jwp91
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,035
|
Post by jwp91 on May 17, 2020 11:35:20 GMT -5
Next season will be very interesting from a defensive point of view. We should get a definitive answer about whether the issue has been personnel or scheme.
Jamarko was one of our best defenders last season Qudus came on strong late in the season with great defensive performances. Bile’s, a possible starter, best attribute per his interview Is defense Jalen Harris, a former MIke Davis player, is reported to be a good defensive player.
Blair is the only likely starter without a strong defensive reputation.
Ignoring what our record may be, I would expect defensive PPP to not be the worst in the conference next year.
|
|
|
Post by professorhoya on May 17, 2020 11:40:23 GMT -5
Next season will be very interesting from a defensive point of view. We should get a definitive answer about whether the issue has been personnel or scheme. Jamarko was one of our best defenders last season Qudus came on strong late in the season with great defensive performances. Bile’s, a possible starter, best attribute per his interview Is defense Jalen Harris, a former MIke Davis player, is reported to be a good defensive player. Blair is the only likely starter without a strong defensive reputation. Ignoring what our record may be, I would expect defensive PPP to not be the worst in the conference next year. Blair's not great but his defense was solid. He's not a liability. Akinjo was a liability with his lack of lateral quickness and lack of length and Mac wasn't great either so that hurt the defense alot, especially that first year when people could blow by them and then expose Jesse to fouls or his lack of rim protection. Obviously offensively we needed those two but Jagan and TA were easily our best defensive tandem.
|
|
hoya9797
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,207
|
Defense
May 17, 2020 11:45:18 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by hoya9797 on May 17, 2020 11:45:18 GMT -5
Next season will be very interesting from a defensive point of view. We should get a definitive answer about whether the issue has been personnel or scheme. Jamarko was one of our best defenders last season Qudus came on strong late in the season with great defensive performances. Bile’s, a possible starter, best attribute per his interview Is defense Jalen Harris, a former MIke Davis player, is reported to be a good defensive player. Blair is the only likely starter without a strong defensive reputation. Ignoring what our record may be, I would expect defensive PPP to not be the worst in the conference next year. Not the worst is all we can aspire to these days.
|
|
SirSaxa
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,620
|
Defense
May 17, 2020 13:15:33 GMT -5
Post by SirSaxa on May 17, 2020 13:15:33 GMT -5
[ Blair's not great but his defense was solid. He's not a liability. Akinjo was a liability with his lack of lateral quickness and lack of length and Mac wasn't great either so that hurt the defense alot, especially that first year when people could blow by them and then expose Jesse to fouls or his lack of rim protection. Obviously offensively we needed those two but Jagan and TA were easily our best defensive tandem. Agree about Allen and Mosely, especially when Qudus backstopped them. I haven't scoured any statistics, but my recollection was the team played the best defense in the Ewing era after Omer went down with an injury and Wahab became the starter at the 5. Loved Jesse, great offensive player, good kid, graduated in 4 years, etc... But he was NOT a good defender. Neither was Yurtseven. Wahab is already much better than either and will only get better. Losing the senior leadership and experience of Terrell and Jagan? Gotta hurt.
|
|
mdtd
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,567
|
Post by mdtd on May 17, 2020 13:36:25 GMT -5
It already was the scheme. Wahab, Allen, Mosely, Pickett, Blair played. Four were mentioned to be above average defenders, with two being very close to elite. The defense was nowhere near above average. And Blair was not a liability. That's the scheme. Leaving shooters wide open, hard hedge, (just see rhw's long post on it, it covers everything much better than I could), etc.
Also, Bile is not a good defender. In the one full game I watched, combined with some clips, his offball defense would be the worst on last year's team (in regards to leaving shooters open). It's the scheme as to why our three-point defense was atrocious. The defensive scheme needs to change if Ewing is to be successful. I can't say this enough. The team needs to be at least middle of the pack NCAA against three-point shooters, not 324th. The offense and the sets Ewing has work. The Syracuse game is the best example. Ewing can coach an offense. The defense needs to step up.
|
|
hoyaroc
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,324
|
Post by hoyaroc on May 17, 2020 14:53:46 GMT -5
It already was the scheme. Wahab, Allen, Mosely, Pickett, Blair played. Four were mentioned to be above average defenders, with two being very close to elite. The defense was nowhere near above average. And Blair was not a liability. That's the scheme. Leaving shooters wide open, hard hedge, (just see rhw's long post on it, it covers everything much better than I could), etc. Also, Bile is not a good defender. In the one full game I watched, combined with some clips, his offball defense would be the worst on last year's team (in regards to leaving shooters open). It's the scheme as to why our three-point defense was atrocious. The defensive scheme needs to change if Ewing is to be successful. I can't say this enough. The team needs to be at least middle of the pack NCAA against three-point shooters, not 324th. The offense and the sets Ewing has work. The Syracuse game is the best example. Ewing can coach an offense. The defense needs to step up. Mdtd, I don’t usually agree with you but you are absolutely correct about the defense. We cannot be 324th against three-point shooters.
