Bear Down Wildcats

For the people who value the advanced stats, one that I think will matter heavily is AdjD. We are very good offensively, and D is likely a huge determinant of where we go.

So, as of the new year, KenPom has our AdjD at 97.2 (lower being better) and 51st nationally. I wish I'd been tracking this earlier so I could have its evolution, but that's why I started this thread, as a cheap tracking tool for people without KenPom paid access.

As a comparison point, we ended last year at 95.1 and 29th nationally. 13-14 is our gold standard year, being 86.4 and #1 nationally.

Here's hoping that 97.2 comes down a bit.

Thanks, I miss KenPom. I loved him when he was free. I don't have access now, so I appreciate your efforts. I agree that getting the D in order is the key to our success. I think the Big 3 with a little help from their friends will take care of the O.

DiehardDave37 wrote:Thanks, I miss KenPom. I loved him when he was free. I don't have access now, so I appreciate your efforts. I agree that getting the D in order is the key to our success. I think the Big 3 with a little help from their friends will take care of the O.

Isn't that stat, plus others, on the homepage? I can see every teams adj d/o plus other stats just by going to the free website.

DiehardDave37 wrote:Thanks, I miss KenPom. I loved him when he was free. I don't have access now, so I appreciate your efforts. I agree that getting the D in order is the key to our success. I think the Big 3 with a little help from their friends will take care of the O.

Yeah, I liked KenPom, but I'm not paying for access as a casual fan.

I'd generally tracked our ranking vs other teams, but the raw AdjD is the big number, and I figured it would be nice to keep an update from the free info. If we could work our way down to where we were last year, that would be a great goal. It would be competitive, and mean we were actually peforming better than last year down the stretch.

Offensively, I have no worries we will be good enough. Being strong on D and the glass, and doing both of those at the same time, that's the big thing.

Kenpom is still using data from last year for about another week or two, so it's the better time to start tracking it tbh

SunnyAZ wrote:

DiehardDave37 wrote:Thanks, I miss KenPom. I loved him when he was free. I don't have access now, so I appreciate your efforts. I agree that getting the D in order is the key to our success. I think the Big 3 with a little help from their friends will take care of the O.

Isn't that stat, plus others, on the homepage? I can see every teams adj d/o plus other stats just by going to the free website.

Thanks, Once he started charging, I stopped using him. I didn't realize that he still had some good free stuff.

SunnyAZ wrote:

DiehardDave37 wrote:Thanks, I miss KenPom. I loved him when he was free. I don't have access now, so I appreciate your efforts. I agree that getting the D in order is the key to our success. I think the Big 3 with a little help from their friends will take care of the O.

Isn't that stat, plus others, on the homepage? I can see every teams adj d/o plus other stats just by going to the free website.

Yeah, you just lose the tracking over time aspect (unless someone knows how to get that for free). I was looking to exploit the free info on the home page to create a bit of tracking here.

Pomeroy AdjD Rank for Arizona:

2003 - 7
2004 - 133
2005 - 36
2006 - 43
2007 - 72
2008 - 60
2009 - 142
2010 - 108
2011 - 71
2012 - 43
2013 - 32
2014 - 1
2015 - 3
2016 - 41
2017 - 28

Median AdjD Rank for NCAA Champions over that period = 9. Mean = 11. 14 out of 15 were 19 or better (exception was Duke in 2015 at 54).

I pay for KenPom (cmon y’all, it’s like a dollar a month) but I don’t know that he provides tracking over a single season. Monthly changes would be great to see.

I noted our improvement in points per possession given up in another thread (something like 1.05 -> 0.97 in games before vs after Atlantis, lower being better). I don’t know how well that improvement is reflected in the KenPom numbers but it’s there.

Saw this analysis of total adjusted efficiency (O and D) by month:



We got way better in December vs Nov. Tenth best, which feels appropriate.

Asu is #9 in December?

Causing turnovers, pressure by the press?

Asu, to their credit have improved from a adj d in the mid to high 100s to low 100 currently

RondaeShimmy wrote:Asu is #9 in December?

Causing turnovers, pressure by the press?

Asu, to their credit have improved from a adj d in the mid to high 100s to low 100 currently

Both O and D. ASU is waaay m9re O than D. We're a bit more balanced.

