Motion Offense and Continuity Offense – What’s the difference?

This is a topic that pops up from time to time in coaching conversations, forums, and the like. Many people tend to equate motion offenses with continuity offenses. There are some commonalities but also some very distinct differences in meaning between the two. This article will attempt tp provide some clarification on the topic.

I’ll start with a definition of continuity

A continuity offense is an offense that can be continuously run until the offense gets a shot or runs out of time. Almost All continuities feature ball reversals and are patterned in a way that allows to the offense to continue through several reversals without having to ‘stop’. In theory, you will rarely see a continuity offense team have ‘reset’ in the way that a team does at the end of a set play that doesn’t produce a shot. One of the benefits of continuity offenses is that they emphasize team play through ball movement. Many continuity offenses are also relatively simple, especially in comparison to a true motion offense. But the key distinction to keep in mind that differentiates continuities from motion is that continuities are almost always patterned offenses that feature the same repetitive cutting and screening sequences every time the ball is reversed. For an example of a very good continuity offense, take a look at a set I’ve run with some success in the past – we called it U-Conn.

This is a very simple continuity that can be run by youth teams and high school teams alike with positive results. It can be a great set for teams that want to focus on creating post-up opportunities from a 3 out, 2 in set. Every time the ball is at a wing, the weak side post player comes off of a screen to the top of the key. This makes it easier to pass the ball into the low post because the weak side post defender becomes occupied guarding his man, and is less likely to help out on a pass to the post. This set initially draws big help defenders out of the lane where they can’t help defend the offensive post move. It is also difficult for most defenses to switch the screen on the weak side block, because in most cases this would leave the defensive point guard to defend a post player coming to the ball in the paint …causing a big-time mismatch problem.

This is not a, however, a motion offense, in my opinion. Yes, the players are moving, but the pattern basically remains the same regardless of the defense. Offensive adjustment will tend to come from the sidelines or in the form of a set play on a particular possession.

This is where a motion offense differs greatly from a simple continuity. Motion offenses do the opposite – offensive players are expected to read the defense on every screen and react. That is very different than going to a prescribed spot and running a pattern, as we do in U-Conn.

Another perspective is that a motion offense can be considered a continuity offense. The offense is expected to continuously probe the defense until it gets a good shot – like other continuities, there is no ‘end’ or ‘break’ point.

A continuity offense cannot, however, necessarily be considered a motion offense.

Something that occurs very often is that a team will run its motion but it will get stagnant, stop making reads, and do nothing more than “pass and screen away” over and over and over. This is particularly true for teams that are in the early stages of learning motion and haven’t figured out how or where to attack the defense. When that happens, a motion offense will start to look and act like a continuity offense (usually an ineffective one.)

Good motion offenses will feature all kinds of different cuts and screens, each executed based on defensive reads that may not be the same on any two consecutive trips down the floor.

A well run motion offense can take a long time to develop, but once it gets there. it can be a thing of beauty to behold. Many times, good high school motion offenses started out as simple continuities like UConn and developed over time.