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on May 17, 2020 15:41:10 GMT -5
Next season will be very interesting from a defensive point of view. We should get a definitive answer about whether the issue has been personnel or scheme. Jamarko was one of our best defenders last season Qudus came on strong late in the season with great defensive performances. Bile’s, a possible starter, best attribute per his interview Is defense Jalen Harris, a former MIke Davis player, is reported to be a good defensive player. Blair is the only likely starter without a strong defensive reputation. Ignoring what our record may be, I would expect defensive PPP to not be the worst in the conference next year. Not the worst is all we can aspire to these days. Better than aspiring to be a troll with no perspective.
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Defense
May 17, 2020 15:43:04 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by rockhoya on May 17, 2020 15:43:04 GMT -5
It already was the scheme. Wahab, Allen, Mosely, Pickett, Blair played. Four were mentioned to be above average defenders, with two being very close to elite. The defense was nowhere near above average. And Blair was not a liability. That's the scheme. Leaving shooters wide open, hard hedge, (just see rhw's long post on it, it covers everything much better than I could), etc. Also, Bile is not a good defender. In the one full game I watched, combined with some clips, his offball defense would be the worst on last year's team (in regards to leaving shooters open). It's the scheme as to why our three-point defense was atrocious. The defensive scheme needs to change if Ewing is to be successful. I can't say this enough. The team needs to be at least middle of the pack NCAA against three-point shooters, not 324th. The offense and the sets Ewing has work. The Syracuse game is the best example. Ewing can coach an offense. The defense needs to step up. Agreed. But the scheme with faulty parts. Having an undersized backcourt hurts most on the defensive end. Either you leave huge gaps in the midrange exposing your frontcourt players, or you leave shooters over the top open. Tough to stop moderns offenses without length and activity in the backcourt.
|
|
saxagael
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,898
|
Defense
May 17, 2020 16:33:00 GMT -5
Post by saxagael on May 17, 2020 16:33:00 GMT -5
Ewing's defensive scheme is hard press most of the court and rotate to keep players fresh, to wear the other team down. Most of the season the team was too short handed to play that way.
Many of the folks complaining last year about hard hedge were complaining when it wasn't run well and players were doing what they are supposed to do. Those complaining didn't remotely understand what it is when it runs well, which the last 4 to 5 games of the season it was run as it is supposed to be run with the big staying below the guard not equal nor above him. People stopped complaining as players were getting it right. Hard hedge is one scheme of 4 to 7 run each defensive possession. Many times the hard hedge worked well, but the break down was on a scheme letter in the possession, or most often running man coverage on guards through double picks to get a top shooter wide open. Having bench to keep players fresh, and to run pressure defense end to end, which means fewer schemes to run and the defense in half court has an advantage only having to run against 2 or 3 schemes in a possession rather than 4 to 7.
To run the defense Patrick keeps talking about it is going to take good athletes with good open court defensive skills. We also have good defensive bigs in the middle, which is going to help with length and athleticism they have.
There are a lot of unknowns. Hopefully Patrick got the players he wanted to fit the style of play he wanted. He had that in the wings that left the program last year and looks like Sibley can fill that role.
