Biggest concerns going into BE play

[johnnysnowplow]

I think a lot of the concerns raised here are very valid. Bradley Hayes's playing time is not one of them. Give it a rest already. Some of my thoughts:

Defense - I think we proved against Indiana that our zone D can be effective against a highly efficient offense. The man to man will hopefully continue to improve, but I always felt this team was built to play a very effective zone. I'd like to see it more frankly. And how bout a little more full court press with some of this length/athleticism/depth we have this year?

DSR - Kid needs to bring it on O much more consistently. That's the long and short of it, especially if our D is gonna continue to be inconsistent. As someone noted earlier, it seemed he played off the ball more against Indiana and it seemed to help. Which also brings me to my next point...

Jabril - Seemed to have the ball in his hands quite a bit against Indiana and played much more under control, especially when you think back to the Kansas game. I think this will be important going forward - Jabril's ability to play under control, with the ball in his hands, freeing up DSR to do what he does best. As far as the FTs, he's 52% on 25 attempts this year. Hes 70% on 250+ attempts in his career. The numbers will improve (7-10 in his last two games...). I've been as disappointed in Jabril this year as anybody, but he seems like he may be coming around, and if he settles into the player he was after the injury last year (on both ends), it would do us a world of good.

[hoyalove4ever]

1) DSR consistently balancing the very difficult job of scoring and distributing;

2) The team consistently winning the foul war and hitting enough free throws; and

3) Those insane elbow calls, and having one come out of nowhere to ruin an important game (or two).

[TBird41]

Dec 29, 2014 22:11:27 GMT -5 tashoya said:

Dec 29, 2014 20:45:55 GMT -5 hoyarooter said:

I agree that the most critical issues are FT shooting (we lose to Charlotte if hadn't been way above our norm in the second half), defensive rotations and keeping Josh on the floor. However, I'm still concerned about DSR against non-Big 10 opponents. We've seen two terrific games from DSR this year, and a number of not so terrific games (at least with respect to his shooting percentage). I think we need DSR shooting well to be consistently successful.

This seems fair enough. DSR did get more time off the ball against Indiana. I suspect this will continue to be the case against teams that aren't really pressing or creating havoc for whomever is bringing the ball up the floor. Peak helped with on-ball duties at MSG could continue to do so. Against teams that don't steal a bunch, I bet we'll see PW help out as well.

Paul was initiating the offense on multiple possessions during the top of the key. Felt like Trawick/DSR would bring it up, give it to Paul and head off to the wing while he got everything started

[GUJook97]

Yeah, the foul trouble is the biggest concern especially since we haven't even started the BE where teams will bang with us much more. Foul trouble dominates everything because it prevents III from always being able to put the team he wants on the floor. I think that was a concern against Kansas. People say that Bowen should have played more, and I agree, but that's partially a factor of personnel around him.

[SirSaxa]

Turnovers
Rebounding (O & D)
Covering 3Pt shooters
Keeping Josh on the floor

If we can handle those four things, we'll have a great season.

[prhoya]

Dec 30, 2014 10:05:52 GMT -5 SirSaxa said:

Turnovers
Rebounding (O & D)
Covering 3Pt shooters
Keeping Josh on the floor

If we can handle those four things, we'll have a great season.

Add making those FTs

[OldHoyafan]

Ditto to free throws. Josh gets fouled everytime on offensive end eventhough few are called. Those that are he has to make a high percentage. This team is driving to the basket more especially Jabril and Peak so they must make a high percentage also.

[SFHoya99]

1) Shooting, shooting, shooting. Yes, we're going to have some games where we give up some rebounds and turnovers seem to be a half to half problem, but both of those seem like the team is actively working on them and getting somewhere. Our mediocre D rebounding is offset by our strong O rebounding, and our turnovers issues have been much less of an issue with the ball shifting to more sure-handed players and better decision-making by others. If this team hits shots, it's sooooo darn good. The upside is so high that if we can hit threes and FTs and control the other elements

2) Defensive cohesiveness. Getting everyone to understand when to switch, when to help and collapse and when not to could take this from a decent defensive team to an elite one with our length, size and athleticism.

[HoyaSinceBirth]

1) Refs
2) FTs
3) having enough room in the trophy case

[aleutianhoya]

Dec 30, 2014 12:32:03 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

1) Shooting, shooting, shooting. Yes, we're going to have some games where we give up some rebounds and turnovers seem to be a half to half problem, but both of those seem like the team is actively working on them and getting somewhere. Our mediocre D rebounding is offset by our strong O rebounding, and our turnovers issues have been much less of an issue with the ball shifting to more sure-handed players and better decision-making by others. If this team hits shots, it's sooooo darn good. The upside is so high that if we can hit threes and FTs and control the other elements

2) Defensive cohesiveness. Getting everyone to understand when to switch, when to help and collapse and when not to could take this from a decent defensive team to an elite one with our length, size and athleticism.

