Where Will the Improvement Come From?
Nov 30, 2015 12:38:52 GMT -5
Cambridge, SoCal Hoya85, and 2 more like this
Post by SFHoya99 on Nov 30, 2015 12:38:52 GMT -5
I think we all agree this team has a ton of potential, and so far this season there have been plenty of bright spots: Isaac Copeland is breaking out; Hayes is providing low post buckets; the freshmen look good; the offense seems more open and capable because everyone can hit a shot. We've got a ton of athletic talent and the exciting part is while the team is borderline Top 25 now ... there seems to be so much room for improvement that we can all see a very good team.
The 2007 team made a leap in January by pairing an already strong offense with a change to the defense -- Thompson decided to let Roy own the middle and began to press his perimeter players out more, allowing Roy to clean up their messes. The defense suddenly improved and the team went on a winning streak. What are we hopeful to see improve this year? Is there a shift like this that can happen?
I don't think we are quite working from as good a position -- the offense was already in place in 2007 from the start -- but we have more players who can improve. So maybe there's a shot. Teams don't always come together, but if this one does, where is it likely to come from?
On the offensive side...
Turnovers.
One of the historic banes of our offense, we actually haven't been poor overall on committing turnovers, but that's largely influenced by a good couple of games. Given that several key players are freshmen and that some other key players have turnover issues that aren't likely solved in-season (I'm thinking Hayes in particular -- you just can't teach what he needs in a few months), I don't see this improving much. DSR and Peak look like they will be low turnover, and as for the rest, you just hope they won't be incredibly high turnover.
Offensive Rebounding.
This is incredibly key and it's been a glaring problem. We are currently grabbing only 25.5% of offensive rebounds -- 275th in the country -- and it's not really due to playing a tough schedule. Only against Maryland did we even do a passable job. We completely flopped here against Radford and Bryant -- teams we should destroy.
Why is it so important?
1. It's free points. Good offensive rebounding doesn't come at the expense of other shots. It can be back-breaking to the other team's will and effort level. Put backs are usually high percentage shots and you get fouled on them often. It's not something to neglect because everything about it is such a plus. The only negative to crashing the boards is possibly a few more fouls and weakened transition D. It's a good trade-off, as Michigan State has proven for years.
2. It's the No. 1 advantage high majors have against good mid-majors. Look, a lot of teams have experienced, shifty guards now that can break pressure or create in the half-court (like we will see against Monmouth). A ton can shoot the 3. A large amount have good coaching. The difference in guard play between many high majors and mid majors is not always very high. But where the higher majors usually have an advantage is size. Now, few big guys can post up ... but where high majors usually massacre upset-minded teams is on the offensive boards. You can get outplayed everywhere else but just get 10 extra shots.
3. It's one of three key ways to kill a zone. You can pick apart a zone with great passing and smart penetration, but that requires a better level of execution on offense versus the zone defense -- and if the zone is long, this is especially hard. You can shoot over it, but outside shooting is erratic. But zones also make it hard to block guys out, and here, it's just effort. You can kill a zone on the offensive boards, and given that no one wants to play man against us unless their zone sucks ... this SHOULD be a huge tool to kill the zone.
But it's not for us so far.
Hayes has been a decent offensive rebounder at times, but his time has been limited because of foul trouble and defensive limitations. Isaac Copeland usually gets a spectacular one every couple of games, and Doc grabbed a bunch against a small team, but no one other than Hayes seems to be great at offensive rebounding.
Some of this is strategic choice -- we play four out and get back on D. Some of it is personnel -- I don't see a lot of strong offensive rebounders in terms of mentality. And some of it is the lack of forcing help D down low.
It's the last one that generated our only really strong offensive rebounding team -- 2007. When Green would force doubles in the post, Hibbert would be able to slink down low and grab offensive boards. Anytime you create help D in the painted area, you create opportunity for an offensive board, whether it be on a post move or a drive or a backdoor cut. Right now, we aren't forcing help D down there much -- even Peak's successful drives have mostly been against his man and not getting past him and forcing help D.
If there's a path to improvement, it's this: more effort level on the offensive boards overall; better offensive execution to force the help D that creates opportunities.