Looks like Utah's 3pt barrage dropped the defense to #61

Arizona had to work so hard for all their points (and dropped their AdjO in the process). Utah scored with way too much ease and efficiency from behind the arc. I think it mostly comes down to just a really rough road game for any team with a target on its chest.

They did have a ton of open looks. Always seems to be the case when we play those guys and the common denominator is the guy on the sidelines. Im glad Utah isnt super loaded all the time - Altman and Larry K are the only coaches in the conference who can consistently get their guys make our guys go through a gauntlet to win.

RondaeShimmy wrote:Looks like Utah's 3pt barrage dropped the defense to #61

It should drop. Our 3 point D was not good. They made a lot of them, but we didn't make it hard.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

RondaeShimmy wrote:Looks like Utah's 3pt barrage dropped the defense to #61

It should drop. Our 3 point D was not good. They made a lot of them, but we didn't make it hard.

Looked like we got lazy in the second half after being up a dozen the whole game. Made it too easy for them and then they got their home crowd mojo going.

75

Yikes

It's actually 77 currently

That's just how horrible a game it was. The high altitude, short turnaround excuse doesn't explain how Arizona had energy in the second half. Would be a more honorable loss if they came out that way at the start of the game and lost their legs down their stretch. The team still needs to learn what it takes to win against any power conference opponent. The upperclassmen have no excuse for not helping the leadership on that one.

No. 82 now

keep in mind that it's been only a couple of days since the Kenpom data has been using data from only this year. Before it was still using data from last year.

And asu has overtaken in the overall rankings btw

RondaeShimmy wrote:No. 82 now

keep in mind that it's been only a couple of days since the Kenpom data has been using data from only this year. Before it was still using data from last year.

And asu has overtaken in the overall rankings btw

My bad Kenpom updated today's games to the database

Offense is now no. 13, defense is no. 65

Asu is still ahead of Arizona though,

RondaeShimmy wrote:

RondaeShimmy wrote:No. 82 now

keep in mind that it's been only a couple of days since the Kenpom data has been using data from only this year. Before it was still using data from last year.

And asu has overtaken in the overall rankings btw

My bad Kenpom updated today's games to the database

Offense is now no. 13, defense is no. 65

Asu is still ahead of Arizona though,

The volatility is the frustrating part on D. We clearly have the ability to move in the right direction, but haven't been.

The second most frustrating part is the pattern I've posted about with the inability to be good on the glass and on D at the same time. Games like Utah, we hammered them on the glass and the D was bad. Last night, the D was solid and we gkt outrebounded for most of the game.

Virginia is number 1 in adjd running the packline.

jsbowl16 wrote:Virginia is number 1 in adjd running the packline.

Tony Bennett, is hands down the best teacher of the Packline, has had the #1 AdjD before, and has never made it past the Elite 8 in the NCAA's.

KaibabKat wrote:

jsbowl16 wrote:Virginia is number 1 in adjd running the packline.

Tony Bennett, is hands down the best teacher of the Packline, has had the #1 AdjD before, and has never made it past the Elite 8 in the NCAA's.

I would say Dick Bennett is a better teacher of the packline since he invented it and he was in a final four in 2000 with Wisconsin.

KaibabKat wrote:

jsbowl16 wrote:Virginia is number 1 in adjd running the packline.

Tony Bennett, is hands down the best teacher of the Packline, has had the #1 AdjD before, and has never made it past the Elite 8 in the NCAA's.

There are a few constants in life.

Death.
The sun rising in the East.
Any mention of the packline prompting a "midmajor" or "Elite Eight ceiling" comment.

Virginia's mid-major defense has held NC State to 42 points with 4:28 left in the second half. First place and 5-0 in ACC. Their only loss was at WVU. Bennett has done very well with almost no top 100 players.

72/71 after oregon btw

The more I watch our D and the more I watch other teams, I'm beginning to think we just don't play physical enough with our on the ball defense. It's almost as though we're afraid of contact. Sometimes it's important to set a defensive tone by really getting physical with an offensive player who looks to penetrate. When we do reach for a steal, it's tentative. Sometimes a good, hard foul sets mental tone on an opponent that nothing in the paint will come easy. The more physical you are early in the game also sets the bar higher for officials to call the game. It's okay to commit an obvious foul where a defender deters an offensive player from dribble penetration. The rest of the game the offensive player is going to have that in the back of his mind. I'm not suggesting committing senseless fouls and getting into foul trouble early. But I see the opponents almost setting the tone against our defenders by driving early and our defense playing passive and not wanting to get whistled for a foul and getting in foul trouble. PJC & Trier are almost afraid to pick up early fouls because it could mean an exit to the bench. Maybe that's by design. But I think we need to "give a few" to really set the tone as a more physical team.

