Bear Down Wildcats

UCLA was able to overplay the top of the zone because their bigs completely outplayed our bigs. That took us out of our flow in the 2nd half. Really disappointed in our 4/5 guys other than Pinder.

Trier and PJC were the only guys I was thought played well. UCLA best chance at a Natty is just to hang back in that 3-2 full time. Hides Alford on defense and maximizes the effect of Ball's length and anticipation

UAEebs86 wrote:Game was lost on the offensive glass on the other end of the floor.

You're not going to win many games being outscored 19-4 on 2nd chance points. Stat of the game. Nothing else to talk about. Zone bothered us but it wasn't the determining factor in this game

But we only have 4 losses!



Bear Down!

I get where we lost the game, but there are subplots that contributed as well. going cold from 15min-3 left in the 2nd half because we couldn't penetrate a 2-3 zone is one of them.

Miller better figure this shit out or he'll leave here with the "best coach without getting to the FF" for a while.

It was a 3-2 zone

It's hard to beat a 3-2 zone when neither of your bigs have showed up and your 4 is in foul trouble.

Longhorned wrote:It's hard to beat a 3-2 zone when neither of your bigs have showed up and your 4 is in foul trouble.

Also hard to beat a team playing a 3-2 zone when you refuse to rebound on the defensive end too.

CSM says the 3-2 zone took us out of our rythmn

84Cat wrote:CSM says the 3-2 zone took us out of our rythmn

Preaching to the choir.

let's not act as if the O-reb deficit happened in a vacuum. UCLA just chillaxed in that zone all second half meanwhile our guys are running all over the dang court over screens playing super nasty pack-line defense - who is going to have the extra energy to beat the other guy for a rebound?? the less fatigued one

51%

Take Triers shooting night out of the stats and the team shot 40% from the field. It should also be noted that we shot a hell of a lot less than 51% against the zone once UCLA went to it. Hell, even Miller admitted we had problems with the zone.

Any UA fan who is still in denial about our issues with the zone is living in an alternate universe.

Cherry pick this and that and claim this and that and yes. Great job.

Watch then game on tv, listen to bilas break it down, then get back to us dog.

Arizona was atrocious from the 15 minute mark till about 3 left in the second against the zone and you know it. Everyone sitting on there ass at mckale knew it. It spoke volumes on tv. You're being willfully ignorant.

It was uCla's stellar zone. Enlighted now. Thanks.

In fact it was uCla's 3-2 that allowed Bryce Alford to outrebound everyone with Arizona written across their chest.

Olsondogg wrote:It was uCla's stellar zone. Enlighted now. Thanks.

I wonder how our season stats playing against a zone compare to our overall numbers, but that would be cherry picking, right? I have ultimate faith in Miller, but it seems pretty clear to just about everyone else watching the games that we struggle more against zone defenses.

Instead let's blame Kadeem and text him instructions before the game... Cuz he is so consistently guilty of playing hero ball. Right.

Pretend to be the ever-devoted fan of all Cats to your heart's content... But you pick and choose who to back & blame like everybody else.

We pretty much collectively played like shit (save PJC & Zo) against the #5 team in the country and lost by 3. Bums me out but I can live with it.

Time to get hot, though. Win the P12 tourney and we are the top P12 seed in the tourney.

Oregon is lucky they did not lose vs 'furd. But listen to the talking heads and you would think they are invincible.

Harvey Specter wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:It was uCla's stellar zone. Enlighted now. Thanks.

I wonder how our season stats playing against a zone compare to our overall numbers, but that would be cherry picking, right? I have ultimate faith in Miller, but it seems pretty clear to just about everyone else watching the games that we struggle more against zone defenses.

Instead let's blame Kadeem and text him instructions before the game... Cuz he is so consistently guilty of playing hero ball. Right.

Pretend to be the ever-devoted fan of all Cats to your heart's content... But you pick and choose who to back & blame like everybody else.

We pretty much collectively played like shit (save PJC & Zo) against the #5 team in the country and lost by 3. Bums me out but I can live with it.

Time to get hot, though. Win the P12 tourney and we are the top P12 seed in the tourney.

Oregon is lucky they did not lose vs 'furd. But listen to the talking heads and you would think they are invincible.

Rebounding was the cause of the loss tonight, but if you want to say it was the zone...that's your right.

