PDA

View Full Version : Moving screens: Is this a problem?



JasonJohnHorn
04-18-2016, 09:30 AM
When I was growing up watching the Bulls, I will concede that I was a bit of a hater because I felt like whenever I watched them, for example in 92 against the Knicks, and in 93 against the Knicks and Suns, and in 97 and 98 against pretty much anybody, but especially the Pacers and Jazz, it felt like the officials were wearing Bulls uniforms. It was annoying because I wanted to see the better basketball team win, and I felt like in 88, 89, 90, 91, 94, 95, 96, and 99, the officials just let teams play and the best team won each of those seasons.

The last couple of years I've been relatively happy with the officiating. I do feel that the Heat got a lot of calls the last 2 seasons LBJ was there, but they were a great squad.

With the Warriors, I feel like the officials have been fair and consistent, but I've heard others complain that they get away with a LOT of moving screens. A compilation is provided here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFfS6uDNWhQ


The problem with complications is that you can take a year's worth of missed calls and make it seem like it was going on throughout every game, when really it only happened 2 or 3 times a game, and it likely happened just as often for the other teams.


Do you think this is a problem? And if so, is it intentional? I've always felt like a moving screen is a hard call, not because it isn't obvious, but because it is away from the ball, and since there are only three officials on the court, and since there are 5 pairs of guys on the court, and the tendency is to watch the ball, it is easy to miss a moving screen. Also, when fighting for position in the post, or getting in position for an in-bounds play, the jockeying for position can unintentionally turn into a moving screen once the ball is in play.


I'll admit that when I'm watching, I rarely even notice moving screens, but when you are playing, there is nothing more frustrating than getting caught up in a moving screen because officials so rarely call/see them.


Is this an issue league wide? Or is this something that the Warriors are benefiting from more than other teams? And if they are they benefiting from it more than others, is it because the officials are turning a blind eye for them, or because this is a call the officials miss for everybody but it benefits the Warriors more because of their exceptional 3-pt shooting?

ewing
04-18-2016, 09:52 AM
the Warriors benefit more b/c they can shoot the **** out of the ball. I think the league intentionally starting allowing moving screens well before the Warriors became great. I think the D'antoni Suns were the first team to really take advantage. They did it more in screen role then off the ball. Amare was always rolling to the hole while setting the screen. This is never called anymore and every team in the league does it. It used to illegal. I think in order to promote a more open game the league got away from calling moving screens.

ewing
04-18-2016, 09:55 AM
and to answer the question. I do think it is a problem. I think most of the rule tweaks promote one style of play. I don't like that. If you are going to not let guys bump cutters or hand check lets not let the offense set moving screens too. It not ruining the game or anything but i do think it should be addressed and we should move back to the way this play was traditionally called.

IndyRealist
04-18-2016, 10:14 AM
A couple of years back Roy Hibbert showed exactly how bad the moving screen rule is when he set the screen, kept his hands down, and walked toward the basket while impeding the defender. Since he is allowed to roll it's the defender's responsibility to go around him as long as he's not blatantly putting elbows out in the guy's way.

I feel like the Pacers get warned by the league a lot.

Scoots
04-18-2016, 11:49 AM
The rules should be enforced 100% of the time to the letter of the rule for every moment of play on the court. From that perspective it's an issue because it is missed so often. But since that's not possible then I think it is not as much of an issue as the off-the-ball fouls and the offensive players creating contact to get a foul call rather than to take and make a shot.

Scoots
04-18-2016, 11:51 AM
Also, other than the Warriors shooting making the moving screen more obvious ... the offense they run has a LOT of screens so since they have so many more screens in game than most teams and since they play at a high pace the moving screens look like a much bigger issue with the Warriors.

Dade County
04-18-2016, 12:24 PM
A very BIG problem.

I wish the league actually called 7 of these a game on each team. So just maybe in crush time players wouldn't be doing this illegal move time after time freeing up shooters and putting the defensive team in a very bad position.

Htownballa1622
04-18-2016, 12:59 PM
https://youtu.be/HFfS6uDNWhQ

FlashBolt
04-18-2016, 01:09 PM
https://youtu.be/HFfS6uDNWhQ

What pisses me off is when the commentator would say: "Why are you giving them so much space!" just as Curry+Klay knocks down a three. Hope refs start cracking down on them in the playoffs. If I see Bogut fatass doing a moonwalk again, I'm going to bleed from my eyes.

Htownballa1622
04-18-2016, 01:14 PM
What pisses me off is when the commentator would say: "Why are you giving them so much space!" just as Curry+Klay knocks down a three. Hope refs start cracking down on them in the playoffs. If I see Bogut fatass doing a moonwalk again, I'm going to bleed from my eyes.

It really is bad. It won't matter in our series but against a superior team like spurs or cavs it definitely matters.

I just remembered the play that looks like cavs were getting shot as curry came off of like 3 staggered screens.

He's already the goat shooter. He doesn't need THAT much help.

Hawkeye15
04-18-2016, 01:15 PM
Kevin Garnett should have 3000 more offensive fouls than he does because of moving screens

ewing
04-18-2016, 01:20 PM
What pisses me off is when the commentator would say: "Why are you giving them so much space!" just as Curry+Klay knocks down a three. Hope refs start cracking down on them in the playoffs. If I see Bogut fatass doing a moonwalk again, I'm going to bleed from my eyes.

Its this kind of stuff that really gets abused on the league right now. The screener acts like he just happens to be going that direction after the screen is actually set or not set b/c he is never actually still. its an epidemic

Scoots
04-18-2016, 01:24 PM
What pisses me off is when the commentator would say: "Why are you giving them so much space!" just as Curry+Klay knocks down a three. Hope refs start cracking down on them in the playoffs. If I see Bogut fatass doing a moonwalk again, I'm going to bleed from my eyes.

