Pick N roll or Moving Screen

[TimTaylor]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
[

Posts are supposed to screen, then reverse pivot toward middle, which places them just ouside the lane, just above the blocks. No point in going further, they would roll into each other. They screen, seal, and pop to the elbow if the wings do not open up.

We also use the screen and seal on many differnt inbounds plays. And even pick and roll is a pick, reverse pivot toward basket, then movement.

So you are right that pick and roll involves movement, but many screening actions do not involve the screener leaving that immediate area. It really depends on the situation. [/B]

I agree completely - just that I differentiate the classical pick & roll from a screen & seal move and was addressing the former. We also used many variations of screens, including down screens & several inbounds plays as you described.

My favorite offensive component was pass, then screen away from the ball. I'd start them on it in 5th grade and gradually spoonfeed plays built on that premise until by 7th or 8th they were able to execute a reasonably effective dummied down version of UCLA's motion offense.

I do agree with Camron - if the screen was illegal and IMO the resulting contact created a disadvantage for the defender, even without displacement, I will call the foul.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by CYO Butch
Can I quote you to my team? Better yet, do you want to coach my team? (The dark side beckons, Rainmaker. Remember the dark side allows you to howl and rant at officials, and you don't have to worry about rules, mechanics, dressing properly, or even acting human.)

Go ahead and quote me. I doubt I'll take up coaching any time soon. When my daughter played and I sat and criticized the refs, it led me into this endeavor here -- and a new level of humility. Reffing looked so easy, but woooo-hooo, it's not. Coaching has never looked easy, so I don't think I could even attempt to find out. I cannot imagine sitting on the sidelines watching kids do what they're not supposed to, and having no way to "fix" it. At least as a ref, I can retreat into "neutrality".

[Hawks Coach]

Originally posted by rainmaker
I cannot imagine sitting on the sidelines watching kids do what they're not supposed to, and having no way to "fix" it.[/B]

You can always fix it, just not always that day. That's what the practice court is for. If you teach them right, and over enough time with enough repitition, they will play well. If not, it's back to practice til you get it right.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by zebraman

Fair enough then.. even though the main thing I am looking for is what the screen does to the defender. I was apparently misled by your post that said, "Not only should their be contact on a screen, there should be displacement as well." Then further misled by your later post that said, "I still would want displacement at the levels I work." Then I was misled once again by your post that said, "And even in the rules is suggests that displacement still needs to be present on any screen."

Z

The rule speaks for itself. They ask for displacement as one of the things that should be there and that is what I am looking for with most screens. I am sorry that you are fixated on this one word, but I am not calling a foul for when a player makes no attempt to go thru that screen and the screener did not allow the proper time and distance. If that confuses you, then you will be confused. But displacement is a big part of that for me. Again, we all do not have the same judgment. In my mind, it does not take a lot of contact to displace someone, but I am not calling a foul for a player that just gives up on the play. Sorry, I just am not.

Peace

[Hawks Coach]

jrut
I agree 100%, and I think that your posts were quite clear and appropriate on this subject. If the defedner tries to go through and the offensive player knocks him off his path, holds him, etc., you have a foul. If the defender just stops on slight contact, you have a defender who isn't working too hard to play defense.

[PGCougar]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
jrut
I agree 100%, and I think that your posts were quite clear and appropriate on this subject. If the defedner tries to go through and the offensive player knocks him off his path, holds him, etc., you have a foul. If the defender just stops on slight contact, you have a defender who isn't working too hard to play defense.

Problem becomes when the defender works a bit too hard and knocks down the screener, getting called for the foul. This is why it's so important to get the kids to call out the screens loud and early.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach

We start our offense with guards in the blocks, posts out on the wings. The entries come from the posts screening down, gards pop to wings. Posts are supposed to screen, then reverse pivot toward middle, which places them just ouside the lane, just above the blocks. No point in going further, they would roll into each other. They screen, seal, and pop to the elbow if the wings do not open up.

We also use the screen and seal on many differnt inbounds plays. And even pick and roll is a pick, reverse pivot toward basket, then movement.

So you are right that pick and roll involves movement, but many screening actions do not involve the screener leaving that immediate area. It really depends on the situation. [/B]

What's a screen & seal?

Sounds like something I might put in my transmission.