This needs to change -- it's really hurting us right now and it'll only get worse against teams like Xavier. We are going to give up second chance points; we need to get our own. I'm hoping that the players simply start doing better, because I'm not sure I see a tactical change coming.
Princeton Execution
Our offense has been pretty good, but it's really not running at full speed. Cutters are open, and they aren't getting hit. There was a key stretch in the Duke game where Derrickson twice had the ball in the post with a wide open cutter and didn't complete the pass. Add in the ball that went through Hayes' hands, and that's six easy points we missed during the second 8-0 run.
We also have an effective inside out game we don't push as much as we have in the past and a nice pick and roll game that has had varied success. The general motion stops often and for no reason. Even the screen and step back three really isn't executing well.
I think all this can and will get better. The easy baskets will finally come this year, to a certain extent. I don't expect 2007-level execution here, but defenses can't sag as much as they have the last few years. And the freshmen and sophomores will hopefully buy in for easy baskets. We just need the passer to recognize faster and trust.
On the defensive side...
Rim Protection.
I'm not super hopeful about this. We've always been a strong rim-protection team, and I doubt we're poor, but I don't see an easy path to the elite levels we've had when our defense has been great. Hayes isn't quick and tends to play small on defense, leaving him as an unintimidating presence. People shoot over him easily for this reason, and he doesn't create the misses down low other big men can. Govan seems to block more shots, and he's quicker, but he's also shorter and both of them have to work on foul trouble.
I'm sure this can get a little better, but I don't think it is going to get much better -- Govan is a freshman and Hayes has too much to improve, if I had to guess. A rim protector is the easiest way to get good at D. But there's no Roy Hibbert there.
Defensive Rebounding.
It's been mediocre at best, though it has seemed to crumble at crunch time. Amongst our key issues -- Copeland is not rebounding like he did last year; Hayes is our best D rebounder but is often off the court; the freshman bigs are struggling like heck.
Playing Hayes more seems like a good solution ... but there's reasons why he's not. He's struggling on D at times versus certain matchups, he gets into foul trouble, and if the opponent doubles down on him on offense, it's more often been a turnover than a pass for an easy bucket. Hayes will help the D rebounding ... but playing him more than Thompson normally would will likely create other issues.
The real solution simply seems to be in effort and players playing better. Copeland is playing a ton and mostly as the PF (20% of his time is with Derrickson, but he's still mostly the 2nd big on the floor) -- he needs to play like he did last year despite taking on a larger offensive role. And the freshman simply need to up the intensity level - Mourning still has ZERO defensive boards. They shouldn't be this bad.
I'm sure we will lose a couple of games this year on the defensive boards -- but hopefully the young players can simply effort this to acceptability. The defensive rebounding hasn't been the issue so much as the lack of offensive boards, but either way, we just need to get better. The Bryant game looked better -- but don't be overly happy with it -- the counting totals are high because Bryant missed a lot of shots, not because we dominated the boards.
Playing team defense.
You know what I like about Reggie Cameron this season? Offensively, defensively, whatever, he always seems to know exactly where to go, what to do. On offense, he feeds inside and out and finds the holes in the defense for open shots. On defense, he has really learned to use positioning and his teammates to improve his D. He's never frantic, and he's pointing out to others where to go.
The rest of the team, not so much. It's actually a bit worrisome to me that our sophomores still get lost on where they should be in the zone, or wildly overcommit on D. Even Peak has had flubs, and he's a good defender. I don't think Hayes or Govan is going to dominate the middle, so we really need our perimeter defenders to be solid. If you get beat, that's fine -- you should have help. It's hard not to get beat with the new rules. But right now, it doesn't feel like the team is defending together. They don't understand where to angle a dude who is beating them to help, or when to give up and let the next guy take it so they don't abandon the perimeter. We aren't seeing guys in passing lanes getting steals. Some of the last is lack of playing zone, but our inability to play a decent zone D has hurt our turnovers forced ... which means more shots for the opponent and less easy baskets for us.
A team of long, interchangeable parts is made for a zone or a high-switching man to man. But both those defenses require a ton of teamwork, and we're nowhere near doing that effectively.
Can we get there? We really didn't last season. But it is something that can improve. I'd just feel better about it if Isaac wasn't still looking at times like he doesn't know where to be.