Part of it is that the refs are watching the shooter and his feet (need another ref!). And part of it is that the defenders running through the screens are often so dumb about it. The ref isn't likely to call a moving screen when the defender has an arm wrapped around the screener and it looks like the screener is just getting pushed or pulled. The rule doesn't say the screener can't move after contact, but that they must be in place before contact and leave enough distance for the screened player to avoid contact. When the defender doesn't avoid contact and just tries to go through the screen it plays into Bogut's hands. Players know they need to sell contact when they have the ball, why don't they sell it when they are screened? Arms out and flailing and yell "HEY!".


Section III--Screening
A player who sets a screen shall not (1) assume a position nearer than a nor-mal step from an opponent, if that opponent is stationary and unaware of the screen-er's position, or (2) make illegal contact with an opponent when he assumes a posi-tion at the side or front of an opponent, or (3) assume a position so near to a moving opponent that illegal contact cannot be avoided by the opponent without changing direction or stopping, or (4) move laterally or toward an opponent being screened, after having assumed a legal position. The screener may move in the same direction and path of the opponent being screened. In (3) above, the speed of the opponent being screened will determine what the screener's stationary position may be. This position will vary and may be one to two normal steps or strides from his opponent.

Bogut is pretty good at moving the direction the contact comes from, and he and Draymond do a decent job of getting to the spot in time to not get called for a moving screen.

ewing
04-18-2016, 01:30 PM
Part of it is that the refs are watching the shooter and his feet (need another ref!). And part of it is that the defenders running through the screens are often so dumb about it. The ref isn't likely to call a moving screen when the defender has an arm wrapped around the screener and it looks like the screener is just getting pushed or pulled. The rule doesn't say the screener can't move after contact, but that they must be in place before contact and leave enough distance for the screened player to avoid contact. When the defender doesn't avoid contact and just tries to go through the screen it plays into Bogut's hands. Players know they need to sell contact when they have the ball, why don't they sell it when they are screened? Arms out and flailing and yell "HEY!".



Bogut is pretty good at moving the direction the contact comes from, and he and Draymond do a decent job of getting to the spot in time to not get called for a moving screen.


Bogut is 7 foot 260. James Harden isn't moving a set Bogut all over the place like that. they are clearly moving screens. The only defense for it not getting called is that is it is not called across the board. Refs just need to sack up and start making the calls.

Scoots
04-18-2016, 01:32 PM
There was a rule "clarification" several years ago that a screener couldn't use their roll to the hoop to function as a continuation of the screen. But Bogut doesn't care about the hoop so he doesn't move that way :)

Scoots
04-18-2016, 01:35 PM
Bogut is 7 foot 260. James Harden isn't moving a set Bogut all over the place like that. they are clearly moving screens. The only defense for it not getting called is that is it is not called across the board. Refs just need to sack up and start making the calls.

I didn't say he was. But all that contact Harden creates isn't the defenses fault either.

Any time a rule is broken and it's not enforced it's bad for the game, I was just explaining some of how the Warriors (and pretty much every team in the NBA) get away with it.

It's not that the Warriors do it better, or that the refs are on their side, it's that they screen a LOT more than most teams and their screens lead to a lot more points than it does on most teams so it's talked about a lot more.

ewing
04-18-2016, 01:36 PM
There was a rule "clarification" several years ago that a screener couldn't use their roll to the hoop to function as a continuation of the screen. But Bogut doesn't care about the hoop so he doesn't move that way :)

it really weird b/c i think the justification the league has been using is the "The screener may move in the same direction and path of the opponent being screened" but often the defender only moving the same direction as the screener b/c some big dude is pushing him in the opposite direction then the one he wants to go.

Scoots
04-18-2016, 01:41 PM
Found this, it's a pretty good quick brief on the subject: https://www.quora.com/What-is-a-moving-screen-in-NBA-definition-Is-it-considered-to-be-a-foul

ewing
04-18-2016, 01:43 PM
I didn't say he was. But all that contact Harden creates isn't the defenses fault either.

Any time a rule is broken and it's not enforced it's bad for the game, I was just explaining some of how the Warriors (and pretty much every team in the NBA) get away with it.

It's not that the Warriors do it better, or that the refs are on their side, it's that they screen a LOT more than most teams and their screens lead to a lot more points than it does on most teams so it's talked about a lot more.

I agree. I've pointed out that the moving screen had basically become legal on here a number of times but no one cared until the Warriors became great. I agree with you on how players get away with it but its really pretty oblivious that the refs/league tacitly agreed that they weren't going to make the call unless the screener obliterated someone

Scoots
04-18-2016, 01:49 PM
I agree. I've pointed out that the moving screen had basically become legal on here a number of times but no one cared until the Warriors became great. I agree with you on how players get away with it but its really pretty oblivious that the refs/league tacitly agreed that they weren't going to make the call unless the screener obliterated someone

Or if the defender avoided and ran around the screen it would make it SO much more obvious. I find it funny when defenders on the side lines try to stay in-bounds when dealing with a screen. The screener can't go out of bounds but the defender can AFAIK.

Saddletramp
04-18-2016, 01:52 PM
I didn't say he was. But all that contact Harden creates isn't the defenses fault either.

Any time a rule is broken and it's not enforced it's bad for the game, I was just explaining some of how the Warriors (and pretty much every team in the NBA) get away with it.

It's not that the Warriors do it better, or that the refs are on their side, it's that they screen a LOT more than most teams and their screens lead to a lot more points than it does on most teams so it's talked about a lot more.

Then shouldn't they be called for more illegal screens if they're doing more screens and doing more illegal screens? Haven't looked at the numbers but I wouldn't think that they are.

It's not just the screens, it's also the BS that Green and Bogut do and they usually get away with it. It is just plain awful.

beasted86
04-18-2016, 01:56 PM
Watching the Warriors play, at least 1/3rd of the screens Bogut and Green set they are moving, and it should be an offensive foul. I don't mean to single them out as the only violators though.

A lot of people complained about traveling so much for the past few years, but if I were to list problematic officiating, I'd rank it as:

1. Moving screens
2. Loose ball/over the back fouls
3. Defensive 3 seconds
4. Blocking foul/charge calls
5. Traveling

Scoots
04-18-2016, 02:08 PM
Watching the Warriors play, at least 1/3rd of the screens Bogut and Green set they are moving, and it should be an offensive foul. I don't mean to single them out as the only violators though.