I won't cherry pick, I'll just ask what Arizona's record against teams that zone is and leave it at that...then you and anyone else can continue to bitch and whine about shit that doesn't really matter anyway.

Odogg is bizzaro rise and fire wrt to Arizona and the zone.

The truth is somewhere in the middle.

CalStateTempe wrote:Odogg is bizzaro rise and fire wrt to Arizona and the zone.

The truth is somewhere in the middle.

What is Arizona's record against teams that zone?

Olsondogg wrote:51%

Cherry pick much?

dmjcat wrote:Hell, even Miller admitted we had problems with the zone.

Cant trust that guy's opinion, clearly.

Olsondogg wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:Odogg is bizzaro rise and fire wrt to Arizona and the zone.

The truth is somewhere in the middle.

What is Arizona's record against teams that zone?

What is Arizona's record vs similarly talented teams?

Give credit to not stubbing the toe vs inferior teams but the product isn't greater than the sum of the parts vs really good teams.

Two factors contributed to the loss vs ucla at home. Offense struggling and rebounding. Nearly the Cats were able to overcome.

Cats are a really good team but the offensive struggle vs talented teams who zone is keeping them back from being great.

Lets not pretend the Cats moved the ball well vs the 3 2 zone and got amazing looks every time down the floor. Every time a team zones Arizona looks lost.

I haven't watched the game yet. Did we have trouble with entry passes to our bigs?

I know people love the hyperbole that Arizona is awful against zone defense every year under Miller and blah blah blah, but the truth is no team looks great against zone defense. Your offense will always slow down and won't be at its peak. That's the whole purpose of zone defense. Now in past Miller coached Arizona teams we've had a talented wing whose a capable passer with great hands who was able to get into the middle of the zone and create either for the post players or to kick it back out to a deep shooting capable guard. Those guys were Solomon Hill and Rondae Hollis-Jefferson. What this team lacks at this point is that guy. I'd figure Rawle Alkins would be more than sufficient at this spot, but I've literally never seen him attempt to get in the middle of the zone as it's typically Lauri and Dusan who are trying to get in the middle for whatever reason. Both our 7 footers have decent hands, but truth is a smaller guard with quick hands will be able to strip them easily especially when they get pressured in the middle of the zone and it's occurred numerous times hence our guards hesitation to give it to either big in the middle of the zone.

It's very difficult to throw an entry pass against a zone defense and that's why that guy in the middle of the zone is so important. We unfortunately lack that guy or are unwilling to try somebody different in that position. I'm not sure why.

Chicat wrote:I haven't watched the game yet. Did we have trouble with entry passes to our bigs?

No, there was little opposition to the low post passes, we just rarely tried it. Late in the second half to catch up we fed Chief down low for 5 points, then decided to stop.

Who knows, maybe Miller is telling these guys to do that more (he referenced it in his post game presser), but the players just aren't executing what he's telling them to do.

Olsondogg wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:Odogg is bizzaro rise and fire wrt to Arizona and the zone.

The truth is somewhere in the middle.

What is Arizona's record against teams that zone?

That's not the correct outcome measure, something like offensive efficiency during when teams have zoned us this season vs offensive efficiency when teams don't zone us would be. That would be a lot of game watching to complete this analysis.

Bagdad OlsonBob Speaks:



Ignore what you see on the court, We have no problems with a Zone

TheGreatCatsby wrote:

Chicat wrote:I haven't watched the game yet. Did we have trouble with entry passes to our bigs?

No, there was little opposition to the low post passes, we just rarely tried it. Late in the second half to catch up we fed Chief down low for 5 points, then decided to stop.

Who knows, maybe Miller is telling these guys to do that more (he referenced it in his post game presser), but the players just aren't executing what he's telling them to do.

Interesting for sure. Torn on whether I want to watch the game or not.

There are multiple ways to attack a zone and we consistently dont do most of them. No reason Rawle cant be the Rondae in the middle of that zone. No reason awareness blind Dusan should be the guy flashing to the middle, or the guy setting high ball screens. No reason Lauri cant be the guy flashing to the middle every possession, even just to catch and immediately shoot. We see him hit contested 15 footers all the time. No reason to take our time and not deliver passes with intent until theres 10-15 left in the shot clock and waiting to probe/attack with the dribble until then either. No reason to keep the wrong personnel on the floor for huge stretches and only make the obvious changes after 4-5 minutes have passed, rather than doing so after three awful possessions. Theres a fine line between overcoaching and letting things play out, and forcing things and looking for the right shot, but both areas need a bit more of a sense of urgency when things arent going our way.

