The offense just isn't built for March...

Olsondogg · Post by **Olsondogg** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:48 am

As far as offense goes, I don't see us shooting as poorly as last year, be it from the field, line or the arc. However, I don't think we will be a great shooting team from the arc.

salim'sheadband · Post by **salim'sheadband** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:49 am

Exactly. Everyone should be better. Stanley will bring more to the table as a scorer than Gordon ever did. It should be good.

Chicat wrote:
salim'sheadband wrote:I am responding in earnest to the OP, no sarcasm, but this isn't rocket science. As I've said before and will continue to say throughout the season, the players just need to make shots. If you actually look at our metrics when we do that compared to other teams with so-called "good" offenses there's basically no difference. We need to make about 50% of our total field goals, 37% of our 3s, and 75% of our free throws. If we can do that we will have a top-20 (aka elite) offense - as Miller has had three previous times in his ten year career. Miller couldn't "make" Gordon make shots or free throws, or TJ, or anyone else. We just didn't have good offensive players last year. Say what you will about the "scheme" but if it were that easy to get guys open for layups all the time everyone would do it, and honestly, that's the point of the motion offense anyway.

And as someone else said, if you're going off of the "eye test" I can't help you there; I don't know how to measure subjective expectations, but I will repeat the words of Coach Wooden and remind you not to confuse activity with achievement.
We just did not have great shooters last year. Nick was Nick, but McConnell had an off year in comparison to his numbers at Duquesne, Rondae's shot was pretty bad, Gordon's wasn't that much better (and worse from the free throw line), and our best shooter went down with an injury halfway through the season. As you mentioned, without good shooters, teams will look inept on the offensive end. Shit, how many times did we as fans bitch and moan about us missing bunnies? It was like a tip drill out there at some points where it seemed like no matter how close our guys got to the basket, the ball simply would not go in even on layups.

This year we should be improved as far as shooting. I have to think that TJ will return to his past numbers. Hopefully Bash will be healthy all year. Rondae looks improved. Pitts or Gabe should give us that outside threat. And if SJ can pick and choose his spots instead of taking heat-check threes out of the rhythm of the offense like a lot of star freshman love to do, our shooting percentage will improve and this talk about Miller's offense sucking will quickly and thankfully die down.

I agree with you Odogg, but we don't need to be great. As I know you know, we just need to be good enough to force defenses to respect us and open up the lane for our bigs and slashers.

Olsondogg wrote:As far as offense goes, I don't see us shooting as poorly as last year, be it from the field, line or the arc. However, I don't think we will be a great shooting team from the arc.

Olsondogg · Post by **Olsondogg** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 9:55 am

Agreed. This team's identity will not be found beyond the arc. It is within...

Watching the game in McKale, I noticed that TJ passed up shots (again). One exhibition in, but it was addressed by him in the presser.

salim'sheadband · Post by **salim'sheadband** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:00 am

Olsondogg wrote:Agreed. This team's identity will not be found beyond the arc. It is within...

Watching the game in McKale, I noticed that TJ passed up shots (again). One exhibition in, but it was addressed by him in the presser.

11 assists though, and probably a few hockey assists too.

Olsondogg · Post by **Olsondogg** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:03 am

Yup. Nobody's ever been concerned about his passing. He needs to shoot though, for several reasons. I'm just glad he is aware of it and knows what to do. People are concerned about defense too...but I'm not as he is a bulldog on the floor.

It will be interesting to see what happens on Friday.

Longhorned · Post by **Longhorned** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:07 am

I'm becoming more and more a fan of Miller's offense. But the thing I still don't get is his repeated statements in press conferences that "good defense makes for good offense", which he specifically relates to forcing turnovers and scoring in transition. Why does he say that when his defense is aimed at forcing low-percentage shots, and does so at the expense of forcing turnovers? A disciplined Miller defense gives you the entire open court to advance the ball and passing lanes as big as parking lots in Phoenix, and then gives you nothing along the arc and nothing within the arc. There's an occasional steal and a ball that bounces off somebody's foot, but there's little to facilitate steals or loose balls in the 75+% of the court that leads to high percentage buckets.

What am I not getting about Miller's repeated comment? Does he actually encourage more aggressive, risk-taking havoc on defense than I think he does?

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:15 am

A forced bad shot is just as good as a steal when you have a great rebounding team.