A lot of people complained about traveling so much for the past few years, but if I were to list problematic officiating, I'd rank it as:

1. Moving screens
2. Loose ball/over the back fouls
3. Defensive 3 seconds
4. Blocking foul/charge calls
5. Traveling

I think the phantom contact on offensive players is my number 1, followed by offensive players creating contact and having the defender called for it. Otherwise I agree.

beasted86
04-18-2016, 02:09 PM
Also to specify the most common moving screen is not really the overly blatant stuff from most of those videos like posted above.

To me the most common moving screen in the NBA is when the screen setter's feet are stationary, allows his teammate to run the curl route, but then extends his butt, hip, or shoulder right after his teammate goes by. What this does is it causes the shadowing defender to run a different route than the offensive player he's been trailing "creating space". You run 2-3 of these picking up 1 ft of space each time, and that's all a team like GS needs.

But I would say they need to take a "baby steps" approach and clean up the blatant feet moving screens like in those videos first.

FlashBolt
04-18-2016, 02:09 PM
You cannot tell me for a second that what Draymond did during that play in Boston wasn't a dirty play. Refs miss many calls and that's fine but he has a reputation for it. Warriors are one of the sneakiest teams right now. What they get away with is appalling.

Scoots
04-18-2016, 02:14 PM
Then shouldn't they be called for more illegal screens if they're doing more screens and doing more illegal screens? Haven't looked at the numbers but I wouldn't think that they are.

It's not just the screens, it's also the BS that Green and Bogut do and they usually get away with it. It is just plain awful.

On the moving screens ... by rule it's a moving screen if the screener doesn't get set well before contact, but that's just a variation on the block/charge issue and we know how terrible that is called. When a screener keeps moving and screening that is not necessarily illegal. It is a violation for a defender to wrap an arm around an offensive player but that happens on screens a lot and it too is not called hardly at all.

The Warriors do get called for a few offensive fouls from moving screens regularly ... I wish I had numbers to see if there was any correlation with screen frequency vs foul frequency.

On the Bogut/Green "other stuff" ... yeah, and players all over the league get away with "other stuff". CP3 grabs, hooks, kicks, trips, head butts, leans, knees, and pushes off regularly and gets away with it. I don't blame CP3, I blame the refs. The game SHOULD be called the same for everybody, but they just can't see it all so it becomes a matter of who is good at getting away with it.

FlashBolt
04-18-2016, 02:19 PM
On the moving screens ... by rule it's a moving screen if the screener doesn't get set well before contact, but that's just a variation on the block/charge issue and we know how terrible that is called. When a screener keeps moving and screening that is not necessarily illegal. It is a violation for a defender to wrap an arm around an offensive player but that happens on screens a lot and it too is not called hardly at all.

The Warriors do get called for a few offensive fouls from moving screens regularly ... I wish I had numbers to see if there was any correlation with screen frequency vs foul frequency.

On the Bogut/Green "other stuff" ... yeah, and players all over the league get away with "other stuff". CP3 grabs, hooks, kicks, trips, head butts, leans, knees, and pushes off regularly and gets away with it. I don't blame CP3, I blame the refs. The game SHOULD be called the same for everybody, but they just can't see it all so it becomes a matter of who is good at getting away with it.

That doesn't change the fact that they get away with some really blatant garbage. Bogut should not be moonwalking around and not to mention Iggy, Green, and Bogut are floppers as well. This team is too good to be pulling this kind of crap. Watch the Boston vs Warriors game again.. Green does not get called for anything at all but he's out there tackling and diving on players. Between pulling jerseys and him running over players, I hope the refs start cracking down on this. Houston would have lost anyways.. no need to do that ****.

Chronz
04-18-2016, 02:33 PM
the Warriors benefit more b/c they can shoot the **** out of the ball. I think the league intentionally starting allowing moving screens well before the Warriors became great. I think the D'antoni Suns were the first team to really take advantage. They did it more in screen role then off the ball. Amare was always rolling to the hole while setting the screen. This is never called anymore and every team in the league does it. It used to illegal. I think in order to promote a more open game the league got away from calling moving screens.

The Suns? No ****ing way. The C's were the first to really bend the rules and they learned that from Daryl Morey basically.

Its the off the ball stuff where the illegality is most influential. You make a pass, the ref tracks the ball which gives you the opening for a split second foul, imo anyways. Warriors have definitely upended the C's in that regard.

Chronz
04-18-2016, 02:35 PM
On the moving screens ... by rule it's a moving screen if the screener doesn't get set well before contact, but that's just a variation on the block/charge issue and we know how terrible that is called. When a screener keeps moving and screening that is not necessarily illegal. It is a violation for a defender to wrap an arm around an offensive player but that happens on screens a lot and it too is not called hardly at all.

The Warriors do get called for a few offensive fouls from moving screens regularly ... I wish I had numbers to see if there was any correlation with screen frequency vs foul frequency.

On the Bogut/Green "other stuff" ... yeah, and players all over the league get away with "other stuff". CP3 grabs, hooks, kicks, trips, head butts, leans, knees, and pushes off regularly and gets away with it. I don't blame CP3, I blame the refs. The game SHOULD be called the same for everybody, but they just can't see it all so it becomes a matter of who is good at getting away with it.

Ill try to find the numbers someone from ESPN posted but the Dubs do set the most screens, given the visual evidence, wouldn't you expect them to be #1 in fouls given in that situation? I remember them not even coming close tho.

likemystylez
04-18-2016, 02:38 PM
On the moving screens ... by rule it's a moving screen if the screener doesn't get set well before contact, but that's just a variation on the block/charge issue and we know how terrible that is called. When a screener keeps moving and screening that is not necessarily illegal. It is a violation for a defender to wrap an arm around an offensive player but that happens on screens a lot and it too is not called hardly at all.

