|
Post by professorhoya on Jan 28, 2015 12:41:29 GMT -5
A few more thoughts (that I don't think have been mentioned much) about the game in no particular order: This had all the signs of one of those games where the opponents gameplan was going to give us fits all game and we had no answer. Our sets weren't working and we really made very little or no adjustments. It's not the first time and it won't be the last. But Thompson was again at a loss for how to adjust in-game to give us a chance. Or he made those adjustments too late. I've come to accept that he and the team will have these games. No, the turnovers and silly fouls are not his fault of course, but it was plain to anyone watching that their D was not going to let us operate as we normally like to. Coach and team couldn't adjust. It happens all the time to teams that are good not great, and that's what we are right now. Players failed to execute. Not about adjustments. Xavier stayed in their Pack the Line defense and we didn't perform what was necessary to beat it. "WHAT IS THE PACK-LINE?Conceptually, it’s pretty simple. Encourage dribble penetration into help, takeaway post touches, force contested jumpers over the top of the defense and clean up the defensive glass." Beating the Pack the Line:"The biggest key to breaking down Virginia’s defense is to have ball-handlers that can create off the dribble and shooters that can knock down contested threes. When push comes to shove, the Pack-Line defense is structured around the idea an opponent isn’t going to be able to hit enough threes to beat them. They want you to drive into defense, kick the ball out and shoot jumpers with a hand in your face. Teams that can do that are going to give them trouble." Players didn't execute. Shot only 27% from 3. "If you aren’t blessed enough to have a first-team all-american playmaker on the same team as three shooters knocking down at least 40 percent of their threes, there’s still an answer: Movement. Not just ball movement, player movement."We were patient and moving the ball and not rushing shots which is key to beating the pack the line but our shots weren't falling. collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/07/film-session-how-does-virginias-pack-line-defense-work-and-how-do-you-beat-it/"If you have players that are good at attacking the basket, fake middle and go baseline, the Achilles Heel of the pack line." This is what Jabril was trying to do, except he was being called for the travel. Again failure of execution but they knew what they had to do. forums.basketballogy.com/threads/how-to-attack-packline-m2m-defense.408/Chris Mack Pack the Line:
|
|
chep3
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,314
|
Post by chep3 on Jan 28, 2015 12:48:46 GMT -5
Ball movement was too patient in my opinion. I thought we struggled to move the ball quickly in the first half, and taking those extra dribbles or an extra second to find the open man allowed them to overhelp without getting burned. Had we moved the ball as decisively as we did against Nova and MU, there would have been a lot more open shots. The other problem is we passed up some open looks for what turned out to be crappier looks. We just looked flat from the get go.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Jan 28, 2015 12:54:07 GMT -5
Ball movement was too patient in my opinion. I thought we struggled to move the ball quickly in the first half, and taking those extra dribbles or an extra second to find the open man allowed them to overhelp without getting burned. Had we moved the ball as decisively as we did against Nova and MU, there would have been a lot more open shots. The other problem is we passed up some open looks for what turned out to be crappier looks. We just looked flat from the get go. Actually, those extra dribbles and seconds are a way to beat Pack the Line: "Also, I've found that doubling a layer works, too.Something like: 2 Dribble-Ats in a row; 2 Pass & Skips in a row; 2 Backscreens in a row; At the Basic Foundation Level, perhaps 2 Pass & Cuts in a Row; or 2 Post Pass & Laker Cuts in a Row. Rick talked about this as: "Fast - Fast - Slow" . . . 2 actions together and then READ what's happening." forums.basketballogy.com/threads/how-to-attack-packline-m2m-defense.408/MU plays zone, and Nova played man, neither of them played Pack the Line like Xavier does.
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,303
|
Post by Cambridge on Jan 28, 2015 12:55:04 GMT -5
One more point on the at-game experience: we have the worst band ever. Embarrassingly bad, and seemingly worse this year than in the past. It's too bad because I have seen bands at other schools play a big role in creating a pumped-up atmosphere. I have to agree. I know Aaron Broadus is well respected within GU, but a director can only do so much--the band seems to have declined in size and sound for a school with somewhere around 7,000 undergraduates. The rugby shirts and aging selections like "Hey Baby" seem like a band still playing in the Capital Centre. Contrast this with the band at VCU: VCU is a university with 32,000 students and a large and well renowned music department...seems like a pretty unfair comparison.