[Jimgolf]

I don't think anyone answered the original question. TigerBBall asked "whether moving after contact is legal", and everyone is responding about whether or not movement before the screen is legal. If I can paraphrase, A1 sets screen. B2 makes contact. TigerBBall is telling his players that after contact, they should "pivot() and us(e) their backside to contact the defender"(B2). Is this legal?

To me, this is legal contact, the same as boxing out.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Jimgolf
I don't think anyone answered the original question. TigerBBall asked "whether moving after contact is legal", and everyone is responding about whether or not movement before the screen is legal. If I can paraphrase, A1 sets screen. B2 makes contact. TigerBBall is telling his players that after contact, they should "pivot() and us(e) their backside to contact the defender"(B2). Is this legal?

To me, this is legal contact, the same as boxing out.

Actually, if you look back, I think that you'll find that both Camron and I did answer it. If the screener moves into the defender after contact, it's illegal contact on the screener's part. The defender is entitled to their spot on the floor, and can't be legally crowded out of that spot. The screener can stay as close to the defender as he can get, but the screener cannot move into the defender.

[Jimgolf]

Jurassic,

Your first reply said ... "Coach, pivoting and then using their backsides is illegal. The screener has to hold their position on the "pick" part of a "pick 'n' roll" until they feel the contact, then roll. Or "roll" without contact. If they pivot and roll before the contact, it's usually an illegal screen. Whether it gets called or not is another story."

I think what TigerBBall is asking is after contact, can the screener maintain contact with the defender, by pivoting, and thus keep the defender from catching up with his original assignment. In other words, what can the screener do after the screening contact has been established legally? Obviously, the screener can roll away from the contact, but can the screener legally move while maintaining contact? IMHO, the screen has ended and determination of whether a foul has occurred now follows normal guidelines, i.e., displacement, unfair advantage, illegal use of hands, etc. Or is this blocking? If so, why is there a difference between this and boxing out for a rebound? And if I'm misunderstanding the whole discussion, I apologize.

[Hawks Coach]

This was asked and answered by several of us. Screen, contact, pivot before defender starts moving, seal defender (slight contact ok, no displacement) - legal. Pivot with no contact - clearly can't be a foul. Pivot into path of a defender who has changed directions or made contact and subsequently started to cut around screen - foul. Pivot into defender with displacement - foul. Pivot before contact, thus taking away defender's line of motion, subseqquent contact by defender - foul.

jrut further added that slight contact on any of these where the defender appears to quit on the play - no foul. Defnse has to be trying to go somewhere with offense obstructing them to get the foul. These are about all the variations I can think of on this, but I am sure there are more. What more are you looking for here?

[Jimgolf]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
Screen, contact, pivot before defender starts moving, seal defender (slight contact ok, no displacement) - legal.

Actually, I was looking for this particular statement to be verified by a referee. I thought that all who were saying this were coaches. I must have missed something. Thanks for your response.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
This was asked and answered by several of us. Screen, contact, pivot before defender starts moving, seal defender (slight contact ok, no displacement) - legal. Pivot with no contact - clearly can't be a foul. Pivot into path of a defender who has changed directions or made contact and subsequently started to cut around screen - foul. Pivot into defender with displacement - foul. Pivot before contact, thus taking away defender's line of motion, subseqquent contact by defender - foul.

jrut further added that slight contact on any of these where the defender appears to quit on the play - no foul. Defense has to be trying to go somewhere with offense obstructing them to get the foul. These are about all the variations I can think of on this, but I am sure there are more. What more are you looking for here?

Agree with the Coach's summary. Please note that the same principles outlined above also apply to players blocking an opponent out on a rebound.

[Hawks Coach]

Jurassic confirmed my summary. Jrutledge amplified on and confirmed my summary. If one of us coaches says something that the other refs don't think is right, they will be more than happy to make their opinion known. So at least two supported this opinion, no strong feelings against - consider it to be good.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Jimgolf

Actually, I was looking for this particular statement to be verified by a referee. I thought that all who were saying this were coaches. I must have missed something. Thanks for your response.

Jim, from a further post of mine on P.2,- "Finally, just as you said, I look at the screener to see if they roll into the defender. If so, and the contact gives them an advantage- illegal block". That statement applies for both cases - initial contact on the screen, and further contact after legal initial contact.

Just as an aside, Hawks Coach has a very good understanding of the rules and how they are applied, as do other coaches who post here also.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Apr 5th, 2004 at 09:39 AM]