The Warriors do get called for a few offensive fouls from moving screens regularly ... I wish I had numbers to see if there was any correlation with screen frequency vs foul frequency.

On the Bogut/Green "other stuff" ... yeah, and players all over the league get away with "other stuff". CP3 grabs, hooks, kicks, trips, head butts, leans, knees, and pushes off regularly and gets away with it. I don't blame CP3, I blame the refs. The game SHOULD be called the same for everybody, but they just can't see it all so it becomes a matter of who is good at getting away with it.

what if they never make contact, is it still a moving screen?

CHANGO
04-18-2016, 02:45 PM
Also, other than the Warriors shooting making the moving screen more obvious ... the offense they run has a LOT of screens so since they have so many more screens in game than most teams and since they play at a high pace the moving screens look like a much bigger issue with the Warriors.

That argument doesn't help the Warriors at all, that's the biggest problem as I wrote on the Rockets vs Warriors thread. They are a team focused on players movement and screens. And with them getting away with moving screens it means they get away with a LOT of moving screens because they are leaders on that category.

Chronz
04-18-2016, 02:53 PM
What pisses me off is when the commentator would say: "Why are you giving them so much space!" just as Curry+Klay knocks down a three. Hope refs start cracking down on them in the playoffs. If I see Bogut fatass doing a moonwalk again, I'm going to bleed from my eyes.

Its going to take someone with no ****s to give to really highlight their illegal screens. Someone consistently trying to beat the pick and then just decking Green for his backwards movement. The guy will get suspended but the media circus would force the NBA to take notice.

Chronz
04-18-2016, 02:56 PM
Kevin Garnett should have 3000 more offensive fouls than he does because of moving screens

Green laughs at that pace, hes well on his way to crushing Celtics KG

KnicksorBust
04-18-2016, 02:57 PM
Green got called for an illegal screen in the 1st quarter yesterday so this all seems like drama to me. He did not react well.

Saddletramp
04-18-2016, 03:04 PM
Green got called for an illegal screen in the 1st quarter yesterday so this all seems like drama to me. He did not react well.

That was against Beverly, after Beverly's scrape with Curry. The refs were going to call that if there was even a 1% angle of Green's hip. Plus, getting caught one time out of doing something so often is pretty weak. Weaker still is alluding that it doesn't matter.

Saddletramp
04-18-2016, 03:15 PM
Its going to take someone with no ****s to give to really highlight their illegal screens. Someone consistently trying to beat the pick and then just decking Green for his backwards movement. The guy will get suspended but the media circus would force the NBA to take notice.

No, they won't. Especially if it's against the NBA's golden team the Warriors. They would just say some guy got frustrated with Green's aggressiveness and lacked the mental toughness and composure to "just play ball". You heard JVG and Jackson saying the Rockets should quit whining and just play through it when the Warriors were committing obvious offensive fouls and then getting called for the same kind of foul on the other end.


I hope the Warriors keep doing this kind of stuff because everybody assumes that the Warriors are gonna blow out the Rockets in every game regardless (which they very well could) and reffing wouldn't matter anyway. It might matter against some other teams later on and if the NBA doesn't address it then, then I say all NBA teams need to just do the same thing next year, and we'lljust have a moving screen festival every game until they either try to call as many as they can across the board or to just make it a part of the game now and the game won't be "Put the ball in the basket" it'll be "Set the best moving screens to get your teammate to get the ball in the basket."

So, that'll be fun.

Scoots
04-18-2016, 03:45 PM
That doesn't change the fact that they get away with some really blatant garbage. Bogut should not be moonwalking around and not to mention Iggy, Green, and Bogut are floppers as well. This team is too good to be pulling this kind of crap. Watch the Boston vs Warriors game again.. Green does not get called for anything at all but he's out there tackling and diving on players. Between pulling jerseys and him running over players, I hope the refs start cracking down on this. Houston would have lost anyways.. no need to do that ****.

On the boston game, I think the first one was just a real trip. The second one is certainly more suspect :)

I would be perfectly happy if all the rules were enforced all the time. But until they are it's a good thing to take advantage.

Scoots
04-18-2016, 03:47 PM
The Suns? No ****ing way. The C's were the first to really bend the rules and they learned that from Daryl Morey basically.

Its the off the ball stuff where the illegality is most influential. You make a pass, the ref tracks the ball which gives you the opening for a split second foul, imo anyways. Warriors have definitely upended the C's in that regard.

The Suns used to have the screener pivot toward the player running off the screen mid-screen and really devastate the defender. It was only a couple years before they changed the emphasis and cleaned that up though.

Scoots
04-18-2016, 03:49 PM
Ill try to find the numbers someone from ESPN posted but the Dubs do set the most screens, given the visual evidence, wouldn't you expect them to be #1 in fouls given in that situation? I remember them not even coming close tho.

Well, the skill of the screeners to hide from the refs will keep those numbers down some :)

Scoots
04-18-2016, 03:50 PM
what if they never make contact, is it still a moving screen?

That's more of a judgement thing. If a player sets a screen, a defender approaches and moves to the screeners left to go around and the screen goes right, forward, or backward it's not illegal. If the screener goes left it is.

Scoots
04-18-2016, 03:55 PM
That argument doesn't help the Warriors at all, that's the biggest problem as I wrote on the Rockets vs Warriors thread. They are a team focused on players movement and screens. And with them getting away with moving screens it means they get away with a LOT of moving screens because they are leaders on that category.

I wasn't trying to help the Warriors. They are helping themselves to all they can get. My point was the huge volume of screens they set means that they get commented on more. The fact that they are good at getting away with them is the issue.

Here's another theory. In the 90s Pat Riley taught his defenses to essentially foul every player on every play because the refs wouldn't call them all, and in fact what happened was the refs got so acclimatized to the violence of the Knicks that they hardly called anything. Well, the Warriors are a jump shooting centered team but they were able to succeed despite all of the standard knowledge saying that doesn't work in the playoffs where the game gets more physical. Well in the playoffs the screens get more physical and the Warriors shooters get a little more open than in the regular season, and the refs can't call them all just like Riley said.