|
|
boxout05
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 573
|
Post by boxout05 on Jan 28, 2015 12:56:43 GMT -5
One more point on the at-game experience: we have the worst band ever. Embarrassingly bad, and seemingly worse this year than in the past. It's too bad because I have seen bands at other schools play a big role in creating a pumped-up atmosphere. I have to agree. I know Aaron Broadus is well respected within GU, but a director can only do so much--the band seems to have declined in size and sound for a school with somewhere around 7,000 undergraduates. The rugby shirts and aging selections like "Hey Baby" seem like a band still playing in the Capital Centre. Contrast this with the band at VCU: The band is what it is. I assume they mirror the student body's enthusiasm for the team and therefore there's probably a lot of things, both big and small, that can be done. Since you specifically mentioned it though, getting rid of "Hey Baby" ... when we're down 14 ... I'm all for it.
|
|
vv83
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,326
|
Post by vv83 on Jan 28, 2015 12:57:12 GMT -5
It is beginning to become clear that the pack line defense is the best current form of man-to-man defense for teams that don't have a group of high level physical defensive talents. More and more teams are using it with a lot of success. It takes quite a bit of practice and good coaching, but I think we are likely to see more of this kind of defense moving forward. The answer, as others have pointed out, is outside shooting and really strong guard penetration. Not our strong suits right now. Hopefully the young players will continue to develop their outside shooting, and their willingness to let fly when they get an open look. Unfortunately, I think the game may start to drift towards even more of a jump shooting contest across college hoops as more and more teams adopt this form of defense.
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,303
|
Post by Cambridge on Jan 28, 2015 12:57:56 GMT -5
Absolutely agree. This is an area in which I continue to be critical of Coach. Why not try to trap more aggressively at that desperate stage of the game? Why not try a more aggressive kind of press (IDK...a 2-2-1 or something) once it's clear the primary press you use isn't doing what it needs to do? Or a real aggressive man defense with Copeland on the inbounder and trapping the first pass? Even if you don't work on it much, and if they easily break it for a layup the first two times you try it, well, at least you tried, right? And how about a trapping half-court defense to change things up when the game is almost out of hand? I know these aren't things we usually do, and I'm OK with that. But if there's a 90% chance you're going to lose by simply doing the same things, then try something else. I always said this too, as have plenty of others. Our teams under Thompson have never been adept at closing leads late in games. We've had some miraculous comebacks, sure, but generally those are over a longer period of time and the result of good halfcourt D. When we're making that mini run last night, hovering in the 8-12 point range with about 5 or so to go, it never really felt like we had enough time to fully close that gap, mostly because we're letting them use 30+ seconds on offense and then doing the same ourselves. We never have any kind of a plan for trying to play high pressure D with the intention of forcing turnovers getting easy buckets. They had 26 missed FGs in the game and only grabbed 6 O Rebs (4 of which were Team rebounds). Mostly because their focus was on transition D and taking away our easy bucket opportunities. They did it all game. So even if we played good halfcourt D and forced a miss, we weren't getting anything easy off of those. I just think having an aggressive full court (or even half court) D designed to force turnovers would be helpful in these situations.
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Jan 28, 2015 13:02:15 GMT -5
I really just think it's primarily a match-up issue above all else. The thing that makes their defense middling more often than not is that they have a center who is immobile and unable to properly rotate within their defensive philosophy. (As professor points out, they play a pack-line, and that requires a lot of quick help to shutdown the lanes). Most teams are able to move Stainbrook around and take advantage. Well, we have a guy that's even more immobile! Or, if we go with Josh's backup, we have a guy that Stainbrook is more than happy to allow to do whatever he wants.
So, their defense immediately goes from middling to excellent because their primary weakness is something we can't exploit.
Won't happen very often. In fact, if you look at their losses, they're almost all against teams that have centers that are either perimeter guys or at least are very mobile. Sure, if other guys perform well we still win the game, but we have a lot less margin for error against Xavier than we do against other teams.
