換上來的原因之一就是藍藍路會這項基本技巧，而狼人不會。Farmar從來就沒有學會過，而Lamar好像忘記他的了= = As far as effort, I actually think the players are trying harder than they were at the beginning of the season. But to quote the Wizard, “don’t mistake activity for achievement”. Constant doubling demands a lot of hard work. Unfortunately such indiscriminate activity puts the defense in easy-to-exploit scramble mode. More lazy, but discriminate trapping would be far more effective. 從積極的角度上面來看，我其實認為球員們更認真的想要達到目的，但是就如同巫師所說的「不要把有認真在做跟做的好混為一談」。不斷的包夾或許需要更多體力，但是這種無腦的行為讓湖人需要不斷的衝去關門，比較懶但是比較有腦的陷阱包圍會更有效率。 Personnel. No matter the validity of the strategy and degree of execution. These two factors have to fit the characteristics of the personnel. For the most part, an aggressive trapping defense fits well. In Kobe, Ariza, and Odom, the Lakers have disruptive wing players who can both provide trap pressure and intercept errant passes. Although even here recently (perhaps spurred on by the wager made by several players on highest steals totals) too many steals attempts are being made on passes to the middle rather than cross court. A missed steal on a cross court pass gives team mates a chance to rotate over. A missed steal to a pass to the free throw line to the top of the key creates a wide open lane. 人才。不管防守策略/戰術有多好，都一定要跟你現有的人才有所配合。大致上來講，這種具有攻擊性的陷阱包圍還挺不錯的。Kobe、Ariza、老二都是具有能夠給對方製造壓力以及飛出去斷球的球員。最近太多賭博性的抄截(或許跟幾個球員下賭注賭誰抄截數最多有關係)是對傳到場中央的傳球，而不是對角傳球。一個失敗的抄截動作如果是對對角傳球的話至少給隊友有機會補防，但是對傳到罰球線的傳球抄截失敗的話則會造成對方輕鬆上籃。 Where the strategy does not fit with the personnel is the idea that the wing players should constantly funnel their man baseline to the bigs and the aforementioned hard show on the screen and roll. Funnelling the man to the hoop requires having a big that can change the shot without fouling. A Zo, Wallace, even Chandler. 戰術不符合人才的地方在於兩翼的球員應該把對方逼往底線 ->禁區球員。這種動作需要一個可以妨礙投籃卻又不犯規的大個，如腎鬥士、大班，或小錢。 Against the Kings recently, Bynum showed he has simply has not learned how to defend a small attacking the basket without fouling. Bynum’s best defense is against other bigs (Amare, Bogut, Jefferson), not help defence against smalls. He has to decide whether he is going to block the shot, make a hard foul, or get out of the way. Doing none of the three results in feeble denial attempts that results in an and-more often than any 7’ 285 pound center who can dunk without jumping should ever give up. Kwame has shown (and Roy Hibbert of all players has echoed) that merely standing straight up with arms straight in the air is an incredible deterrent. Bynum has to be coached to play help defence with intent and purpose. Surely he must be tired to making a half-hearted attempt to block a small’s layup a step too slow only to be charged for a foul. I know that I am. As I am tired of his inevitable whining about the unjust call. Maybe the wing player should just play good defense, move their feet and draw a charge (heaven forbid) instead of letting their man go base line. 最近的對上國王的時候，Bynum的表現告訴我們他真的不太會防守一個衝到禁區的小個子。他最好的防守是對上對方的大個，如阿罵、Bogut、Al Jefferson，而不是幫忙防守小個子。他必須要決定他該去蓋火鍋、用力犯規，還是讓開。猶豫不決只會造成他想蓋又沒在認真蓋，給對方and 1的次數超過一般 7呎 285磅(約130公斤)不用跳就能灌籃的中鋒該給的。誇米‧奶油手‧布朗(跟Roy Hibbert等人)已經證明了一個七呎的男人只要站著手舉高，對對方來說就是一座很高的障礙了。Bynum需要學會如果他要補防的話，就要快狠準。他自己大概也對於要去蓋小個火鍋的時候慢了半步、被判犯規感到厭倦。我知道我已經看腻這種情況了，就跟他每次都在哀嚎裁判不公一樣。或許兩翼的球員應該就盡本分的認真防守，移動腳步、試著做給對方衝撞犯規，而不是讓對方往底線切。 Also, whether it is due to lack of quickness or desire, Bynum simply is unable to show hard and get back to his man. 喔，還有，不管是因為太慢還是不想動，Bynum真的沒辦法對對方PG壓迫然後趕回去防守自己的對手。 