Regarding number two, I've watched the past couple of games over with my son, and it seems like much more than in past years, we are trying to do different things on screens depending on which Hoyas' man sets the screen. When it's Josh, we almost never switch. In fact, when Josh is on the floor, we often don't switch even if Josh isn't involved in the screen. When Josh is out, we are much more likely to use the old reliable "switch all screens" defense. (I'm guessing we're also changing schemes depending on who the opponents have in the game, too, but I couldn't pick up on that.)

That seems like a pretty good plan, given personnel issues, but it's obviously more complicated, and a number of times, it looked like the two defensive players weren't on the same page in terms of what to do (which is understandable early in the season, and with a lot of young players). That often led to scrambling off-the-ball players and then open threes. Pick and roll defense is hard enough even if you know the scheme, but it's that much harder when the scheme within a game changes.

People (including, at times, me) have criticized III for always switching ball screens, but I think this season shows why he thinks that's generally a good idea. That is, learn a base defense or two, and learn to do it very well. Don't worry about trying to learn a bunch of different techniques. Even if one technique might be superior for a given game, the benefit of doing the one thing well outweighs it overall. My guess is that the same philosophy guides why III is reluctant to press too much, at least until other things have been mastered.

In any event, it seems that III is prioritizing keeping Josh on the floor at all costs this year. I can't say I disagree with that overarching plan. I suspect that one thing we may see moving forward is much more 2-3 zone when Josh is on the court -- not just as a means to protecting Josh from fouls, but as a means of simplifying the defense when he's in. Then we can go man (and switching all screens) when he's out.

[SFHoya99]

People that decry switching defenses drive me nuts. Yes, you need specific personnel (that is, a bunch of guys who can defend a bunch of positions). Yes, you need to work at it. But it's bar none the best defense you can run. Every NBA coach would run a switching-heavy defense if they could pull it off. It's devastatingly effective if you can run it right -- see the Golden State Warriors this year.

You can say it's too hard, but the idea that it's a bad defense is just silly.

[rockhoya]

Dec 30, 2014 18:31:53 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

People that decry switching defenses drive me nuts. Yes, you need specific personnel (that is, a bunch of guys who can defend a bunch of positions). Yes, you need to work at it. But it's bar none the best defense you can run. Every NBA coach would run a switching-heavy defense if they could pull it off. It's devastatingly effective if you can run it right -- see the Golden State Warriors this year.

You can say it's too hard, but the idea that it's a bad defense is just silly.

This. As long as you have players that know the right rotations to make and that have a good grasp of defensive principles then it can be very effective. The obstacle is having 5 guys on the same page at all times.

[aleutianhoya]

Dec 30, 2014 18:31:53 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

People that decry switching defenses drive me nuts. Yes, you need specific personnel (that is, a bunch of guys who can defend a bunch of positions). Yes, you need to work at it. But it's bar none the best defense you can run. Every NBA coach would run a switching-heavy defense if they could pull it off. It's devastatingly effective if you can run it right -- see the Golden State Warriors this year.

You can say it's too hard, but the idea that it's a bad defense is just silly.

I never said it was too hard or bad. I agree with you. It makes a screen/roll based offense stagnant. But there are times when your personnel renders it ineffective (or at least not the best option). Josh Smith on the floor, I would submit, is one of those times. (We did, as I recall, use a switch all screens system with Roy, though, although our best defense generally was a zone.). My point simply is that this is one of the first times I remember III frequently doing what most NBA coaches are forced to do -- either hedge or show at least some of the time.

[SFHoya99]

Dec 30, 2014 19:28:34 GMT -5 aleutianhoya said:

Dec 30, 2014 18:31:53 GMT -5 SFHoya99 said:

People that decry switching defenses drive me nuts. Yes, you need specific personnel (that is, a bunch of guys who can defend a bunch of positions). Yes, you need to work at it. But it's bar none the best defense you can run. Every NBA coach would run a switching-heavy defense if they could pull it off. It's devastatingly effective if you can run it right -- see the Golden State Warriors this year.

You can say it's too hard, but the idea that it's a bad defense is just silly.

I never said it was too hard or bad. I agree with you. It makes a screen/roll based offense stagnant. But there are times when your personnel renders it ineffective (or at least not the best option). Josh Smith on the floor, I would submit, is one of those times. (We did, as I recall, use a switch all screens system with Roy, though, although our best defense generally was a zone.). My point simply is that this is one of the first times I remember III frequently doing what most NBA coaches are forced to do -- either hedge or show at least some of the time.

Totally agree.

[DanMcQ]

Dec 29, 2014 20:44:02 GMT -5 McBricks said:

Hitting layups and dunks would also bode well in the BE.

...says the guy whose screen name is "McBricks."