TatetheGreat wrote:Virginia's mid-major defense has held NC State to 42 points with 4:28 left in the second half. First place and 5-0 in ACC. Their only loss was at WVU. Bennett has done very well with almost no top 100 players.

He recruits guys that fits his system to a tee. Sean Miller on the other hand...

ChooChooCat wrote:

TatetheGreat wrote:Virginia's mid-major defense has held NC State to 42 points with 4:28 left in the second half. First place and 5-0 in ACC. Their only loss was at WVU. Bennett has done very well with almost no top 100 players.

He recruits guys that fits his system to a tee. Sean Miller on the other hand...

Are you saying Kobi Simmons and Trier doesn't fit that

ChooChooCat wrote:

TatetheGreat wrote:Virginia's mid-major defense has held NC State to 42 points with 4:28 left in the second half. First place and 5-0 in ACC. Their only loss was at WVU. Bennett has done very well with almost no top 100 players.

He recruits guys that fits his system to a tee. Sean Miller on the other hand...

If we played Virginia's offense, people's heads would explode. We get criticism here for Miller's offense, but VA's O makes ours look like the Showtime Lakers.

Miller's recruiting has been less specific and including more offense.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

TatetheGreat wrote:Virginia's mid-major defense has held NC State to 42 points with 4:28 left in the second half. First place and 5-0 in ACC. Their only loss was at WVU. Bennett has done very well with almost no top 100 players.

He recruits guys that fits his system to a tee. Sean Miller on the other hand...

If we played Virginia's offense, people's heads would explode. We get criticism here for Miller's offense, but VA's O makes ours look like the Showtime Lakers.

Miller's recruiting has been less specific and including more offense.

I certainly don't disagree with you there. I'm just a critic of the packline in general. Bennett recruits guys who mentally and to a lesser extent physically fit the mold of a packline defender, while Miller just goes for the best talent possible and tries to fit them into the packline square peg/round hole type deal. That's my beef overall.

ChooChooCat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

TatetheGreat wrote:Virginia's mid-major defense has held NC State to 42 points with 4:28 left in the second half. First place and 5-0 in ACC. Their only loss was at WVU. Bennett has done very well with almost no top 100 players.

He recruits guys that fits his system to a tee. Sean Miller on the other hand...

If we played Virginia's offense, people's heads would explode. We get criticism here for Miller's offense, but VA's O makes ours look like the Showtime Lakers.

Miller's recruiting has been less specific and including more offense.

I certainly don't disagree with you there. I'm just a critic of the packline in general. Bennett recruits guys who mentally and to a lesser extent physically fit the mold of a packline defender, while Miller just goes for the best talent possible and tries to fit them into the packline square peg/round hole type deal. That's my beef overall.

Yeah, I think we agree. I think it's fair to say Bennett gets packline guys and hopes he can mold the remainder of their game into something that can win. Miller gets talent and hopes he can mold it to the packline.

It's two different approaches and both come with pros and cons. I'm sure there's a UVA message board where someone blames Bennett's "EE Ceiling" on recruiting less talented guys who fit the packline.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

TatetheGreat wrote:Virginia's mid-major defense has held NC State to 42 points with 4:28 left in the second half. First place and 5-0 in ACC. Their only loss was at WVU. Bennett has done very well with almost no top 100 players.

He recruits guys that fits his system to a tee. Sean Miller on the other hand...

If we played Virginia's offense, people's heads would explode. We get criticism here for Miller's offense, but VA's O makes ours look like the Showtime Lakers.

Miller's recruiting has been less specific and including more offense.

I certainly don't disagree with you there. I'm just a critic of the packline in general. Bennett recruits guys who mentally and to a lesser extent physically fit the mold of a packline defender, while Miller just goes for the best talent possible and tries to fit them into the packline square peg/round hole type deal. That's my beef overall.