CalStateTempe wrote:Odogg is bizzaro rise and fire wrt to Arizona and the zone.

The truth is somewhere in the middle.

We went stagnant when Alford busted out the 3-2. It was not pretty, but we still shot 51% from the field.

Getting outrebounded by 7 and the way UCLA get extra backbreaking possessions out of offensive boards was the big difference. I agree that they aren't exclusive. We should have done better against the zone, but rebound better and it doesn't matter.

Here's the thing with teams zoning us, it slows down the offense and then they struggle to score. Rhythm goes out of wack, motion offense is stationary, no spacing, etc.

Doesn't mean it's the absolute kryptonite and we'll lose whenever we're zoned. We'll have a good night vs the zone one night. Right now, we can't attack it and haven't been to most of the time. Despite having the right personell to do it.

When teams like Stanford, Washington, Wazzu, Oregon St, and others zone us, we're still going to struggle to score. But ultimately Arizona will win because they have more talent, more athleticism, good coach, deep bench and probably most importantly the defense will tire out playing zone the whole game.

But now, when an equally talented and athletic teams (with better offense) zone us that's when we're in danger.

Against Oregon, we had 18 pts at the half. Even if they don't shoot 3 pointers at a ridiculous pace and hold them to say, 30 pts at the half, we're still losing by 12 pts. They completely shut down Arizona's offense, took 30 minutes to reach 40pts, I'll say that we still lose that game by at least 12 if they don't make all those 3s.

@ UCLA, in the second half we had a pretty consistent 10+ point lead. But then pretty late, Alford played a zone defense against us, and that stalled the offense and slowed down the offense. They struggled to score, and UCLA got the lead to 4 points and at one point 2. They had a chance to take the lead and the game, but then they stopped playing zone for some reason. I thought we were going to lose when they went zone that game, thankfully they quit playing it.

And this game at home vs UCLA, obviously very recent. Struggles on offense attacking the zone. Like Bilas said, Arizona will get zoned until we show we can beat it. Let's be honest, Stanford, Wazzu or a #15, #14 seed likely won't beat us playing the zone, but better teams like a #6, #7 seed will in the tournament.

This team's not losing in the first weekend.

RaisingArizona wrote:This team's not losing in the first weekend.

On talent alone

My thoughts:

We defended very well.

We played offense well enough to win, with a big drought.

We did not rebound well enough to win. Facing a zone, you want to win on the glass. Not only did we not win, we got our asses kicked.

Question: To what degree, does a zone limit your ability to get offensive rebounds, especially when players are pushed to the permitter and there is no penetration?

Our zone offense isn't very creative. Get someone at the DT line is basically it. We are so hesitant to attack it and break it down.

This game though we lost because we simply could not rebound in the second half.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:My thoughts:

We defended very well.

We played offense well enough to win, with a big drought.

We did not rebound well enough to win. Facing a zone, you want to win on the glass. Not only did we not win, we got our asses kicked.

I agree on rebounding. And that really isn't new either, we've gotten out hustled and out rebounded several times this year.

CalStateTempe wrote:Question: To what degree, does a zone limit your ability to get offensive rebounds, especially when players are pushed to the permitter and there is no penetration?

Pretty much answered your own question, that and the bigs aren't outstanding rebounders to begin with.

CalStateTempe wrote:Question: To what degree, does a zone limit your ability to get offensive rebounds, especially when players are pushed to the permitter and there is no penetration?

It should be the opposite. Man is easier to get defensive rebounds because you have a particular guy to box out. Zone doesn't have those defined 1 to 1 boxouts, so the offensive team should have an easier time sneaking into gaps for boards.

Generally, zone teams give up more offensive rebounds. That's why the second half was so frustrating. We got slapped around on our end and got nothing against their zone.

I posted a while back that you can beat a zone the ugly way by playing volleyball on the glass. We could and should do more of that. Last night, we did not rebound on either end.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:Odogg is bizzaro rise and fire wrt to Arizona and the zone.