I've got my popcorn and it is going to be interesting to watch how these guys grow.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,357
|
Post by prhoya on May 17, 2020 16:41:35 GMT -5
It already was the scheme. Wahab, Allen, Mosely, Pickett, Blair played. Four were mentioned to be above average defenders, with two being very close to elite. The defense was nowhere near above average. And Blair was not a liability. That's the scheme. Leaving shooters wide open, hard hedge, (just see rhw's long post on it, it covers everything much better than I could), etc. Also, Bile is not a good defender. In the one full game I watched, combined with some clips, his offball defense would be the worst on last year's team (in regards to leaving shooters open). It's the scheme as to why our three-point defense was atrocious. The defensive scheme needs to change if Ewing is to be successful. I can't say this enough. The team needs to be at least middle of the pack NCAA against three-point shooters, not 324th. The offense and the sets Ewing has work. The Syracuse game is the best example. Ewing can coach an offense. The defense needs to step up. Agreed. But the scheme with faulty parts. Having an undersized backcourt hurts most on the defensive end. Either you leave huge gaps in the midrange exposing your frontcourt players, or you leave shooters over the top open. Tough to stop moderns offenses without length and activity in the backcourt. Other teams do it. Height is not the problem. Sure, ceteris paribus, height is better, but it is not the problem.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,357
|
Post by prhoya on May 17, 2020 17:06:56 GMT -5
Ewing's defensive scheme is hard press most of the court and rotate to keep players fresh, to wear the other team down. Most of the season the team was too short handed to play that way. Many of the folks complaining last year about hard hedge were complaining when it wasn't run well and players were doing what they are supposed to do. Those complaining didn't remotely understand what it is when it runs well, which the last 4 to 5 games of the season it was run as it is supposed to be run with the big staying below the guard not equal nor above him. I'm not going to assume that "those complaining didn't remotely understand what it is when it runs well", since like you, I don't know most of my fellow posters here. What I will say is that what we complain about is that the hard hedge has made our bigs pick up easy, silly fouls every season under Pat. When Omer went down, the aggressiveness of the hard hedge was pulled back. Maybe it was to keep Qudus from picking easy fouls, but no longer would you see hip checks, etc... Our bigs would show the hedge and pull back. This is year 4 and it's Pat's roster. No more excuses. You play with the roster you have. A question for posters: what should be the bar on defense next season (whenever that is)?
|
|
saxagael
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,898
|
Defense
May 17, 2020 17:20:37 GMT -5
Post by saxagael on May 17, 2020 17:20:37 GMT -5
Ewing's defensive scheme is hard press most of the court and rotate to keep players fresh, to wear the other team down. Most of the season the team was too short handed to play that way. Many of the folks complaining last year about hard hedge were complaining when it wasn't run well and players were doing what they are supposed to do. Those complaining didn't remotely understand what it is when it runs well, which the last 4 to 5 games of the season it was run as it is supposed to be run with the big staying below the guard not equal nor above him. I'm not going to assume that "those complaining didn't remotely understand what it is when it runs well", since like you, I don't know most of my fellow posters here. What I will say is that what we complain about is that the hard hedge has made our bigs pick up easy, silly fouls every season under Pat. When Omer went down, the aggressiveness of the hard hedge was pulled back. Maybe it was to keep Qudus from picking easy fouls, but no longer would you see hip checks, etc... Our bigs would show the hedge and pull back. This is year 4 and it's Pat's roster. No more excuses. You play with the roster you have. A question for posters: what should be the bar on defense next season (whenever that is)? The fouls and baskets come off of the hard hedge not being run well. Toward the end of the season it was run well, bigs weren't getting fouls off it as they were no longer out of position be getting too high on coverage. If run well it can save energy, cut off eacy pick-and-rolls, and not get easy shots from three or driving to the lane off a pick up top. It isn't about roster as much as it is having players learn it and stay disciplined in it. I know high school level travel teams that run it really well with with 15U on up, which allows them to compete with bigger, faster, and better shooting teams if the other team starts trying to run pick and rolls a lot. Run that a few times well and the other team shifts to other schemes in their possessions. The hedge run properly is the big never getting even or on to the point guard, but use their size to disrupt and roll back with arms up shutting down the inside pass and not allowing the guard to get to the basket. Not setting even with the guard also lets your own guard get back in position. When Omer went down, it wasn't stopped running, it was getting run correctly and more discipline needed to run it. Omar could run it well, but he often was getting caught too high or even with the guard (do that and you are sunk).
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Defense
May 17, 2020 17:29:52 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by rockhoya on May 17, 2020 17:29:52 GMT -5
Agreed. But the scheme with faulty parts. Having an undersized backcourt hurts most on the defensive end. Either you leave huge gaps in the midrange exposing your frontcourt players, or you leave shooters over the top open. Tough to stop moderns offenses without length and activity in the backcourt. Other teams do it. Height is not the problem. Sure, ceteris paribus, height is better, but it is not the problem. Not height, length. Combined with lack of explosion (Akinjo) and defensive awareness (MAC). Height is a problem when you also don’t know how to play defense, if you average 6’0”/6’1” flat in the backcourt with below average length to boot and other defensive shortcomings like poor iq (MAC) and limited strength (Akinjo) it magnifies the lack of length. Not every player 6’0” has the same defensive chops. Actual question: do you have any examples of average-above average defensive backcourts that have done it with a 6’0” and a 6’2” guard that both had below average length and one with average explosion but poor strength? Particularly one so young? Or it doesn’t have to be that specific just any two guards of their stature who prove “other teams do it”?