Olsondogg · Post by **Olsondogg** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:18 am

Furthermore, if you run 30 plus seconds of your offense looking for a shot, and then settle for a contested jumper against taller more athletic players that is rebounded, you then have to run down and play tough defense on the other end. Over and over.

I fully expect teams to come out shooting hot against Arizona this year, from time to time. I wouldn't be surprised if we found ourselves down at half a handful of times this year. But as was the case last year, teams will wear down over time.

Plus this year the team will shoot the ball better where & when it counts.

Longhorned · Post by **Longhorned** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:36 am

Chicat wrote:A forced bad shot is just as good as a steal when you have a great rebounding team.

Thinking back to last year, did we see defensive rebounds leading to good offense? Like Rondae breaking away for the outlet pass while Gordon runs toward the bucket and York darts toward the three-point line? I seem to remember the opponent running back and TJ jogging the ball up the court while the defense gets set, TJ passing to NJ eight feet behind the arc, NJ looking toward the post and then passing it back to TJ, and then a pass to Tarc in the block, where he starts to dribble....

Don't get me wrong, I'm fully on board with the defense, and I actually like the offense. But yesterday Miller really did repeat what he says about forced turnovers leading to transition points.

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:40 am

Longhorned wrote:
Chicat wrote:A forced bad shot is just as good as a steal when you have a great rebounding team.
Thinking back to last year, did we see defensive rebounds leading to good offense? Like Rondae breaking away for the outlet pass while Gordon runs toward the bucket and York darts toward the three-point line? I seem to remember the opponent running back and TJ jogging the ball up the court while the defense gets set, TJ passing to NJ eight feet behind the arc, NJ looking toward the post and then passing it back to TJ, and then a pass to Tarc in the block, where he starts to dribble....

Don't get me wrong, I'm fully on board with the defense, and I actually like the offense. But yesterday Miller really did repeat what he says about forced turnovers leading to transition points.

We saw both, mainly because we had good leadership at the point guard and off guard positions. Throwing 70 foot outlet passes looks great on highlight reels, but a lot of times the better play is to set up your offense and look for the high percentage shot. While fast breaks are exciting, I wouldn't say that they are always "good offense".

Olsondogg · Post by **Olsondogg** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 10:43 am

Yes. Such as a missed "Top 10" dunk counts for nothing when a boring layup extends a lead or closes a gap.

gumby · Post by **gumby** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 12:28 pm

Sean Miller isn't Lute Olson, and college basketball in the Olson Era is not the same as hoops in the Miller Era.

The frustration with offense is occurring across the land. Scoring is down. Defense is better. Fewer points surrendered in transition. Underclassmen are in roles once occupied by upperclassmen. Guys that played together for three or four years now play together for one, maybe two. (It's still three/four at the non-power schools, which explains why they have more success in the tourney now).

Check out the numbers of some of our all-time greats as underclassmen. Not so great. We remember junior and senior Damon Stoudamire, not the underclassman who couldn't beat out Matt Othick. Michael Dickerson didn't start until he was a junior. Joe McLean did. Ditto, Jud B. and some others. We remember the senior season of Khalid Reeves, but if he had departed after his junior year, he would be an obscure guard who experienced two embarrassing first-round exits.

Rondae Hollis-Jefferson is considered a veteran. Last night was his first start (if not, a rare one). Brandon Ashley needs to get reoriented. Stanley Johnson needs to figure how he fits in. And others need to accommodate that.

If you're looking for the offense of 10 or 20 years ago, well, a lot of fans are. It's a mistake to say coaches are just worse now, or don't get it. You have to consider the changing landscape of hoops.

I've been frustrated, too. But our offense doesn't "suck." Compared to what? A bygone era? OK. But that's not any coach's fault. Compared to other teams? The numbers say this isn't so (unless you think only 20 to 30 teams have offenses that don't suck).

Miller is recruiting all-around players. Doesn't mean they're going to be sharp shooters. NJ, RHJ, Gordon, Ashley ... these are players you judge on all-round skills and defense. None of them is an exceptional offensive player. If you are a sharp shooter, you have to do all the other things to catch Miller's eye. He doesn't look for specialists. So to say, "We have four (or whatever) future NBA players" misses the point. Gordon and Johnson aren't in that league on the strength of their shooting. RHJ isn't getting there base on that either. His immediate selling point was being a fierce defender. Ashley, I think, has been overrated by posters for his offensive abilities.