Scoots
04-18-2016, 03:56 PM
Its going to take someone with no ****s to give to really highlight their illegal screens. Someone consistently trying to beat the pick and then just decking Green for his backwards movement. The guy will get suspended but the media circus would force the NBA to take notice.

What I said in this thread somewhere was that the screen defenders are going to have to get screened with their hands up and complain loudly. Instead they grab onto the screener and are so focused on the shooter they forget to complain mid-play.

Scoots
04-18-2016, 04:03 PM
No, they won't. Especially if it's against the NBA's golden team the Warriors. They would just say some guy got frustrated with Green's aggressiveness and lacked the mental toughness and composure to "just play ball". You heard JVG and Jackson saying the Rockets should quit whining and just play through it when the Warriors were committing obvious offensive fouls and then getting called for the same kind of foul on the other end.


I hope the Warriors keep doing this kind of stuff because everybody assumes that the Warriors are gonna blow out the Rockets in every game regardless (which they very well could) and reffing wouldn't matter anyway. It might matter against some other teams later on and if the NBA doesn't address it then, then I say all NBA teams need to just do the same thing next year, and we'lljust have a moving screen festival every game until they either try to call as many as they can across the board or to just make it a part of the game now and the game won't be "Put the ball in the basket" it'll be "Set the best moving screens to get your teammate to get the ball in the basket."

So, that'll be fun.

All of the teams in the NBA DO set moving screens, including the Rockts. They just don't do it as often as the Warriors.

FlashBolt
04-18-2016, 04:05 PM
All of the teams in the NBA DO set moving screens, including the Rockts. They just don't do it as often as the Warriors.

Yet they rarely get called on that bs. Good that they keep doing it.. nothing wrong with it, tbh. But they get away with more bs than any other team.

Allphakenny1
04-18-2016, 04:09 PM
Wow, a lot of *****ing going on in here. My guess is a lot of you females must have you cycles synced up.

1. All teams commit moving screens. The Warriors use screens more, so obviously they commit moving screens more. Most moving screens committed against the Warriors are not called as well. Just because a few were called in the Rockets game does not mean that is the norm. Most games they are called the same on both ends, but the Warriors get away with more because they set more.

2. When talking about the "extra stuff," you are now reaching. Trying to make it sound worse to take away from the Warriors dominance. Hell, even when Green tackled the Celtics player. A Celtics player first slide tackled Green in the legs, which is extremely dangerous. Then Green got up and gave an equally dirty move to another player. People want to ignore the first dirty play because it goes against their script that the Warriors get away with everything and get every call.

3. The Warriors get very little respect from the officials when it comes to going to the free throw line. People say it is because they only shoot threes, but when Warrior players drive to the hoop they are allowed to be abused and nothing is ever called. Even with Steph who is the reigning MVP and most likely winner this year. He rarely gets the 50/50 calls, let alone the superstar calls players of his caliber get. To me, if they called the moving screens more and actually called the fouls for the Warriors when driving to the hoop, it would make little difference.

The funny thing is I see Rockets fans and I'm pretty sure an OKC fan complaining and their teams and superstars are known for getting the benefit of the whistle. If you want to complain about officiating, then your teams should be shooting far less free throws.

FlashBolt
04-18-2016, 04:51 PM
Wow, a lot of *****ing going on in here. My guess is a lot of you females must have you cycles synced up.

1. All teams commit moving screens. The Warriors use screens more, so obviously they commit moving screens more. Most moving screens committed against the Warriors are not called as well. Just because a few were called in the Rockets game does not mean that is the norm. Most games they are called the same on both ends, but the Warriors get away with more because they set more.

2. When talking about the "extra stuff," you are now reaching. Trying to make it sound worse to take away from the Warriors dominance. Hell, even when Green tackled the Celtics player. A Celtics player first slide tackled Green in the legs, which is extremely dangerous. Then Green got up and gave an equally dirty move to another player. People want to ignore the first dirty play because it goes against their script that the Warriors get away with everything and get every call.

3. The Warriors get very little respect from the officials when it comes to going to the free throw line. People say it is because they only shoot threes, but when Warrior players drive to the hoop they are allowed to be abused and nothing is ever called. Even with Steph who is the reigning MVP and most likely winner this year. He rarely gets the 50/50 calls, let alone the superstar calls players of his caliber get. To me, if they called the moving screens more and actually called the fouls for the Warriors when driving to the hoop, it would make little difference.

The funny thing is I see Rockets fans and I'm pretty sure an OKC fan complaining and their teams and superstars are known for getting the benefit of the whistle. If you want to complain about officiating, then your teams should be shooting far less free throws.

The issue is they don't get called for it so if your logic is that they commit more moving screens because in general, they use screens the most, then please explain why they aren't being called.

Vee-Rex
04-18-2016, 04:55 PM
Wow, a lot of *****ing going on in here. My guess is a lot of you females must have you cycles synced up.

1. All teams commit moving screens. The Warriors use screens more, so obviously they commit moving screens more. Most moving screens committed against the Warriors are not called as well. Just because a few were called in the Rockets game does not mean that is the norm. Most games they are called the same on both ends, but the Warriors get away with more because they set more.

2. When talking about the "extra stuff," you are now reaching. Trying to make it sound worse to take away from the Warriors dominance. Hell, even when Green tackled the Celtics player. A Celtics player first slide tackled Green in the legs, which is extremely dangerous. Then Green got up and gave an equally dirty move to another player. People want to ignore the first dirty play because it goes against their script that the Warriors get away with everything and get every call.

3. The Warriors get very little respect from the officials when it comes to going to the free throw line. People say it is because they only shoot threes, but when Warrior players drive to the hoop they are allowed to be abused and nothing is ever called. Even with Steph who is the reigning MVP and most likely winner this year. He rarely gets the 50/50 calls, let alone the superstar calls players of his caliber get. To me, if they called the moving screens more and actually called the fouls for the Warriors when driving to the hoop, it would make little difference.