Yeah, I think we agree. I think it's fair to say Bennett gets packline guys and hopes he can mold the remainder of their game into something that can win. Miller gets talent and hopes he can mold it to the packline.

It's two different approaches and both come with pros and cons. I'm sure there's a UVA message board where someone blames Bennett's "EE Ceiling" on recruiting less talented guys who fit the packline.

Oh absolutely and in both instances the catalyst to blame is the Packline.

Interesting article in the athletic by KenPom regarding teams ability to get better defensively and ultimate results in the tournament. It is behind a paywall... but the net takeaway statistically was not good for us.

Still hold out hope. I will get to see the cats live tomorrow and up close. Hoping to see defensive intensity.

baycat93 wrote:Interesting article in the athletic by KenPom regarding teams ability to get better defensively and ultimate results in the tournament. It is behind a paywall... but the net takeaway statistically was not good for us.

Still hold out hope. I will get to see the cats live tomorrow and up close. Hoping to see defensive intensity.

There are exceptions, like Duke's most recent title team. Whether we can be an exception to the general rule...we'll see.

ChooChooCat wrote: Oh absolutely and in both instances the catalyst to blame is the Packline.

It seems that Miller is willing to let some of the control of the Packline go when it is needed. It usually revolves around trust but I could have sworn I saw some defensive play this past weekend that evinced some loosening up. The most obvious example to me was Miller's willingness to let TJ jump passing lanes over the line off the ball once he trusted TJ's instincts and recognized the positives outweighed the negatives (I have always HATED overplay because there is always a "hero" who jumps every single passing lane and leaves his team playing 5 on 4. I thought Wojo at Duke was guilty of this and was NEVER called out on it...he jumped the lane and overplayed and even dove, sliding right out of the frame over and over, leaving his team at a disadvantage if the opposition was good enough to take advantage. For every breakaway dunk, you get 3 or 4 lost defensive possessions if you don't pick your spots to overplay...unless you completely overwhelm the other team's guards). The one thing I like about the packline is you know you have 5 defenders, and 5 rebounders, and if everyone does their job, you won't give up stupid looks (note...I said "if everyone does their job").

The packline was very effective when we had RHJ and AG...shit, what defense wouldn't have been? But especially because we were so long, athletic, and the "weakness" of giving up 3 looks was incredibly mitigated by having AG or RHJ sprint out on the shooter. Sure, WisconsinIvanDrago hit rainmaker after rainmaker, but the degree of difficulty was Chinese Diver-level.

The problem is, what if your wings are not particularly big (Gabe), or not particularly experienced on when to stay and when to close. That's why I truly believe this defense is more about March than December...a team of freshmen will understand the packline a lot more by go time in March. You also get a little of the fetishized zone principle out of it...not directly, and no, I am not saying a packline is a zone. But you get some of that help, theoretically, of filling space with bodies, and some of the vulnerability is the same (3s). I like the packline a lot more in March, in a one and done, when big arenas and domes are fucking with shooters minds and pressure is tightening muscles. Again, theoretically, the packline is also going to be better understood in March. Not a lot of AAU/high school teams running it, and not a lot of stars being asked to defend, period, at that level. This is why as long as that AdjD # comes down as the year goes on, I am fine with it.

But it does seem like Miller let the team scramble a bit more last weekend. I understand there is a difference between trapping and overplaying in transition and the final defensive principle, but to my untrained/once-watched eye, it certainly seemed there was a bit more freedom up top off the ball, and we were getting turnovers off it.

Is that a change in direction? Did I imagine that? I mean...there is no 100% in any formation/shape/play in sports. There is always room to tweek. If Miller sees Rawle or Alonzo are more engaged if they sneak over the line, can recover, etc., Miller can always adjust the principles to fit the staff. Again, I did not go back and watch either game, and the Oregon game was watched while rather distracted. Was it just more trapping and aggression in transition, or did the packline look a little different this last week?

I would point to having bigs who could execute all the principles as a big change. We've had issues with the pick and roll and smaller 4's since the Zeus/Ashley/Gordon days. All of those guys were athletic and good at hedge and recover. Even if a team forced a switch, I remember AG straight up locking down pg's.