The truth is somewhere in the middle.

We went stagnant when Alford busted out the 3-2. It was not pretty, but we still shot 51% from the field.

Getting outrebounded by 7 and the way UCLA get extra backbreaking possessions out of offensive boards was the big difference. I agree that they aren't exclusive. We should have done better against the zone, but rebound better and it doesn't matter.

At some point in the second half last night UCLA had outrebounded us 13-3 in the second half. We were up 3 or 4 in rebounding margin at halftime

rgdeuce wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:Odogg is bizzaro rise and fire wrt to Arizona and the zone.

The truth is somewhere in the middle.

We went stagnant when Alford busted out the 3-2. It was not pretty, but we still shot 51% from the field.

Getting outrebounded by 7 and the way UCLA get extra backbreaking possessions out of offensive boards was the big difference. I agree that they aren't exclusive. We should have done better against the zone, but rebound better and it doesn't matter.

At some point in the second half last night UCLA had outrebounded us 13-3 in the second half. We were up 3 or 4 in rebounding margin at halftime

That's why I think it is legit to blame the boards for the loss moreso than the zone. You can win with the offensive production we got. I don't think you can reasonably expect to beat a really good team rebounding like that.

Zo weighs in.

Its not rocket science look up the stats every game we lost (or almost did) was lost on the boards or in the post...

Millers offense was tailored this year to run through the bigs, I think he did this to balance guys like Trier and Kobi who are supposed to be able to create their own shot anytime they want it...made sense at the beginning of the year it would distribute scoring across the whole team...

But if you look at the metrics every time we lost (Oregon being a slight outlier due to the three point apocalypse that rains on us at least once a year) it was when our bigs played soft on the glass...hell Travis Reed almost single handedly beat us (although in fairness he almost beat Oregon as well)...games where we do not rebound we lose plain and simple.

The guards pretty much did their job, Trier had a season high almost doubling any other player on the court, but you can't have 2 fucking 7' players ONLY getting 8 rebounds total, hell our guards out rebounded our bigs...

You cannot play small ball using big lumbering players, if you're not going to dominate the glass get the fuck out of the game and let the little guys do it for you...

There have been games when we could not box out a junior high girls squad...this was one of them...the other games speak for themselves...I honestly think we have lost a key aspect of our coaching when we lost Joseph Blair, we need a good "in your face" big coach...granted his best work was probably Zeus, but still considering what he had to work with I think he is the biggest thing this team is missing...a good NBA level big assistant coach.

Our current bigs are soft as fish.

Merkin wrote:Zo weighs in.

look out?

I don't speak emoji.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

rgdeuce wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:Odogg is bizzaro rise and fire wrt to Arizona and the zone.

The truth is somewhere in the middle.

We went stagnant when Alford busted out the 3-2. It was not pretty, but we still shot 51% from the field.

Getting outrebounded by 7 and the way UCLA get extra backbreaking possessions out of offensive boards was the big difference. I agree that they aren't exclusive. We should have done better against the zone, but rebound better and it doesn't matter.

At some point in the second half last night UCLA had outrebounded us 13-3 in the second half. We were up 3 or 4 in rebounding margin at halftime

That's why I think it is legit to blame the boards for the loss moreso than the zone. You can win with the offensive production we got. I don't think you can reasonably expect to beat a really good team rebounding like that.

The rebounding was the biggest killer for certain. Followed by that 5 or 6 minute dry spell in the 2nd half. That second half drought came when UCLA became more committed to that zone and aside from that time we weren't putting points on the board, it was huge because it killed off the momentum we had going into the locker room.

CalStateTempe wrote:Question: To what degree, does a zone limit your ability to get offensive rebounds, especially when players are pushed to the permitter and there is no penetration?

We had to get back on d before they score so our chances for offensive boards were limited.

84Cat wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:Question: To what degree, does a zone limit your ability to get offensive rebounds, especially when players are pushed to the permitter and there is no penetration?

We had to get back on d before they score so our chances for offensive boards were limited.

I (as I am sure many others too) noticed that once the ball goes up, the entire UA team goes back on defense. If the Cats had 1 or 2 guys crashing the boards, they would have gotten a lot more rebounds. Several UCLA had to chase down that would have gone to Arizona if they team had anyone there.

Is that stat good or bad. I honestly don't know.