The funny thing is I see Rockets fans and I'm pretty sure an OKC fan complaining and their teams and superstars are known for getting the benefit of the whistle. If you want to complain about officiating, then your teams should be shooting far less free throws.

Misogynistic much?

Chronz
04-18-2016, 05:30 PM
Wow, a lot of *****ing going on in here. My guess is a lot of you females must have you cycles synced up.

1. All teams commit moving screens. The Warriors use screens more, so obviously they commit moving screens more. Most moving screens committed against the Warriors are not called as well. Just because a few were called in the Rockets game does not mean that is the norm. Most games they are called the same on both ends, but the Warriors get away with more because they set more.

2. When talking about the "extra stuff," you are now reaching. Trying to make it sound worse to take away from the Warriors dominance. Hell, even when Green tackled the Celtics player. A Celtics player first slide tackled Green in the legs, which is extremely dangerous. Then Green got up and gave an equally dirty move to another player. People want to ignore the first dirty play because it goes against their script that the Warriors get away with everything and get every call.

3. The Warriors get very little respect from the officials when it comes to going to the free throw line. People say it is because they only shoot threes, but when Warrior players drive to the hoop they are allowed to be abused and nothing is ever called. Even with Steph who is the reigning MVP and most likely winner this year. He rarely gets the 50/50 calls, let alone the superstar calls players of his caliber get. To me, if they called the moving screens more and actually called the fouls for the Warriors when driving to the hoop, it would make little difference.

The funny thing is I see Rockets fans and I'm pretty sure an OKC fan complaining and their teams and superstars are known for getting the benefit of the whistle. If you want to complain about officiating, then your teams should be shooting far less free throws.

Did You really just pretend that Curry isn't protected on a level we haven't seen since Peak Durant? If you're too blind to see how scared everyone is to touch him then i wouldn't believe the rest of this drivel.

Scoots
04-18-2016, 05:31 PM
Misogynistic much?

Possibly homophobic too? Methinks he doth protest too much :)

flea
04-18-2016, 05:56 PM
Whether it's a problem depends on whether you like the jumpshooting era of the NBA. All the rules modifications (written and unwritten) have enabled shooting to such a degree that it's by far the easiest way to win games.

The positives are that it has brought back the transition game (which is nearly back to 80s levels), it has encouraged ball movement and team play, and it has allowed the offensive game to be dominated by guard play.

The negatives are that defense is more about body positioning than skill or physicality, post play is inhibited because a contested 3 from a league average shooter is always a better option than a contested running hook from a league average big man, and the slashing game is more finesse-oriented with floaters and line drive layups than it was when you had to be a long athlete like Wilkins or Jordan to really make a living as a slashing forward.

I do think they should either let you play defense on shooters again or cut down on the offensive fouls. The transition and jumper league is what people used to tease all-white college teams for playing. That the NBA does it with better athletes doesn't mean those criticisms go away. (FWIW I don't entirely agree with the criticism, but rather I favor rules that allow a variety of styles of play rather than seeing 30 teams run P&R offense 80% of their possessions - this is why I like college better.) I don't think they're going to let you be physical with screeners, cutters, and shooters again. In fact I think they will eventually succeed in removing that from the college game - which they have already made huge strides in.

So essentially I believe they will cut down on this. Shooting is increasing to an absurd degree - the league average in 3PA has increased 50% just in the last 10 years. It has gone up by 4 attempts per game in just the last 4 years. This isn't some genius in moneyball "hacking the league" - this is rules changes just as much as the NFL's passing surge is the result of rules changes.

At some point the league will decide that having half of a team's FGA come from beyond the 3 point line is too much - that is Harlem Globetrotter silliness. If guys wanted to see a glorified game of HORSE they would just go the Y.

Scoots
04-18-2016, 06:10 PM
Did You really just pretend that Curry isn't protected on a level we haven't seen since Peak Durant? If you're too blind to see how scared everyone is to touch him then i wouldn't believe the rest of this drivel.

I try to be unbiased and I don't think Curry is protected. He gets grabbed pulled hit and banged around regularly without getting calls. I'm not complaining about it, just saying it happens so I don't see how he's being protected.

Scoots
04-18-2016, 06:15 PM
Whether it's a problem depends on whether you like the jumpshooting era of the NBA. All the rules modifications (written and unwritten) have enabled shooting to such a degree that it's by far the easiest way to win games.

The positives are that it has brought back the transition game (which is nearly back to 80s levels), it has encouraged ball movement and team play, and it has allowed the offensive game to be dominated by guard play.

The negatives are that defense is more about body positioning than skill or physicality, post play is inhibited because a contested 3 from a league average shooter is always a better option than a contested running hook from a league average big man, and the slashing game is more finesse-oriented with floaters and line drive layups than it was when you had to be a long athlete like Wilkins or Jordan to really make a living as a slashing forward.

I do think they should either let you play defense on shooters again or cut down on the offensive fouls. The transition and jumper league is what people used to tease all-white college teams for playing. That the NBA does it with better athletes doesn't mean those criticisms go away. (FWIW I don't entirely agree with the criticism, but rather I favor rules that allow a variety of styles of play rather than seeing 30 teams run P&R offense 80% of their possessions - this is why I like college better.) I don't think they're going to let you be physical with screeners, cutters, and shooters again. In fact I think they will eventually succeed in removing that from the college game - which they have already made huge strides in.

So essentially I believe they will cut down on this. Shooting is increasing to an absurd degree - the league average in 3PA has increased 50% just in the last 10 years. It has gone up by 4 attempts per game in just the last 4 years. This isn't some genius in moneyball "hacking the league" - this is rules changes just as much as the NFL's passing surge is the result of rules changes.

At some point the league will decide that having half of a team's FGA come from beyond the 3 point line is too much - that is Harlem Globetrotter silliness. If guys wanted to see a glorified game of HORSE they would just go the Y.

Rod Strickland, Isiah Thomas and countless other non-long armed forwards did plenty of scoring on flip shots and floaters back in the day.