Miller craved Justice Winslow. Shooting is not Winslow's strength. Trier looks like a guy who can fill it up, but if he doesn't do the other things, he'll ride pine.

Sure it would be nice to score more readily, but you'd be giving up more hoops, too. Scores of 88-75 would calm the worriers, I suppose. But 67-55 is a victory, too.

No coach is going to change his defense when it's one of the best in the nation. Shots won't fall like they did under Lute, because we don't have the pure shooters or players who have played together a long time. We won't zoom out to crushing first-half leads with teams predicated on wearing the opponent down.

Focus on Another Soul Crushing (for the opponents) Finish, not Another #$%#@ Slow Start.

Different era. Different coaches. The game has changed. You should, too.

P.S. I was bitching about the first half, too. Just know better than to post when I'm in that state.

Olsondogg · Post by **Olsondogg** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 12:33 pm

67-51 is a victory too

NYCat · Post by **NYCat** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 12:34 pm

Bosy Billups wrote:Not to let stats get in the way of a good story, but if I'm reading KenPom's final rankings from 2014, here they are:

1. Louisville: Adjusted O = 15, Adjusted D = 4
2. Arizona: Adjusted O = 20, Adjusted D = 1
3. Florida: Adjusted O = 18, Adjusted D = 2
4. Virginia: Adjusted O = 21, Adjusted D = 5
5. Wichita St.: Adjusted O = 8, Adjusted D = 12
6. Wisconsin: Adjusted O = 4, Adjusted D = 49
7. Tennessee: Adjusted O = 17, Adjusted D = 19
8. Connecticut: Adjusted O = 39, Adjusted D = 10

http://kenpom.com/index.php?y=2014

Moreover, how about other years?

2013
Arizona: Adjusted 0 = 10, Adjusted D = 47

2012 (obviously a transition year)
Arizona: Adjusted 0 = 86, Adjusted D = 41

2011
Arizona: Adjusted 0 = 8, Adjusted D = 88

Maybe's there is some recency bias going on here, but a top 20 O in 3 of the last 4 years does not support this thread.

Discuss...

PS - please no "doesn't pass the eye test" arguments.

Arizona was way over the plus 25 range going into the tournament, final rankings don't tell the whole story.

http://forum.goazcats.com/showpost.php? ... tcount=230

UConn won because of their great guard play (like I say every time wins the tournament).

They beat UK team which had the Harrison twins, Poythress, Cauley-Stein, Dakari, Randle, Young.

That team had better size, athleticism, talent yet lost to two guards who were hard to stop.

NYCat · Post by **NYCat** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 12:35 pm

NYCat wrote: My only concern and what this thread is about, and that's concern for the offense in March. If UA bows out in the tournament it'll be because of offense (a slow tempo, low scoring game) guarantee it.

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 12:41 pm

So you want Sean Miller to change up his offensive AND defensive philosophies? If so, in essence you're asking for someone else to coach this team.

Longhorned · Post by **Longhorned** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 12:43 pm

Great post, gumby.

And never watch an NBA game right before a college basketball game before February. You can't do that anymore. College basketball in November through January is for fans and connoisseurs of college basketball, not the general public. Just give in and consider yourself elite. There'll be no bearing your haughty looks.

NYCat · Post by **NYCat** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 12:45 pm

I still want Rich Rod, but want him to change the 3-3-5. Not much difference.

Nothing wrong with a man-to-man defense, instead of pressure man-to-man defense. Packline defense is for less talented teams, uva & Bennett is a great example.

Instead of a Donovan, Pitino defense which actually benefit the offense.

ASUHATER! · Post by **ASUHATER!** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 12:56 pm

NYCat wrote:I still want Rich Rod, but want him to change the 3-3-5. Not much difference.

Nothing wrong with a man-to-man defense, instead of pressure man-to-man defense. Defense for less talented teams, uva is a great example.

Instead of a Donovan, Pitino defense which actually benefit the offense.

Actually a huge difference. The 335 isn't rich rods. The offense and defense are both Miller's.

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 12:59 pm

I just really can't imagine anything changing the fact that Sean Miller runs a packline defense and a motion offense at any time in the near or far future.

NYCat · Post by **NYCat** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:03 pm

ASUHATER! wrote: Actually a huge difference. The 335 isn't rich rods. The offense and defense are both Miller's.