Our wing ability isn't where it was with Rondae, AG, etc., but it is ok. If we have an aspect currently that is behind, we wrestle with big rotation because Dusan, Ayton, Lee and Pinder are all below the Zeus/Ashley/AG level. Our wing play...well, it's passable.

and that is a huge problem in the pack line because you can't force pressure higher up to eliminate screen action, or push it too high to matter. By playing back in the pack line, if the other team can complete the first pass in the half court without the on-ball pressure deflecting or stealing, they can, if they want, set up some kind of screen action. If we were playing regular man, we could just ratchet up the pressure to 25', which would make us open to back doors or dribble drives, but would make it hard to run anything off the screen.

So we have to be better off screen action. Which is hard for Dusan, because he is dead on any position other than a big 5. Ayton does a good job of holding the smaller player in front of him for some fancy dribbling and distracting any distance shot, but if the guard gets switched onto Ayton, if he doesn't get too excited and just drives into Deandre and takes what the help gives him, success is available. Pinder can guard most switches, but is not good recovering off the roll (Deandre is not, either, and Dusan? Yeah). But we can make up for this by fighting through screens, sending help in varied patterns, and going under screens until the shooter shoots us out of it (BTW, none of this is helped by a zone. The need for screen action is mitigated by zone seams, and you still have issues with "letting it come to you" in the zone, whatever it is).

The problem I see is we don't have that level of awareness (yet?) as to when to go under a screen, when to fight through, when to hedge, and when help should shade the screen action. A lot going on in a pack line...when to close the shooter, how far to deny, where is that line, anyway, when to just say "fuck it" and jump the passing lane because you saw it coming 3 seconds before it happened and no coach is going to jump you for coming out of the pack line off the ball if you clearly saw it coming, steal, and break, etc.

So what are some of the more basketball gurus' suggestions? We aren't changing defense. So what do we need to do to disrupt the screen action? We aren't going to extend the man defense to pressure them out of getting into the set. Do we just keep going under screens/get through them to avoid the switch, and give up the shot until it hits? Play more small and give up the offensive advantage (I know everyone freaks out on Dusan, but he does offer value. Question always is does he give more than he surrenders, and that varies game to game. And on the wings, do we extend the pack line a bit, or let off-ball defenders gamble occasionally outside the defense's scheme?

EVCat wrote:So what are some of the more basketball gurus' suggestions? We aren't changing defense. So what do we need to do to disrupt the screen action? We aren't going to extend the man defense to pressure them out of getting into the set. Do we just keep going under screens/get through them to avoid the switch, and give up the shot until it hits? Play more small and give up the offensive advantage (I know everyone freaks out on Dusan, but he does offer value. Question always is does he give more than he surrenders, and that varies game to game. And on the wings, do we extend the pack line a bit, or let off-ball defenders gamble occasionally outside the defense's scheme?

Ive made it well known I am not a packline guy at all. Considering that, my suggestions (which I have posted here previously) are basically changing PNR coverages, as the help behind all of that can be relaxed in certain situations, which helps the entirety of the shape/help/cutoff points of the defense. Otherwise, its very easy for teams with an off guard who can attack to pinpoint advantageous sets. Case in point being, draw Ristic into an empty corner (PNR off the wing with others 3 offensive players weak side) PNR with the man PJC is defending sitting weak side, corner three, because that is where the help rotation on the PNR dive man would come from (when you see PJC cross from the weak side/back side corner shooter, ALL the way across the lane to cover the dive man; Ristic's man) at the rim.

I thought Miller was on point when we began to drop the big on the side ball screens (instead of the hard hardge) and execute a soft show (pick up ball handler at the level of the screen until guard recovers) instead of hard hedge. If that defender is Ayton or anyone but the other bigs, Miller also allowed them to switch.

I would continue to allow both of those things to happen, but the execution just needs more grease. You let the player defending the screen make the call on switching. But he has to make that call immediately otherwise you stick with the show. If its late in the clock, its an easy call to switch. If the guard is a shooter, its an easy call to switch. If the big is a shooter its an easy call to switch. Problem is, Miller wants to get back to his base defense as much as possible, so he isnt going to let them switch that freely. Miller can also make the call on when we are switching and when we are showing from the bench. Its a simple concept to pull off either way, but it requires top level communication.