Thoughts? Anything I missed? Any disagreement on what can and can't improve? This seems to have come out pessimistic, but I'm not sure I'm actually there. I spent little time on the positives, and we are young. But the defense especially needs to get better. Where do you think the improvement will come from?
The 2007 team made a leap in January by pairing an already strong offense with a change to the defense -- Thompson decided to let Roy own the middle and began to press his perimeter players out more, allowing Roy to clean up their messes. The defense suddenly improved and the team went on a winning streak. What are we hopeful to see improve this year? Is there a shift like this that can happen?
I don't think we are quite working from as good a position -- the offense was already in place in 2007 from the start -- but we have more players who can improve. So maybe there's a shot. Teams don't always come together, but if this one does, where is it likely to come from?
On the offensive side...
Turnovers.
One of the historic banes of our offense, we actually haven't been poor overall on committing turnovers, but that's largely influenced by a good couple of games. Given that several key players are freshmen and that some other key players have turnover issues that aren't likely solved in-season (I'm thinking Hayes in particular -- you just can't teach what he needs in a few months), I don't see this improving much. DSR and Peak look like they will be low turnover, and as for the rest, you just hope they won't be incredibly high turnover.
Offensive Rebounding.
This is incredibly key and it's been a glaring problem. We are currently grabbing only 25.5% of offensive rebounds -- 275th in the country -- and it's not really due to playing a tough schedule. Only against Maryland did we even do a passable job. We completely flopped here against Radford and Bryant -- teams we should destroy.
Why is it so important?
1. It's free points. Good offensive rebounding doesn't come at the expense of other shots. It can be back-breaking to the other team's will and effort level. Put backs are usually high percentage shots and you get fouled on them often. It's not something to neglect because everything about it is such a plus. The only negative to crashing the boards is possibly a few more fouls and weakened transition D. It's a good trade-off, as Michigan State has proven for years.
2. It's the No. 1 advantage high majors have against good mid-majors. Look, a lot of teams have experienced, shifty guards now that can break pressure or create in the half-court (like we will see against Monmouth). A ton can shoot the 3. A large amount have good coaching. The difference in guard play between many high majors and mid majors is not always very high. But where the higher majors usually have an advantage is size. Now, few big guys can post up ... but where high majors usually massacre upset-minded teams is on the offensive boards. You can get outplayed everywhere else but just get 10 extra shots.
3. It's one of three key ways to kill a zone. You can pick apart a zone with great passing and smart penetration, but that requires a better level of execution on offense versus the zone defense -- and if the zone is long, this is especially hard. You can shoot over it, but outside shooting is erratic. But zones also make it hard to block guys out, and here, it's just effort. You can kill a zone on the offensive boards, and given that no one wants to play man against us unless their zone sucks ... this SHOULD be a huge tool to kill the zone.
But it's not for us so far.
Hayes has been a decent offensive rebounder at times, but his time has been limited because of foul trouble and defensive limitations. Isaac Copeland usually gets a spectacular one every couple of games, and Doc grabbed a bunch against a small team, but no one other than Hayes seems to be great at offensive rebounding.
Some of this is strategic choice -- we play four out and get back on D. Some of it is personnel -- I don't see a lot of strong offensive rebounders in terms of mentality. And some of it is the lack of forcing help D down low.
It's the last one that generated our only really strong offensive rebounding team -- 2007. When Green would force doubles in the post, Hibbert would be able to slink down low and grab offensive boards. Anytime you create help D in the painted area, you create opportunity for an offensive board, whether it be on a post move or a drive or a backdoor cut. Right now, we aren't forcing help D down there much -- even Peak's successful drives have mostly been against his man and not getting past him and forcing help D.
If there's a path to improvement, it's this: more effort level on the offensive boards overall; better offensive execution to force the help D that creates opportunities.
This needs to change -- it's really hurting us right now and it'll only get worse against teams like Xavier. We are going to give up second chance points; we need to get our own. I'm hoping that the players simply start doing better, because I'm not sure I see a tactical change coming.