Only his if he holds on to it, styles change with the times. There's no longer widespread wishbone offenses in football. Miller has an offense of the 1980s, or a B1G team which is an insult. And its not like the teams are (east coast) tough like those of Gtown or others in the past - they're just not.

Nastiness hasn't been required in a while.

Chicat wrote:I just really can't imagine anything changing the fact that Sean Miller runs a packline defense and a motion offense at any time in the near or far future.

I don't either, but I want the change eventually.

EOCT · Post by **EOCT** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:04 pm

Nice start!!

Sorry to be a bore, but I'm sure I was watching the wrong game. Darn.

Fifty percent shooting for the game against a nice D opponent. Bash 4/6, RHJ 3/6. K 5/8, YCit 5/11(2/6), StanJ 4/8 yeah, Deuce 2/3.

Boards, + 16. Bash 7, Gabe 6, TJ 7(!!)

Dimes--TJ 11. Sweet!

What I saw in that other game:

...Excellent recovery from a stiff, nervous start. Lightning popped out of the bottle in the last 2 min of the first half.
...Balanced scoring with noteworthy sharing.
...Surprising D in the second half with personnel changing rapidly. Liked the switching for this point, and was surprised that StanJ was mostly on it. He'll be fine on D by Conference play.

Bottom line, I was surprised that after an expected tentative start we could catch the intensity by the end of the first half. I thought our flow would get interrupted badly with the personnel intros, but no. Questions about our StanJ fit? You kidding?
Frustration that TJ didn't score 39? He was a terrific distributor out there, exactly the right match for our stable.

salim'sheadband · Post by **salim'sheadband** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:15 pm

So we should change our #1 defense to help our offense? Got it.

Besides that, you're asking us to refute something yet providing no evidence yourself that a different defense would somehow help our offense. Again, noteworthy that there is no correlation between tempo or average possession length on offense and an elite or super-efficient offense. There is, however, a correlation between average possession length on defense and elite defensive efficiency. Not to mention you think we should change our offensive system notwithstanding three elite offenses in the last ten years. Forgive me if I tell you what you're saying doesn't make a lot of sense. How would you feel about our offense if Horne's 3 goes in and Nick doesn't get called for the charge?

It's not rocket science bruh. We gotta make shots.

salim'sheadband · Post by **salim'sheadband** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:18 pm

Also, there is no correlation between a high forced turnover percentage and an elite offense, so the whole "we need to force turnovers to turn into offense" doesn't really hold water. You're asserting things without data to support what you're asserting. If you show me some data backing up what you're saying I (and other people disagreeing with you) might feel differently.

TucsonClip · Post by **TucsonClip** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:23 pm

Chicat wrote:I just really can't imagine anything changing the fact that Sean Miller runs a packline defense and a motion offense at any time in the near or far future.

Exactly. Miller is not going to sacrifice his defensive philosophies in order to churn out a more exciting and higher scoring offense.

Miller starts and ends with defense. His offense is fine, albeit unexciting, and when his sets are executed well they yield good shots. There are a few wrinkles Miller will throw in from year to year to adjust for guys like BAsh and DWill or Nick Johnson, but we are going to see a lot of back screens from sets, dribble drives and penetration into kick outs.

UAGreg · Post by **UAGreg** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:27 pm

I'm guessing I'm not the only one who noticed, but there was plenty of standing around in those first 15 minutes. One guy dribbling and the rest spectating. Once the team got into a rhythm the offense flowed fine, almost flawlessly in that second half.

Standing around and not moving on offense isn't Miller's fault. Regardless, the first 15 minutes of an exhibition (and the first opponent of the year) shouldn't be used as a barometer for the rest of the season. We'll be fine.

gumby · Post by **gumby** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:31 pm

salim'sheadband wrote:So we should change our #1 defense to help our offense? Got it.

Besides that, you're asking us to refute something yet providing no evidence yourself that a different defense would somehow help our offense. Again, noteworthy that there is no correlation between tempo or average possession length on offense and an elite or super-efficient offense. There is, however, a correlation between average possession length on defense and elite defensive efficiency. Not to mention you think we should change our offensive system notwithstanding three elite offenses in the last ten years. Forgive me if I tell you what you're saying doesn't make a lot of sense. How would you feel about our offense if Horne's 3 goes in and Nick doesn't get called for the charge?