If you are watching the defense intently, the sheer lack of defensive skills and instincts of Farmar is quite shocking. I wrote in the Kings game thread that the defense would be better without Farmar at all and the Lakers playing 4 on 5 as at least then his man might be tempted to shoot the open jumper instead of abusing Farmar at will and driving to the hoop. It is as if his coach had not taught him to watch his man’s belly instead of his eyes or the ball. Every twitch of the ball handler had Farmar jumping until his man decided to take him out of his misery and blow by him. Farmar might be that rare athlete who is fast when running straight with the ball to the hoop while being slow moving laterally, and explosive and strong when rising for a dunk but not when fighting through a pick. 如果你有認真看防守的話，Farmar在防守上之嫩之無腦真的還挺不可思議的。我在vs. Kings live文(國外的)裡寫到沒有Farmar，讓球隊4v5可能還比較好，至少對方PG會想要投籃而不是輕輕鬆鬆繞過Farmar去上籃= =。感覺上，好像Farmar的教練忘了教他眼睛要盯著對方的小腹而不是球或眼睛。對手隨便動一動都能讓Farmar有緊張一下，直到他玩腻了，直接過農夫。可憐的農夫可能是百年難的一見的那種球員：直線往籃框跑的超快，可是橫向移動慢的像烏龜；跳起來灌籃的時候具有爆發力跟力量，卻連個檔拆都只能走下位。 Both point guard’s inability to keep their men in front of them and the scramble that the hard show creates should result in the Defensive Coordinator adjusting and changing the strategy. 兩個PG防守都這樣、湖人因為大個跑出去壓迫需要不斷補防協防關門是很大的問題，Kurt Rambis應該做出一點調整。 My suggestions on what this change could be are: 我的建議是... 1. The default defense for screen roll should be for the bigs not to show and the guard to go under the screen. I would much rather have Udrih taking long jump shots or trying to initiate the offense from the three point line than having a straight line to the basket. Show occasionally to mix it up. 基本上，預設的檔拆防守應該是C/PF不壓迫對方PG，自己PG走下位。讓Udrih等人投三分球或從三分線外組織至少比讓他衝進禁區好。偶而可以壓迫一下。 2. If you show, rarely do it with Bynum. And never do it if a Bynum/Farmar combo is the defense. 當你真的要壓迫的時候，盡量不要讓Bynum去壓迫。還有，絕對不要讓Farmar 跟Bynum這個組合去做壓迫... 3. Do show with Lamar. He is the best show help defender on the team. His screen and roll defense against Tony Parker 2 seasons ago was a revelation. When Lamar is on the floor, put him against the big that usually sets the high screen and roll. 要壓迫給Lamar壓迫。他是隊上壓迫協防能力最好的球員。兩個球季前他對法國跑車的協防可以說是神來一筆。當Lamar在場上的時候，讓他去守愛玩高檔拆的球員。 4. Whatever you do. Change is up. 不管怎麼樣，做出調整就對了啦ˊˋ 5. Consider putting Ariza on the point. Much like San Antonio, make the point guard shoot over a taller quicker player who can play off him as a result of his size. Considering the dearth of wings who can play from the post, if Parker isn’t exposed on defense neither will be Fisher. 考慮把Ariza丟去跟對方PG互尬。就像馬刺一樣，讓對方PG對上一個更快更高、不需要做壓迫防守就能達到效果的球員。如果Parker可以這樣做的話，Fisher應該也可以。 6. Play straight man defense sometimes. Again, change it up. The current defense is akin to an all out blitz. This works for a while but then the offense will screen pass you to death and eventually figures out a blocking scheme to kill you over the top. The triangle is fluid, changing and morphing to adapt to the defense. Why can’t the defense adapt to the offense? 有的時候還是打盯人防守就好。還是一樣，偶而做出調整。目前的防守基本上是有效果一段時間後一被看破就容易被人玩到死。三角戰術是瞬息萬變的，為什麼防守不能像進攻一樣？ Despite the “sky is falling” laments from the fan base I think we should take heart in the performance so far. Think of the first 23 games as practice for a new kind of hybrid defense. Constant practice has made them better at it but constant use has made them vulnerable to the opposition. Now it is time to use it as just one of their many options in a multi-dimensional, adaptive defense that leverages the strengths of their personnel whilst hiding the players’ natural weaknesses. 雖然球迷們不斷哀嚎著「天空要掉下來了」，我認為我們可以把這前23場當作戰術實地演練(俗稱練球)來看。不斷的練習讓他們更熟悉，但是不斷的使用讓他們很容易掛掉。該是時候把這個戰術加到戰術列表裡面跟其他防守策略一起使用，如此才能達到善用自己優勢、掩蓋自己缺點。 —Bill Bridges 原文作者 Bill Bridges 翻譯員Solid4 見鬼了這篇翻好久Orz||| 翻到後面開始恍神了，有錯請指證，歡迎重翻/修改，因為個人認為真的翻的很爛Orz -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 74.131.16.180

→

Solid4

12/17 04:51, , 1^F

12/17 04:51, 1^F

推

YamagiN

12/17 05:42, , 2^F

12/17 05:42, 2^F

→

YamagiN

12/17 05:44, , 3^F

12/17 05:44, 3^F