Princeton Execution
Our offense has been pretty good, but it's really not running at full speed. Cutters are open, and they aren't getting hit. There was a key stretch in the Duke game where Derrickson twice had the ball in the post with a wide open cutter and didn't complete the pass. Add in the ball that went through Hayes' hands, and that's six easy points we missed during the second 8-0 run.
We also have an effective inside out game we don't push as much as we have in the past and a nice pick and roll game that has had varied success. The general motion stops often and for no reason. Even the screen and step back three really isn't executing well.
I think all this can and will get better. The easy baskets will finally come this year, to a certain extent. I don't expect 2007-level execution here, but defenses can't sag as much as they have the last few years. And the freshmen and sophomores will hopefully buy in for easy baskets. We just need the passer to recognize faster and trust.
On the defensive side...
Rim Protection.
I'm not super hopeful about this. We've always been a strong rim-protection team, and I doubt we're poor, but I don't see an easy path to the elite levels we've had when our defense has been great. Hayes isn't quick and tends to play small on defense, leaving him as an unintimidating presence. People shoot over him easily for this reason, and he doesn't create the misses down low other big men can. Govan seems to block more shots, and he's quicker, but he's also shorter and both of them have to work on foul trouble.
I'm sure this can get a little better, but I don't think it is going to get much better -- Govan is a freshman and Hayes has too much to improve, if I had to guess. A rim protector is the easiest way to get good at D. But there's no Roy Hibbert there.
Defensive Rebounding.
It's been mediocre at best, though it has seemed to crumble at crunch time. Amongst our key issues -- Copeland is not rebounding like he did last year; Hayes is our best D rebounder but is often off the court; the freshman bigs are struggling like heck.
Playing Hayes more seems like a good solution ... but there's reasons why he's not. He's struggling on D at times versus certain matchups, he gets into foul trouble, and if the opponent doubles down on him on offense, it's more often been a turnover than a pass for an easy bucket. Hayes will help the D rebounding ... but playing him more than Thompson normally would will likely create other issues.
The real solution simply seems to be in effort and players playing better. Copeland is playing a ton and mostly as the PF (20% of his time is with Derrickson, but he's still mostly the 2nd big on the floor) -- he needs to play like he did last year despite taking on a larger offensive role. And the freshman simply need to up the intensity level - Mourning still has ZERO defensive boards. They shouldn't be this bad.
I'm sure we will lose a couple of games this year on the defensive boards -- but hopefully the young players can simply effort this to acceptability. The defensive rebounding hasn't been the issue so much as the lack of offensive boards, but either way, we just need to get better. The Bryant game looked better -- but don't be overly happy with it -- the counting totals are high because Bryant missed a lot of shots, not because we dominated the boards.
Playing team defense.
You know what I like about Reggie Cameron this season? Offensively, defensively, whatever, he always seems to know exactly where to go, what to do. On offense, he feeds inside and out and finds the holes in the defense for open shots. On defense, he has really learned to use positioning and his teammates to improve his D. He's never frantic, and he's pointing out to others where to go.
The rest of the team, not so much. It's actually a bit worrisome to me that our sophomores still get lost on where they should be in the zone, or wildly overcommit on D. Even Peak has had flubs, and he's a good defender. I don't think Hayes or Govan is going to dominate the middle, so we really need our perimeter defenders to be solid. If you get beat, that's fine -- you should have help. It's hard not to get beat with the new rules. But right now, it doesn't feel like the team is defending together. They don't understand where to angle a dude who is beating them to help, or when to give up and let the next guy take it so they don't abandon the perimeter. We aren't seeing guys in passing lanes getting steals. Some of the last is lack of playing zone, but our inability to play a decent zone D has hurt our turnovers forced ... which means more shots for the opponent and less easy baskets for us.
A team of long, interchangeable parts is made for a zone or a high-switching man to man. But both those defenses require a ton of teamwork, and we're nowhere near doing that effectively.
Can we get there? We really didn't last season. But it is something that can improve. I'd just feel better about it if Isaac wasn't still looking at times like he doesn't know where to be.
Thoughts? Anything I missed? Any disagreement on what can and can't improve? This seems to have come out pessimistic, but I'm not sure I'm actually there. I spent little time on the positives, and we are young. But the defense especially needs to get better. Where do you think the improvement will come from?