It's not rocket science bruh. We gotta make shots.

Pretty sure he'd feel the same. Feels much better to lose 90-89 (2005) and 78-75 (2003).

Both games you've noted could've been won with just one more stop, too. So, time to change the defense!

loomer · Post by **loomer** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:43 pm

salim'sheadband wrote:So we should change our #1 defense to help our offense? Got it.

Besides that, you're asking us to refute something yet providing no evidence yourself that a different defense would somehow help our offense. Again, noteworthy that there is no correlation between tempo or average possession length on offense and an elite or super-efficient offense. There is, however, a correlation between average possession length on defense and elite defensive efficiency. Not to mention you think we should change our offensive system notwithstanding three elite offenses in the last ten years. Forgive me if I tell you what you're saying doesn't make a lot of sense. How would you feel about our offense if Horne's 3 goes in and Nick doesn't get called for the charge?

It's not rocket science bruh. We gotta make shots.

This is true, just look at Duke in 2010 or Wisconsin last year. They both had elite offenses though, therefore they could play a slow tempo and still be efficient. The 2011 team got to the doorstep of a FF because of its offense, the defense was god awful by comparison. Miller's offense has been proven to be effective in the past, but I think some (including myself) are wondering whether Gottlieb may be on to something. This is why TJ and York are the keys to the season, if they can shoot 40% from 3 or greater we will be in great shape and it won't matter if our defense does limit our offensive potential.

illcat · Post by **illcat** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:54 pm

Has the starting 5 been set in stone? First game an exhibition game at that and the Cats didn't win by 40 points and some of you are ready to start jumping out of the windows.

NYCat · Post by **NYCat** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:55 pm

salim'sheadband wrote:So we should change our #1 defense to help our offense? Got it.

Besides that, you're asking us to refute something yet providing no evidence yourself that a different defense would somehow help our offense. Again, noteworthy that there is no correlation between tempo or average possession length on offense and an elite or super-efficient offense. There is, however, a correlation between average possession length on defense and elite defensive efficiency. Not to mention you think we should change our offensive system notwithstanding three elite offenses in the last ten years. Forgive me if I tell you what you're saying doesn't make a lot of sense. How would you feel about our offense if Horne's 3 goes in and Nick doesn't get called for the charge?

It's not rocket science bruh. We gotta make shots.

salim'sheadband wrote:Also, there is no correlation between a high forced turnover percentage and an elite offense, so the whole "we need to force turnovers to turn into offense" doesn't really hold water. You're asserting things without data to support what you're asserting. If you show me some data backing up what you're saying I (and other people disagreeing with you) might feel differently.

Wisconsin was 54-54 - I don't care what anyone says, if you score in the 50s by the end regulation the offense isn't good. Ohio St, the defense wasn't as good which opened up the offense more, also Ross hit an OUTSIDE shot to win. '11 vs UConn the defense was atrocious but with a great offense and DWill they where a missed shot from final four. And both those last shots were horrible plays, I mean the Nick running left fade shot?

Defense doesn't help when it slows down the tempo to the slowest of slows. There's no flow, no rhythm (not to mention Miller's constant substitution addiction), no one gets hot in this offense. Waste 25-30 seconds of shot clock then go for contested shots because no one has outside shot to give spacing. Every time anyone drives to the paint there's bodies all around. Oh wait another 30 seconds of wasted shot clock, while nothing happened. There might be a a play for an alley oop, but other then that bunch of nothing going on. Too many players playing the same way /style/position: last year Gordon/Ashley, this year RHJ, Stanley = log jam.

The offense choked on the elite eight plain and simple, they lost because the offense couldn't score in the second half. They slowed down the pace and beat the packline while being effective, can also be counterproductive as teams who slow the pace can beat them (cough Wisconsin). Probably got lucky SDSu has no offense or else that win never would've happened.

Packline gurantees slow tempo games. Which is effective when you have shooters, which Arizona does not have. Either get better shooters who can shoot in half court or loosen up on the defense to open up the offense.

TJ (actual scoring not FTs), York, (Pitts) are the keys to win in the tournament, not SJ, RHJ, Bash or anyone else.

NYCat · Post by **NYCat** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 1:58 pm

illcat wrote:Has the starting 5 been set in stone? First game an exhibition game at that and the Cats didn't win by 40 points and some of you are ready to start jumping out of the windows.