I'd also like to point out that Xavier is good! I know they're 5-4 in the conference and all, but they're significantly higher rated in Pomeroy than we are.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Jan 28, 2015 13:04:43 GMT -5
It is beginning to become clear that the pack line defense is the best current form of man-to-man defense for teams that don't have a group of high level physical defensive talents. More and more teams are using it with a lot of success. It takes quite a bit of practice and good coaching, but I think we are likely to see more of this kind of defense moving forward. The answer, as others have pointed out, is outside shooting and really strong guard penetration. Not our strong suits right now. Hopefully the young players will continue to develop their outside shooting, and their willingness to let fly when they get an open look. Unfortunately, I think the game may start to drift towards even more of a jump shooting contest across college hoops as more and more teams adopt this form of defense. off the top of my head these teams run Pack the Line: #2 Virgina #5 Wisconsin #6 Arizona #25 Butler Xavier Pack the Line also keeps you out of foul trouble (even with the new defense unfriendly rules)
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on Jan 28, 2015 13:09:15 GMT -5
I really just think it's primarily a match-up issue above all else. The thing that makes their defense middling more often than not is that they have a center who is immobile and unable to properly rotate within their defensive philosophy. (As professor points out, they play a pack-line, and that requires a lot of quick help to shutdown the lanes). Most teams are able to move Stainbrook around and take advantage. Well, we have a guy that's even more immobile! Or, if we go with Josh's backup, we have a guy that Stainbrook is more than happy to allow to do whatever he wants. So, their defense immediately goes from middling to excellent because their primary weakness is something we can't exploit. Won't happen very often. In fact, if you look at their losses, they're almost all against teams that have centers that are either perimeter guys or at least are very mobile. Sure, if other guys perform well we still win the game, but we have a lot less margin for error against Xavier than we do against other teams. I'd also like to point out that Xavier is good! I know they're 5-4 in the conference and all, but they're significantly higher rated in Pomeroy than we are. I'd also like to point out that most of Xavier's losses are very close: 4 point loss to UTEP 3 point loss to Long Beach State 1 point loss to Auburn in double OT 3 point loss to DePaul 3 point loss to Providence in OT Only bad losses are 12 point loss to Butler (another pack the line team) 13 point loss to Villanova This team could easily have had 5 more wins and at 19-2 if the ball had bounced a different way
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 28, 2015 13:18:27 GMT -5
A few more thoughts (that I don't think have been mentioned much) about the game in no particular order: This had all the signs of one of those games where the opponents gameplan was going to give us fits all game and we had no answer. Our sets weren't working and we really made very little or no adjustments. It's not the first time and it won't be the last. But Thompson was again at a loss for how to adjust in-game to give us a chance. Or he made those adjustments too late. I've come to accept that he and the team will have these games. No, the turnovers and silly fouls are not his fault of course, but it was plain to anyone watching that their D was not going to let us operate as we normally like to. Coach and team couldn't adjust. It happens all the time to teams that are good not great, and that's what we are right now. Players failed to execute. Not about adjustments. Xavier stayed in their Pack the Line defense and we didn't perform what was necessary to beat it. "WHAT IS THE PACK-LINE?Conceptually, it’s pretty simple. Encourage dribble penetration into help, takeaway post touches, force contested jumpers over the top of the defense and clean up the defensive glass." Beating the Pack the Line:"The biggest key to breaking down Virginia’s defense is to have ball-handlers that can create off the dribble and shooters that can knock down contested threes. When push comes to shove, the Pack-Line defense is structured around the idea an opponent isn’t going to be able to hit enough threes to beat them. They want you to drive into defense, kick the ball out and shoot jumpers with a hand in your face. Teams that can do that are going to give them trouble." Players didn't execute. Shot only 27% from 3. "If you aren’t blessed enough to have a first-team all-american playmaker on the same team as three shooters knocking down at least 40 percent of their threes, there’s still an answer: Movement. Not just ball movement, player movement."We were patient and moving the ball and not rushing shots which is key to beating the pack the line but our shots weren't falling. collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/07/film-session-how-does-virginias-pack-line-defense-work-and-how-do-you-beat-it/"If you have players that are good at attacking the basket, fake middle and go baseline, the Achilles Heel of the pack line." This is what Jabril was trying to do, except he was being called for the travel. Again failure of execution but they knew what they had to do. forums.basketballogy.com/threads/how-to-attack-packline-m2m-defense.408/Chris Mack Pack the Line: Yeah, I don't get how this is about adjustments. What adjustments were there to make? Most of our shots in the first half were open; we just missed them. Most of our turnovers were travels or offensive fouls. How do you adjust to that? In the second half, we played pretty much the same but actually made shots -- 48% from 2, 36% from 3, a few offensive boards and only four turnovers. The result? Thirty seven points. Not blowing the barn doors off, but this was a first half issue mostly. And in that first half, we turned the ball over 13 times in 34 possessions. And gathered 0 offensive boards.
|
|
|
Post by johnnysnowplow on Jan 28, 2015 13:21:12 GMT -5
I always said this too, as have plenty of others. Our teams under Thompson have never been adept at closing leads late in games. We've had some miraculous comebacks, sure, but generally those are over a longer period of time and the result of good halfcourt D. When we're making that mini run last night, hovering in the 8-12 point range with about 5 or so to go, it never really felt like we had enough time to fully close that gap, mostly because we're letting them use 30+ seconds on offense and then doing the same ourselves. We never have any kind of a plan for trying to play high pressure D with the intention of forcing turnovers getting easy buckets. They had 26 missed FGs in the game and only grabbed 6 O Rebs (4 of which were Team rebounds). Mostly because their focus was on transition D and taking away our easy bucket opportunities. They did it all game. So even if we played good halfcourt D and forced a miss, we weren't getting anything easy off of those. I just think having an aggressive full court (or even half court) D designed to force turnovers would be helpful in these situations. I'm not sure what your point is here. I was at this game, I'm very well aware of what happened. What point are you trying to make by posting this?