I wouldnt change much else defensively, perhaps some more trapping/blitzing scoring guards on ball screens. You dont want to change your rotations defensively, so the PNR coverage is least invasive, but it needs a lot of work, because it has to be an immediate reaction. Ive counted four different PNR coverages from us this season. I would stick with two (relaxed show and switch), based on Miller's calls and gameplan.

TucsonClip wrote:

EVCat wrote:So what are some of the more basketball gurus' suggestions? We aren't changing defense. So what do we need to do to disrupt the screen action? We aren't going to extend the man defense to pressure them out of getting into the set. Do we just keep going under screens/get through them to avoid the switch, and give up the shot until it hits? Play more small and give up the offensive advantage (I know everyone freaks out on Dusan, but he does offer value. Question always is does he give more than he surrenders, and that varies game to game. And on the wings, do we extend the pack line a bit, or let off-ball defenders gamble occasionally outside the defense's scheme?

Ive made it well known I am not a packline guy at all. Considering that, my suggestions (which I have posted here previously) are basically changing PNR coverages, as the help behind all of that can be relaxed in certain situations, which helps the entirety of the shape/help/cutoff points of the defense. Otherwise, its very easy for teams with an off guard who can attack to pinpoint advantageous sets. Case in point being, draw Ristic into an empty corner (PNR off the wing with others 3 offensive players weak side) PNR with the man PJC is defending sitting weak side, corner three, because that is where the help rotation on the PNR dive man would come from (when you see PJC cross from the weak side/back side corner shooter, ALL the way across the lane to cover the dive man; Ristic's man) at the rim.

I thought Miller was on point when we began to drop the big on the side ball screens (instead of the hard hardge) and execute a soft show (pick up ball handler at the level of the screen until guard recovers) instead of hard hedge. If that defender is Ayton or anyone but the other bigs, Miller also allowed them to switch.

I would continue to allow both of those things to happen, but the execution just needs more grease. You let the player defending the screen make the call on switching. But he has to make that call immediately otherwise you stick with the show. If its late in the clock, its an easy call to switch. If the guard is a shooter, its an easy call to switch. If the big is a shooter its an easy call to switch. Problem is, Miller wants to get back to his base defense as much as possible, so he isnt going to let them switch that freely. Miller can also make the call on when we are switching and when we are showing from the bench. Its a simple concept to pull off either way, but it requires top level communication.

I wouldnt change much else defensively, perhaps some more trapping/blitzing scoring guards on ball screens. You dont want to change your rotations defensively, so the PNR coverage is least invasive, but it needs a lot of work, because it has to be an immediate reaction. Ive counted four different PNR coverages from us this season. I would stick with two (relaxed show and switch), based on Miller's calls and gameplan.

I like the packline more than you. The unknown is how high the team's communication and IQ level is. If they are higher, I think switching late is a decent option. Maybe base rules like switching in late clock situations (under 8 seconds) and playing either hard hedge or passive hedging otherwise. If we consistently have rotation issues, I doubt we can pull off a system where players are making choices individually.

An underrated issue is that our rougher games are linked to a lot of to's and our transition D is suspect. The Oregon game, we had jags of turnovers that fueled them getting into it. If I was going to start with an area that can immediately improve, fewer to's and stronger transition D is the most achieveable.

Maybe start rotating two back every time. Zo and PJC would be the choices, with Rawle covering if one drives.

The remaining questions are opponent specific, IMO. Weak shooting team, soft hedges. Maybe work a few blitzes if you have a team with one or two really good players.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:An underrated issue is that our rougher games are linked to a lot of to's and our transition D is suspect. The Oregon game, we had jags of turnovers that fueled them getting into it. If I was going to start with an area that can immediately improve, fewer to's and stronger transition D is the most achieveable.

Maybe start rotating two back every time. Zo and PJC would be the choices, with Rawle covering if one drives.

The remaining questions are opponent specific, IMO. Weak shooting team, soft hedges. Maybe work a few blitzes if you have a team with one or two really good players.

Our transition defense has been bad. There always should be two bailing, and the issue is when one of them is supposed to be Randolph, Rawle or Lee, as they have been the worst offenders. Hell, even if they arent the first to bail.

Our main issue is not something we can fix, and we can all see it/have seen it... We cant defend off the bounce.