I'll say it for the 10th time, this thread isn't about the exhibition game but the offense in tournament games when the games actually matter.

UAGreg · Post by **UAGreg** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 2:00 pm

NYCat wrote:
The offense choked on the elite eight plain and simple,they lost because the offense couldn't score in the second half.

I don't know that I agree with that. I feel like we lost because Zeus couldn't guard Kaminsky and neither could anyone else on our team.

TucsonClip · Post by **TucsonClip** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 2:04 pm

NYCat wrote:I still want Rich Rod, but want him to change the 3-3-5. Not much difference.

Nothing wrong with a man-to-man defense, instead of pressure man-to-man defense. Packline defense is for less talented teams, uva & Bennett is a great example.

Instead of a Donovan, Pitino defense which actually benefit the offense.

Miller is proving that with elite athletes in his packline system, he can trot out an elite defense every year. Whats wrong with that? The advanced stats and analytic guys are not going to grade out our players very well (See Gordon, Johnson, ect. via Kevin Pelton), but Miller's system works.

gumby · Post by **gumby** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 2:05 pm

NYCat wrote:
illcat wrote:Has the starting 5 been set in stone? First game an exhibition game at that and the Cats didn't win by 40 points and some of you are ready to start jumping out of the windows.
I'll say it for the 10th time, this thread isn't about the exhibition game but the offense in tournament games when the games actually matter.

So the exhibition thread will be in March?

"I don't care what anyone says."

Says it all.

NYCat · Post by **NYCat** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 2:08 pm

UAGreg wrote: I don't know that I agree with that. I feel like we lost because Zeus couldn't guard Kaminsky and neither could anyone else on our team.

Look at the box score, first half the offense was rolling, 6-8 comfortable lead. The game wasn't as slow. Then 2nd half happens, Nick was the only one scoring but still struggling at 6/16 from the field. Rhj a bucket or 3, Tj a FT or two, Gordon being a statue and waiting to get back on defense because he couldn't score, Zeus not scoring and putting the ball on the floor led to automatic strips, York being streaky. By now the game was slow and the offense was stagnant, no flow no rhythm, a couple 2-3+ minutes without any score.

All that led to Kaminsky to take advantage and score easily, but the offensive struggles led to that. Wouldn't be as close if the offense showed up.

Merkin · Post by **Merkin** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 2:10 pm

gumby wrote: Check out the numbers of some of our all-time greats as underclassmen. Not so great. We remember junior and senior Damon Stoudamire, not the underclassman who couldn't beat out Matt Othick. Michael Dickerson didn't start until he was a junior. Joe McLean did. Ditto, Jud B. and some others. We remember the senior season of Khalid Reeves, but if he had departed after his junior year, he would be an obscure guard who experienced two embarrassing first-round exits.

Check out the redshirt and scrub players on the Gumbies. Especially the 1st and 5th players.

Both ended up in the league for 12 years.

NYCat · Post by **NYCat** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 2:26 pm

TucsonClip wrote: Miller is proving that with elite athletes in his packline system, he can trot out an elite defense every year. Whats wrong with that? The advanced stats and analytic guys are not going to grade out our players very well (See Gordon, Johnson, ect. via Kevin Pelton), but Miller's system works.

Its not needed, its made for inferior athletes. Great for the regular season, but for the post season? I'm not convinced. The defense will prevent early outings, but will get Wisconsin'd again.

Longhorned · Post by **Longhorned** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 2:32 pm

NYCat wrote: Wisconsin was 54-54 - I don't care what anyone says, if you score in the 50s by the end regulation the offense isn't good.

The offense wasn't good enough to save Arizona from an overtime loss against a 2-seed in the Elite Eight. But then again, Ashley.

NYCat wrote:Packline gurantees slow tempo games. Which is effective when you have shooters, which Arizona does not have. Either get better shooters who can shoot in half court or loosen up on the defense to open up the offense.

Arizona needs a perimeter shooting clip that matches expectations, particularly from Ashley, TJ, and York. But they no more need to make outside shots for spacing than they need to make outside shots to break a zone. They need to shoot 40% from the perimeter (which is realistic), get to the rim, and draw fouls.