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 28, 2015 13:25:41 GMT -5
The point he's trying to make is that you've presented no evidence that the Hoyas have trouble coming back more than any other team. There's plenty of evidence to the contrary. We were just down big to Butler and came back on them.
Just because you've said it many times doesn't make it true.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 28, 2015 13:26:53 GMT -5
Thompson's biggest coaching mistake was playing Smith and Hopkins together for 8 minutes in this game. Otherwise, I don't think the game plan was bad. The bigs came out to the three point line to try to break up the packing aspect of the defense. We got decent shots. We did not execute.
|
|
hoyaboya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,360
Member is Online
|
Post by hoyaboya on Jan 28, 2015 13:35:21 GMT -5
Thompson's biggest coaching mistake was playing Smith and Hopkins together for 8 minutes in this game. Otherwise, I don't think the game plan was bad. The bigs came out to the three point line to try to break up the packing aspect of the defense. We got decent shots. We did not execute. He also stubbornly refused to call timeouts when XU was going on runs in the first half, at least until it was too late and the game got out of hand. He has a very slow trigger finger on timeouts to stop runs and often goes home with timeouts in his pocket. That is one of my biggest critiques of his in-game coaching.
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,303
|
Post by Cambridge on Jan 28, 2015 13:38:16 GMT -5
The point he's trying to make is that you've presented no evidence that the Hoyas have trouble coming back more than any other team. There's plenty of evidence to the contrary. We were just down big to Butler and came back on them. Just because you've said it many times doesn't make it true. Bingo.
|
|
|
Post by BubbleVisionBiff on Jan 28, 2015 13:42:24 GMT -5
Anyone else wondering what Derrickson would have done last night? A big who can hit the jumper?
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 28, 2015 13:43:10 GMT -5
Win expectancy at key points in this game:
0-0 / 67% 8-23 / 19% 12-23 / 28% 12-29 / 10% 16-29 / 16% 23-33 / 21% 30-48 / 3% 47-55 / 8%
By the time we were down 15, we win that game one time in five.
By the way, just a few games ago, this was the situation:
19-29 / 18% Win.
Earlier this season:
37-47 / 5% Loss. 41-51 / 18% Win. 15-28 / 16% Came back to take the lead; lost. 16-28 / 20% Came back to take the lead; lost.
We've had six games where we've been down 10+ points. We've won 2, came back in 2 but lost, and lost 2. Win expectancy in those games would expect us to come back and win just once in those games, given our competition (Butler 2x, Xavier 2x, Indiana, Kansas).
We come back. We've come back and won more than an average team would expect to do so. The issue here is not that our team lacks heart, the coach can't adjust or that the system can't come back -- it's that you expect the team to come back and win every game.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jan 28, 2015 13:43:58 GMT -5
Thompson's biggest coaching mistake was playing Smith and Hopkins together for 8 minutes in this game. Otherwise, I don't think the game plan was bad. The bigs came out to the three point line to try to break up the packing aspect of the defense. We got decent shots. We did not execute. He also stubbornly refused to call timeouts when XU was going on runs in the first half, at least until it was too late and the game got out of hand. He has a very slow trigger finger on timeouts to stop runs and often goes home with timeouts in his pocket. That is one of my biggest critiques of his in-game coaching. Please provide evidence that this is effective in stopping runs. I'm not saying calling time outs does not do this, but someone must have a factual basis for this, no?
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyJones on Jan 28, 2015 13:47:06 GMT -5
I thought the zone press with Copeland at the front of it looked good. We never actually turned them over on it, but we were close and they were rattled (and had a few near 10 second calls). I wish we had stayed with that longer to try to turn them over and change momentum. I agree with this. I think there's potential there. The one thing we need to add to it, is when they make a pass to just get over the line, we need to be ready to trap that guy and use the line as another defender. Twice they managed to get the ball to a guy just past half court and he was allowed to turn and face and look for the next pass with out any pressure really. Exactly right.
|
|