Hard not to argue that our defense would be a lot better if our offense would stop throwing the ball to their defense (handing it their offense)!

TucsonClip wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:An underrated issue is that our rougher games are linked to a lot of to's and our transition D is suspect. The Oregon game, we had jags of turnovers that fueled them getting into it. If I was going to start with an area that can immediately improve, fewer to's and stronger transition D is the most achieveable.

Maybe start rotating two back every time. Zo and PJC would be the choices, with Rawle covering if one drives.

The remaining questions are opponent specific, IMO. Weak shooting team, soft hedges. Maybe work a few blitzes if you have a team with one or two really good players.

Our transition defense has been bad. There always should be two bailing, and the issue is when one of them is supposed to be Randolph, Rawle or Lee, as they have been the worst offenders. Hell, even if they arent the first to bail.

Our main issue is not something we can fix, and we can all see it/have seen it... We cant defend off the bounce.

One of the dispiriting things about the Oregon game was watching veterans getting lost with simple tactics like fading to the corner off a screen or slipscreens. Those are not complex concepts and people who should respond better were getting destroyed.

Yeah, a lot of this, unfortunately, stems from getting beat man to man in situations where that shouldn't happen. There's only so much scheming around that issue possible.

TucsonClip wrote: I thought Miller was on point when we began to drop the big on the side ball screens (instead of the hard hardge) and execute a soft show (pick up ball handler at the level of the screen until guard recovers) instead of hard hedge. If that defender is Ayton or anyone but the other bigs, Miller also allowed them to switch.

I would continue to allow both of those things to happen, but the execution just needs more grease. You let the player defending the screen make the call on switching. But he has to make that call immediately otherwise you stick with the show. If its late in the clock, its an easy call to switch. If the guard is a shooter, its an easy call to switch. If the big is a shooter its an easy call to switch. Problem is, Miller wants to get back to his base defense as much as possible, so he isnt going to let them switch that freely. Miller can also make the call on when we are switching and when we are showing from the bench. Its a simple concept to pull off either way, but it requires top level communication.

I wouldnt change much else defensively, perhaps some more trapping/blitzing scoring guards on ball screens. You dont want to change your rotations defensively, so the PNR coverage is least invasive, but it needs a lot of work, because it has to be an immediate reaction. Ive counted four different PNR coverages from us this season. I would stick with two (relaxed show and switch), based on Miller's calls and gameplan.

We switched all ball screens that didnt involve Ristic a majority of the first half tonight against Cal (second half pending). Defense looks good, Cal FG% is terrible, contested shots galore, and no easy straight line drives to the rim. Cal has 26 points, 12 coming off turnovers.

TucsonClip wrote:

TucsonClip wrote: I thought Miller was on point when we began to drop the big on the side ball screens (instead of the hard hardge) and execute a soft show (pick up ball handler at the level of the screen until guard recovers) instead of hard hedge. If that defender is Ayton or anyone but the other bigs, Miller also allowed them to switch.

I would continue to allow both of those things to happen, but the execution just needs more grease. You let the player defending the screen make the call on switching. But he has to make that call immediately otherwise you stick with the show. If its late in the clock, its an easy call to switch. If the guard is a shooter, its an easy call to switch. If the big is a shooter its an easy call to switch. Problem is, Miller wants to get back to his base defense as much as possible, so he isnt going to let them switch that freely. Miller can also make the call on when we are switching and when we are showing from the bench. Its a simple concept to pull off either way, but it requires top level communication.

I wouldnt change much else defensively, perhaps some more trapping/blitzing scoring guards on ball screens. You dont want to change your rotations defensively, so the PNR coverage is least invasive, but it needs a lot of work, because it has to be an immediate reaction. Ive counted four different PNR coverages from us this season. I would stick with two (relaxed show and switch), based on Miller's calls and gameplan.

We switched all ball screens that didnt involve Ristic a majority of the first half tonight against Cal (second half pending). Defense looks good, Cal FG% is terrible, contested shots galore, and no easy straight line drives to the rim. Cal has 26 points, 12 coming off turnovers.

11 turnovers or we would be slaughtering them. This makes me nervous bc we are not exactly excelling at putting 2 good halves together either.

We jumped from 99.1 to 98.3 and back into the 60's nationally, continuing a schizo season trend.