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 2:35 pm

NYCat wrote:
TucsonClip wrote: Miller is proving that with elite athletes in his packline system, he can trot out an elite defense every year. Whats wrong with that? The advanced stats and analytic guys are not going to grade out our players very well (See Gordon, Johnson, ect. via Kevin Pelton), but Miller's system works.
Its not needed, its made for inferior athletes. Great for the regular season, but for the post season? I'm not convinced. The defense will prevent early outings, but will get Wisconsin'd again.

Why is it so great for the regular season and so terrible for the postseason? Is there some system out there that you think Miller should switch to that is infallible no matter what month it is? Apologies if you've already covered this.

And why do you think it's made for inferior athletes? On that one my opinion is the opposite. Inferior athletes in the post can't hedge as effectively as ours have to and do.

Longhorned · Post by **Longhorned** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 2:36 pm

NYCat wrote:
TucsonClip wrote: Miller is proving that with elite athletes in his packline system, he can trot out an elite defense every year. Whats wrong with that? The advanced stats and analytic guys are not going to grade out our players very well (See Gordon, Johnson, ect. via Kevin Pelton), but Miller's system works.
Its not needed, its made for inferior athletes. Great for the regular season, but for the post season? I'm not convinced. The defense will prevent early outings, but will get Wisconsin'd again.

What does this mean? The defense got Wisconsin'd? I thought the defense held Wisconsin to 59 points in overtime.

The idea that the packline is made for inferior athletes is often repeated but it's also an oversimplification.

salim'sheadband · Post by **salim'sheadband** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 2:36 pm

"Packline slows the tempo down" Yes, the two best defenses in the country played packline last year. So you're saying you would prefer our defense be worse? Our #1 defense? You would prefer the other team scoring more quickly for increased tempo and some perceived subjective benefit (hint: there isn't one). I mean that's basically what you're saying.

NYCat wrote:I don't like what we do on offense and I don't care what 1) the data supports, 2) the evidence shows, or 3) what any of you say.

Just be honest dude.

azcat49 · Post by **azcat49** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 2:51 pm

Well Lute had a 1 or 2 seed play Bennett at Wisky and we got beat in the second round and h e was using the pack line to beat an uptempo good metric offense that year.

Like I said, I like Miller in March, the rest is window dressing

salim'sheadband · Post by **salim'sheadband** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 3:02 pm

azcat49 wrote:Well Lute had a 1 or 2 seed play Bennett at Wisky and we got beat in the second round and h e was using the pack line to beat an uptempo good metric offense that year.

Like I said, I like Miller in March, the rest is window dressing

Well we lost 78 to 86 to Oklahoma in 1988, but at least we scored more than 60.

Longhorned · Post by **Longhorned** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 3:07 pm

salim'sheadband wrote:
azcat49 wrote:Well Lute had a 1 or 2 seed play Bennett at Wisky and we got beat in the second round and h e was using the pack line to beat an uptempo good metric offense that year.

Like I said, I like Miller in March, the rest is window dressing
Well we lost 78 to 86 to Oklahoma in 1988, but at least we scored more than 60.

Would Miller's packline have beat Billy Tubbs's boys that night? No, but Kerr shooting a little more like Kerr would have. Which brings us back to The Importance of Shooting Well Enough by I. Chuckem Freely.

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 3:14 pm

Longhorned wrote:
salim'sheadband wrote:
azcat49 wrote:Well Lute had a 1 or 2 seed play Bennett at Wisky and we got beat in the second round and h e was using the pack line to beat an uptempo good metric offense that year.

Like I said, I like Miller in March, the rest is window dressing
Well we lost 78 to 86 to Oklahoma in 1988, but at least we scored more than 60.
Would Miller's packline have beat Billy Tubbs's boys that night? No, but Kerr shooting a little more like Kerr would have. Which brings us back to The Importance of Shooting Well Enough by I. Chuckem Freely.

His brother I.P. is a much more compelling historical character.

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 3:22 pm

NYCat wrote:PS: I bet someone will bump this thread ironically during the season, I won't because its not about one game, one exhibition game or the regular season that means nothing, this thread isn't about that. Its about the games in the tournament.

The only way that someone could bump this thread ironically is if we go undefeated up to and all the way through the tourney. 40-0. Because you've centered this argument surrounding literally a couple of games that Arizona lost recently.

