Many people accuse Nash of incompetence, mainly in two directions: first, Nash does not have popovich's bravado at key moments, he does not like to call a timeout, and there is no complicated technical and tactical display; second, with a lineup of the big three, it seems that the record has little to do with Nash, and it is okay to stand there with another person.
Here the small ball from the Nets' lineup composition logic to talk about Nash's operable space, and then everyone to summarize Nash's problem is how big.
We talked earlier about the Nets' roster being a bit overkill.
Last season they were very good offensively, basically giving full play to the offensive strength of the Big Three, but their defense was almost non-existent, and many opponents were five or five, so they introduced some so-called defensive forces in the offseason. Theoretically, the Nets' tone this season is to ensure defense, not to attack indiscriminately.
But for now, we don't see this progress, and on the contrary, their offense has taken a regressive form. Of course, there are many reasons for the Nets' offensive regression, one is Harris's injury retirement, and the other is Irving's part-time job.
The absence of two key offensive players has led to offensive breaks and offensive over-concentration of the Nets, which is actually normal.
Harris had the league's best three-point shooting percentage before he retired from injury, and that's a revenue that can't be ignored. And Irving's attack is varied, and it is a force that cannot be ignored. Multiple offensive forces are reduced, and the Nets will naturally have offensive breaks.
In addition, their offense is too concentrated on Durant alone, which is also very easy to understand, after all, Durant's singles are the strongest in the league, and it is also the most time-saving and labor-saving offensive method. When the Nets lost other offensive styles, Durant was naturally the first choice. Durant, on the other hand, is generally efficient, and the offense is naturally focused on him.
If Durant isn't efficient and he'll normally give the ball to someone else, the Nets' biggest problem is this: The Nets don't have a good player in scoring sense except Mills.
Bembry, Griffin, Clarkston and others actually do not have too strong scoring ability. There are no long-range shots, the efficiency of the basket is unknown, the mid-range is basically no shot, and the role players have become people who only have a sense of participation, not someone who contributes. In such a situation, the Nets' offense focused on Durant is an inescapable reality.
But we have to look at the changes in this situation, is there anyone who still stands up?
Mills hasn't been consistent all the time, we've seen it in these games, but for the shooter, the timing of stability is more important than stability itself.
As long as Mills plays best in key moments in the playoffs, the regular season's overall inaccuracies do not affect the overall situation. He is a long-range missile set by the Nets, and it is not yet the best time to launch. This allows mills to settle in, adjust, and prevent them from being overly expected and losing their fun.
Then we have to see other people, and this person is Thomas.
Thomas' s streaking of the Spurs and his 20-plus score against the Blazers proved that he was already familiar with the environment, and it was inevitable that he would be reused next. Thomas may also offer a more competitive scoring performance, when the Nets will have an additional offensive force in addition to the Big Three.
So in this turbulent situation in a short period of time, it is better to exercise Thomas more and abandon those unrealistic fantasies.
Maybe that's exactly what the Nets do, and the people who have unrealistic fantasies are a subset of the fans. The Nets don't need complicated trades and head coaching.
From the above, you can understand that the Nets' offensive strength is basically only a few singles. The three-pointers and organizers are often absent from the lineup, and Durant, as a singles force, is the most attending. From Nash's point of view, only Durant can be applied.
This matter can only be logically analyzed, and there can only be one explanation, that is, the nets' singles power represented by Durant is far greater than the so-called correct basketball concept of conducting the ball.
They no longer need to complete the tactical purpose through the so-called rotation of the ball, and can directly be completed by various types of singles players. That's the best way the Nets offense, and it's the best way they did it during their Big Three days. When Harris returns and Mills returns, the Nets' rotations will naturally happen a lot.
In addition, from the perspective of the type of singles players, they are not players who look for teammates to cooperate in singles, they are pure singles players.
Durant has been crowned the best finisher in his career, and he has carried out this mission on any team, rarely seeing him looking for a fit in the name of singles. Naturally, he has times to look for teammates to cooperate, but it is all deliberate cooperation, a balanced way to balance for the sake of balance, rather than his singles embedded with the gene of cooperation.
His singles are so pure that they reach such heights. The situation is similar for Owen.
Irving, who tried to run as an organizational defender, did not have any results, and Irving, who became the indiscriminate tackler of the James system, really found his own value.
Irving's singles moves, more inclined to end himself than Durant's singles moves, and his various offensive skills are all inclined to end themselves. Irving's singles can only be most effective in a fully stable system, so he can't suddenly transform into a player who combines organization and tackling tough problems.
But Harden's organization and attack can be seamlessly transformed, depending on Harden's attitude.
In the Rockets, Harden was trained in this way, and also achieved top results, so at present, the Nets require Harden to improve his attack power while organizing, which is feasible, and Harden's style includes these two aspects.
So, in the Nets, from a functional point of view, Harden is asked for more players, but also the hardest players, while Durant and Irving are only asked to attack. That's the difference.
At this point, there is a conclusion:
With the Nets' lineup in place, the big three's output is enough to cover up all the team's offensive structure and interior problems, and of course, it can also cover up the problem of inaccurate shooters. When the Big Three is not complete, the gap in the ability to finish between the Big Three and the role players, as well as the technical characteristics of the Big Three, will cause all kinds of problems, but this is not enough to destroy the Nets.
Compared with the Lakers using injuries to prevaricate fans, the Nets have their correctness in taking injuries. Because the Return of the Nets' injured players can really improve the team's problems, the Lakers' improvement is completely out of the blue.
So why doesn't Nash leave class yet? Because there is no need.
Why didn't Nash come up with a wealth of tactics? Also because it is not necessary.