I think all the rules should be enforced or removed from the rule book. Not until the rules are consistently applied can we see what needs to be changed.

The funny thing to me is how long it took for a team to take advantage of the current rules. not many years ago a great 3 point shooter was considered a nice situational player/option to have. Now people talk like it's impossible to win without a few of them.

CHANGO
04-18-2016, 08:03 PM
Wow, a lot of *****ing going on in here. My guess is a lot of you females must have you cycles synced up.

1. All teams commit moving screens. The Warriors use screens more, so obviously they commit moving screens more. Most moving screens committed against the Warriors are not called as well. Just because a few were called in the Rockets game does not mean that is the norm. Most games they are called the same on both ends, but the Warriors get away with more because they set more.

2. When talking about the "extra stuff," you are now reaching. Trying to make it sound worse to take away from the Warriors dominance. Hell, even when Green tackled the Celtics player. A Celtics player first slide tackled Green in the legs, which is extremely dangerous. Then Green got up and gave an equally dirty move to another player. People want to ignore the first dirty play because it goes against their script that the Warriors get away with everything and get every call.

3. The Warriors get very little respect from the officials when it comes to going to the free throw line. People say it is because they only shoot threes, but when Warrior players drive to the hoop they are allowed to be abused and nothing is ever called. Even with Steph who is the reigning MVP and most likely winner this year. He rarely gets the 50/50 calls, let alone the superstar calls players of his caliber get. To me, if they called the moving screens more and actually called the fouls for the Warriors when driving to the hoop, it would make little difference.

The funny thing is I see Rockets fans and I'm pretty sure an OKC fan complaining and their teams and superstars are known for getting the benefit of the whistle. If you want to complain about officiating, then your teams should be shooting far less free throws.

That's all it matters here... Thank you for proving everyone's point.

Allphakenny1
04-18-2016, 08:19 PM
The issue is they don't get called for it so if your logic is that they commit more moving screens because in general, they use screens the most, then please explain why they aren't being called.

If that is the issue then there is no issue. The Warriors get called for plenty of moving screens. If your complaint is that they should get called for every moving screen, then that complaint applies to every team in the league. Also, moving screens is not the only call officials miss regularly. That is just the one that benefits the Warriors so people want to complain about it.

Allphakenny1
04-18-2016, 08:22 PM
Did You really just pretend that Curry isn't protected on a level we haven't seen since Peak Durant? If you're too blind to see how scared everyone is to touch him then i wouldn't believe the rest of this drivel.

I truly believe that Curry gets less respect from the officials than any superstar I have seen and I have been watching since the mid 90s. Many that are not superstars get more calls on less contact.

Allphakenny1
04-18-2016, 08:26 PM
That's all it matters here... Thank you for proving everyone's point.

I never disagreed with that point, the problem is that everyone is ignoring the benefits of officiating all the other teams (their teams) are getting, and the fact that the Warriors get screwed by officiating in other areas.

Gander13SM
04-18-2016, 09:12 PM
It's really not that big of a deal, although I have a feeling something akin to what happened with Dallas and Yao a few years back after Cuban complained could eventually happen here.

The truth is all teams do it, Warriors are just better at it.

Also, and I know most of you don't like to hear this. But the majority of people complaining never played/coached beyond high school level. Check the rule book and make sure you know what an illegal screen is before you start making such a big deal out of it. I would say one in every five screens people complain about with the Warriors are legitimately illegal. The rest are actually fine as the rule book currently stands.

ewing
04-18-2016, 10:14 PM
Whether it's a problem depends on whether you like the jumpshooting era of the NBA. All the rules modifications (written and unwritten) have enabled shooting to such a degree that it's by far the easiest way to win games.

The positives are that it has brought back the transition game (which is nearly back to 80s levels), it has encouraged ball movement and team play, and it has allowed the offensive game to be dominated by guard play.

The negatives are that defense is more about body positioning than skill or physicality, post play is inhibited because a contested 3 from a league average shooter is always a better option than a contested running hook from a league average big man, and the slashing game is more finesse-oriented with floaters and line drive layups than it was when you had to be a long athlete like Wilkins or Jordan to really make a living as a slashing forward.

I do think they should either let you play defense on shooters again or cut down on the offensive fouls. The transition and jumper league is what people used to tease all-white college teams for playing. That the NBA does it with better athletes doesn't mean those criticisms go away. (FWIW I don't entirely agree with the criticism, but rather I favor rules that allow a variety of styles of play rather than seeing 30 teams run P&R offense 80% of their possessions - this is why I like college better.) I don't think they're going to let you be physical with screeners, cutters, and shooters again. In fact I think they will eventually succeed in removing that from the college game - which they have already made huge strides in.

So essentially I believe they will cut down on this. Shooting is increasing to an absurd degree - the league average in 3PA has increased 50% just in the last 10 years. It has gone up by 4 attempts per game in just the last 4 years. This isn't some genius in moneyball "hacking the league" - this is rules changes just as much as the NFL's passing surge is the result of rules changes.

At some point the league will decide that having half of a team's FGA come from beyond the 3 point line is too much - that is Harlem Globetrotter silliness. If guys wanted to see a glorified game of HORSE they would just go the Y.

Stop it some nerd that got cut from his freshmen team realized 3 was worth more then 2.

Lo Porto
04-18-2016, 11:11 PM
Tim Duncan never wins a title if they call illegal screens correctly. He's so blatantly obviously moving at top of the key almost everytime.

And to the original point - the refs wore Bulls jerseys a ton in MJ's day. Hell, his shining moment was an offensive foul.

Gander13SM
04-18-2016, 11:17 PM
Tim Duncan never wins a title if they call illegal screens correctly. He's so blatantly obviously moving at top of the key almost everytime.

And to the original point - the refs wore Bulls jerseys a ton in MJ's day. Hell, his shining moment was an offensive foul.

+ Kevin Garnett

FlashBolt
04-18-2016, 11:24 PM
It's really not that big of a deal, although I have a feeling something akin to what happened with Dallas and Yao a few years back after Cuban complained could eventually happen here.