Here's the thing: Only one team who makes the big dance ends the season with a win. All 67 other teams will point to this aspect of their team or that aspect of their team to explain why they lost. Is it the same thing for every team? How could it be? Is it the same system and type of player who wins the championship every year? Absolutely not.

So you can argue this and argue this, right up until Sean Miller makes a Final Four, but then I suspect the argument will change to, "well, this offense and defense can win games in the regular season and early in the tourney, but the Final Four is another beast". And if he wins a natty, the argument becomes, "yeah, the offense showed up in the tourney this year, but remember that loss to _____ in the regular season? That could have easily happened again." So the only way to prove your take completely wrong is to go 40-0 . . . repeatedly.

3goggles · Post by **3goggles** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 3:26 pm

NYCat wrote:
salim'sheadband wrote:So we should change our #1 defense to help our offense? Got it.

Besides that, you're asking us to refute something yet providing no evidence yourself that a different defense would somehow help our offense. Again, noteworthy that there is no correlation between tempo or average possession length on offense and an elite or super-efficient offense. There is, however, a correlation between average possession length on defense and elite defensive efficiency. Not to mention you think we should change our offensive system notwithstanding three elite offenses in the last ten years. Forgive me if I tell you what you're saying doesn't make a lot of sense. How would you feel about our offense if Horne's 3 goes in and Nick doesn't get called for the charge?

It's not rocket science bruh. We gotta make shots.
salim'sheadband wrote:Also, there is no correlation between a high forced turnover percentage and an elite offense, so the whole "we need to force turnovers to turn into offense" doesn't really hold water. You're asserting things without data to support what you're asserting. If you show me some data backing up what you're saying I (and other people disagreeing with you) might feel differently.
Wisconsin was 54-54 - I don't care what anyone says, if you score in the 50s by the end regulation the offense isn't good.

The Championship game was UCONN 60-UK 54. So whats your point with a score around the 50-60? To me it would win you a title! With those great UCONN guards they scored 6 more points then AZ did. With a healty BASH we win that game and you know it NYCAT.

3goggles · Post by **3goggles** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 3:32 pm

azcat49 wrote:Well Lute had a 1 or 2 seed play Bennett at Wisky and we got beat in the second round and h e was using the pack line to beat an uptempo good metric offense that year.

Like I said, I like Miller in March, the rest is window dressing

Preach AZCAT I just caught a holyghost up this forum!!!

3goggles · Post by **3goggles** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 3:39 pm

NYCat wrote:
UAGreg wrote: I don't know that I agree with that. I feel like we lost because Zeus couldn't guard Kaminsky and neither could anyone else on our team.
Look at the box score, first half the offense was rolling, 6-8 comfortable lead. The game wasn't as slow. Then 2nd half happens, Nick was the only one scoring but still struggling at 6/16 from the field. Rhj a bucket or 3, Tj a FT or two, Gordon being a statue and waiting to get back on defense because he couldn't score, Zeus not scoring and putting the ball on the floor led to automatic strips, York being streaky. By now the game was slow and the offense was stagnant, no flow no rhythm, a couple 2-3+ minutes without any score.

All that led to Kaminsky to take advantage and score easily, but the offensive struggles led to that. Wouldn't be as close if the offense showed up.

Exactly these are all problems with not making a shot and not the defense brobeans!

TucsonClip · Post by **TucsonClip** » Mon Nov 10, 2014 3:59 pm

NYCat wrote:
TucsonClip wrote: Miller is proving that with elite athletes in his packline system, he can trot out an elite defense every year. Whats wrong with that? The advanced stats and analytic guys are not going to grade out our players very well (See Gordon, Johnson, ect. via Kevin Pelton), but Miller's system works.
Its not needed, its made for inferior athletes. Great for the regular season, but for the post season? I'm not convinced. The defense will prevent early outings, but will get Wisconsin'd again.

What does it matter if its not needed? Miller is proving that he can field an elite defense each year with his system and his prowess on the recruiting trail. Why do we need to trap, play aggressive and jump passing lanes to speed up the tempo to score more when Miller's system is working?

Also, if getting Wisconsin'd means holding a team to 54 points in regulation with the Final Four on the line, then sign me up. Kaminsky beat us, but needed one of the best games of his career to do so. Yes, the offense failed but im not willing to sacrifice the best portions of Miller's coaching philosophy so that we can score more points. We were 2 baskets away from 2 Final Fours.

Login • Register