Looking for some advice on running the motion offense...for a while I put the distro at around 12-13 for my main 2-3 guys in the starting lineup but for the past few games I decided to go all even at around 12. Any opinions on that...I know the better players the better results but I can't seem to get over the hump.

Motion demands some semblance of balance, but you don't want to go even across the board. Get the ball to your best players more often, and keep it out of the hands of your frosh.

There is no formula, but I like what you were doing before better.

I like the motion offense, but at the same time I dont. On the WIS hoops 101 page the cons of motion is "more talented players will not be utilzied as much". This sounds like to me that if you put up a bunch of distro to your best player, he wont get as much shots as you would like. When I use to run motion this was the problem I had. Thats why I stick with Triangle. Triangle seems to be the best offense to give distro to 2 or 3 of your best players and seems to work out better that way in terms of distro.

MOtion seems to be a better offense if you have a ton of depth on your roster.

What's your starting 5? - I would probably go with - Trey Peterson, Kees, Metzinger, Rech and Kilberg. - Bench of - Nevels, Glover, Fontenot, Riney, Mckinley. With Rich Backing up on 3rd string both the pg and sg. Neal Redshirted.

Pirate...my starting five is almost what you had...it is metzinger, kees, riney, rech and kilberg.

Pirate...I dont want to start one of my PG's at SF because of the penalty or I would.

i have allways found these threads very interesting.

now, i gotta admit there are usually very few coaches who tinker and micro-manage and generally overthink than me.

But, when it comes to intricate differences between the three basic offnenses (fastbroke aside) i just have never seen these drastic differences that are alluded to in the FAQ and that others seem to live by.

As for the specific question of distro for motion offense, ... i prettymuch do it like i would with any other offense. i guess i do try to develop a bit of a more balanced scoring team.... A BIT. and that is in development when i am deciding which players to recruit or how to coach them up.

once i have the players? the distro i would use for mo is no more than couple of points different than what i would use for triangle.

take a look at my oneonta-iba team currently. not my best team, by any stretch, but a decent team. and clearly NOT a team that i would want to run an even distro on. There are clearly two or three players that are going to carry the load. They are just better scorers. period. so why wouldnt i give them more touches?

On a related note, I have even seen "Bingball" work fairly well with the motion offense. (Bingball= give your starting SG 60-70 distro and your backup SG all the rest and have them jack up threes at will) After seeing that offense work fairly well, I decided that there was no reason to "even out the distro" with motion offense. Like I said, try to get a more balanced scoring group (read into that: put a premium on recruiting offensive players as opposed to defensive players.) but i would never give distro to a player that didnt deserve it.

one thing i like to look at once the season gets unnderway is: who has the best shooting percentage? To me, it is a no brainer to give the guys with great shooting percentages more distro. (now, this only works up to a point. if you go overboard, the player's shooting percentage will drop too much.) (Also, make sure to take note of the number of turnovers each player has. If they have an excessive number of TO's, perhaps you dont want to up thier distro even if they are shooting well)

Obviously your have to treat threepointshooters a bit differently. but you can figure that one out.

for your team, it seems to me that Rech and Glover deserve more shots. Even though Rech doesnt look like a scorer with his low LP, but his ATH/sp must be servng him well.

Id prolly play peterson a bit more and get him more shots too.

Quote: Originally posted by nwphotog on 1/10/2010Pirate...I dont want to start one of my PG's at SF because of the penalty or I would.

the penalty is really not that big of a deal. i wouldnt let it keep me from starting the players that i wanted to.

The reason i started metzinger at 3 in my mock lineup of your squad first of all he's 6'4 guard, with decent reb for a pg 24, he gets a lot of steals 1.6 per game, he's athletic and has speed to motor by SF plus he's not bringing up the ball a lot to where he's turning it over almost 3 times per game. Peterson who can give you a scoring option at the pg this year he's at 45% from three in limited tries assist to turnover ratio 2 to 1 almost (1.7apg, 0.9tpg)

6'4" is irrelevant. other than that there is some good rationale there

pi-fan, i also gotta disagree a bit on your logic for Peterson at PG.... assist to TO is a nice stat to look at... but you have to be sure you are comparing apples to apples. in comparing Peterson to metzinger, you gotta remember that metz is going up agains the other team's first string defense. and is playing PG (PG's suffer far more TO's than other positions) not sure where Peterson has been playing.

with metz's bh/pa IQ and decent speed, id be hard pressed to start anyone else at PG. unless i felt the need for more DE , in which case i would go with Kees.

I've played mostly motion offense with everyone set at 0 for a while now. The key is good passers. The "cream" will almost always rise to the top, in other words the better offensive players will usually take more shots, and it allows good passers to flurish in this offense, which they should. Just be sure to recruit players that can pass the ball...

interesting point, bd. i suppose that the better players will tend to take more sots, even with distro at zero, but i gotta believe that a well-thought-out distro would give you a little better shot distribution in the long run and maybe win a couple more games than the zero distro.

i do agree 100% that passing is very important in the motion offense. What I find a bit odd is that your LakeSup-Naismith team is such a horrible passing team. Granted, your PG is a great passer and your backup PG is on his way to being very good also, but after that... the PA ratings are just downright horrible.

I really dont mean to hate on you, bd, but Im trying to figure out why your team is so different than your stated theory. Do you feel that PG is the only position that requires good PA? or maybe you have just had a couple recruiting classes that didnt turn out like you had hoped? or maybe your theory was developed after seeing how much poor passing can affect a motion offense?

again, sorry for raggin on you, bd, but just triyng to figure out what your theory is.