The truth is all teams do it, Warriors are just better at it.

Also, and I know most of you don't like to hear this. But the majority of people complaining never played/coached beyond high school level. Check the rule book and make sure you know what an illegal screen is before you start making such a big deal out of it. I would say one in every five screens people complain about with the Warriors are legitimately illegal. The rest are actually fine as the rule book currently stands.

1 in 5 considering they set 60000 of them is not a good thing.

Gander13SM
04-19-2016, 12:04 AM
1 in 5 considering they set 60000 of them is not a good thing.

They set 60000 screens per game? I highly doubt that.

Again, I think a lack of knowledge here is the issue. People think if your feet aren't set or if you move at all that it's an illegal screen, a proper understanding of the rules is required to really see what's going on here.

They do set some illegal screens, but I don't think it's more than any other team, they're just more effective at it and they don't get called quite as much as some other teams. But let's not pretend all the screens people are claiming to be illegal are actually illegal.

kobe4thewinbang
04-19-2016, 12:54 AM
If I get whistled for doing it on NBA 2K, then real players should be whistled for it too since it has a naturally big impact on a play/close game outcome. The real life referees need to get their act together. I also feel that the referees should not stop play after a big shot drops, for example Ray Allen's fatal blow to the Spurs or Paul's shot over Duncan, or the last play for the Spurs that was halted by a whistle and revealed much of the play and led to it being swatted away in a Game 7. The referees need to back the hell away from the game, or be involved when something should be whistled.

DODGERS&LAKERS
04-19-2016, 02:22 AM
Kevin Garnett should have 3000 more offensive fouls than he does because of moving screens

100% spot on! It was so upsetting. But hes smart to do it if its not called.

it makes a huge difference. Randle was throwing body blocks for Kobes last game like a full back that wern't called. That washed up old man got 60 because of it being allowed.

Chronz
04-19-2016, 01:08 PM
Stop it some nerd that got cut from his freshmen team realized 3 was worth more then 2.

Then why did they shun the 3 and go so far as to consider it a novelty instead of the weapon it should have always been? Rule changes have been in effect for a long time, 3pt line has been around even longer. Teams now understand the math that's irrefutable.

ewing
04-19-2016, 01:14 PM
Then why did they shun the 3 and go so far as to consider it a novelty instead of the weapon it should have always been? Rule changes have been in effect for a long time, 3pt line has been around even longer. Teams now understand the math that's irrefutable.

b/c creating the line didn't make people able to shoot it. its only been around since 79 in the NBA. this is the first generation of coaches and Dads that grew up with it and like Flea stated the league has made moves to open the game and this made further increased the value of shooting

Chronz
04-19-2016, 01:31 PM
b/c creating the line didn't make people able to shoot it. its only been around since 79 in the NBA. this is the first generation of coaches and Dads that grew up with it and like Flea stated the league has made moves to open the game and this made further increased the value of shooting
Here's the thing, you don't have to be a great shooter to experience the gains in efficiency from 3, especially in THAT era. They could've taken a step back and hit them less frequently than the high floor percentage from long-midrange.

Your excuse is exactly why they failed at the math and needed the egg heads to count for them. Again the thing was SHUNNED because of the league it came from.

Put it this way, Westbrook is a horrible shooter and even he would experience a massive gain in efficiency relative to that era. I get that in the 80s Russ would take less simply because he would have an easier time getting shots in the paint and in transition given the lack of zones and athletes but all those long 2s should've been replaced. i don't believe for a second that they understood the math. Too many bad jumpshots taken for that to be true.

ewing
04-19-2016, 01:47 PM
Here's the thing, you don't have to be a great shooter to experience the gains in efficiency from 3, especially in THAT era. They could've taken a step back and hit them less frequently than the high floor percentage from long-midrange.

Your excuse is exactly why they failed at the math and needed the egg heads to count for them. Again the thing was SHUNNED because of the league it came from.

Put it this way, Westbrook is a horrible shooter and even he would experience a massive gain in efficiency relative to that era. I get that in the 80s Russ would take less simply because he would have an easier time getting shots in the paint and in transition given the lack of zones and athletes but all those long 2s should've been replaced. i don't believe for a second that they understood the math. Too many bad jumpshots taken for that to be true.


I'm not making an excuse i'm nearing 40 and i was the gunner. I loved Pinito when he was calling for this when i was in grammer school and the only kid with range. 23'9 and a top of the key jumper are different shots. dudes have more range now, work on the that, are taught by dudes who have range, etc. I wasn't the only one shooting from deep consistently b/c i was smart

Chronz
04-19-2016, 01:48 PM
Ps there were guys who had deep range back then bro, it's just they were told they would get yanked if they dared rely on them outside of final options.

Chronz
04-19-2016, 01:55 PM
I'm not making an excuse i'm nearing 40 and i was the gunner. I loved Pinito when he was calling for this when i was in grammer school and the only kid with range. 23'9 and a top of the key jumper are different shots. dudes have more range now, work on the that, are taught by dudes who have range, etc. I wasn't the only one shooting from deep consistently b/c i was smart
They weren't taking them precisely because they weren't smart. Obviously we have better shooters now, but understanding the math means you can take advantage in any era. We have better shooters but everyone has caught onto the value so the potential gains are lessened in this era. Having inferior shooters doesn't exonerate the lack of attempts if you understand the math.

Do you know how bad of shooter you can be from 3 and still be more efficient than even some of the best midrange guys? All things being equal, they should've spaced the floor better

IndyRealist
04-19-2016, 01:58 PM
It's like your two crazy drunk uncles getting in a fistfight over nascar on the 4th of July.

ewing
04-19-2016, 02:05 PM
we should really arm wrestle for it

Scoots
04-19-2016, 02:09 PM
It's like your two crazy drunk uncles getting in a fistfight over nascar on the 4th of July.

Over what is a better chassis the Chevy or the Ford. (NASCAR fans will understand the extreme stupidity of that argument ... and of the NASCAR rules that created it)