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,357
|
Defense
May 17, 2020 17:33:56 GMT -5
Post by prhoya on May 17, 2020 17:33:56 GMT -5
I'm not going to assume that "those complaining didn't remotely understand what it is when it runs well", since like you, I don't know most of my fellow posters here. What I will say is that what we complain about is that the hard hedge has made our bigs pick up easy, silly fouls every season under Pat. When Omer went down, the aggressiveness of the hard hedge was pulled back. Maybe it was to keep Qudus from picking easy fouls, but no longer would you see hip checks, etc... Our bigs would show the hedge and pull back. This is year 4 and it's Pat's roster. No more excuses. You play with the roster you have. A question for posters: what should be the bar on defense next season (whenever that is)? The fouls and baskets come off of the hard hedge not being run well. Toward the end of the season it was run well, bigs weren't getting fouls off it as they were no longer out of position be getting too high on coverage. If run well it can save energy, cut off eacy pick-and-rolls, and not get easy shots from three or driving to the lane off a pick up top. It isn't about roster as much as it is having players learn it and stay disciplined in it. I know high school level travel teams that run it really well with with 15U on up, which allows them to compete with bigger, faster, and better shooting teams if the other team starts trying to run pick and rolls a lot. Run that a few times well and the other team shifts to other schemes in their possessions. The hedge run properly is the big never getting even or on to the point guard, but use their size to disrupt and roll back with arms up shutting down the inside pass and not allowing the guard to get to the basket. Not setting even with the guard also lets your own guard get back in position. When Omer went down, it wasn't stopped running, it was getting run correctly and more discipline needed to run it. Omar could run it well, but he often was getting caught too high or even with the guard (do that and you are sunk). Like jwp wrote, paraphrasing, we'll know next year if it's the roster or the scheme. Our hard hedge for most of the season before Omer went down looked exactly alike the previous two years under Pat with Govan and Trey with similar defensive rating results. Omer, Qudus, and Tim got caught fouling with their hips, hands, legs or manhood 25 feet from the basket. It changed once Omer went down and we had to be more conservative, while using the same scheme. Why were our players fouling 25 ft from the basket? Who is responsible? My question to you is why did it take so long to run properly? Again, what should be the bar on defense next season (whenever that is)?
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,952
|
Post by EtomicB on May 17, 2020 17:37:07 GMT -5
I'm not going to assume that "those complaining didn't remotely understand what it is when it runs well", since like you, I don't know most of my fellow posters here. What I will say is that what we complain about is that the hard hedge has made our bigs pick up easy, silly fouls every season under Pat. When Omer went down, the aggressiveness of the hard hedge was pulled back. Maybe it was to keep Qudus from picking easy fouls, but no longer would you see hip checks, etc... Our bigs would show the hedge and pull back. This is year 4 and it's Pat's roster. No more excuses. You play with the roster you have. A question for posters: what should be the bar on defense next season (whenever that is)? The fouls and baskets come off of the hard hedge not being run well. Toward the end of the season it was run well, bigs weren't getting fouls off it as they were no longer out of position be getting too high on coverage. If run well it can save energy, cut off eacy pick-and-rolls, and not get easy shots from three or driving to the lane off a pick up top. It isn't about roster as much as it is having players learn it and stay disciplined in it. I know high school level travel teams that run it really well with with 15U on up, which allows them to compete with bigger, faster, and better shooting teams if the other team starts trying to run pick and rolls a lot. Run that a few times well and the other team shifts to other schemes in their possessions. The hedge run properly is the big never getting even or on to the point guard, but use their size to disrupt and roll back with arms up shutting down the inside pass and not allowing the guard to get to the basket. Not setting even with the guard also lets your own guard get back in position. When Omer went down, it wasn't stopped running, it was getting run correctly and more discipline needed to run it. Omar could run it well, but he often was getting caught too high or even with the guard (do that and you are sunk). Then the staff should have stopped running it with him, that was the point folks were making during the season... I don't think anyone has ever said the Hard Hedge is a terrible defensive scheme in general but for Gtown it was the majority of the time...
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,357
|
Defense
May 17, 2020 17:39:45 GMT -5
Post by prhoya on May 17, 2020 17:39:45 GMT -5
Other teams do it. Height is not the problem. Sure, ceteris paribus, height is better, but it is not the problem. Not height, length. Combined with lack of explosion (Akinjo) and defensive awareness (MAC). Height is a problem when you also don’t know how to play defense, if you average 6’0”/6’1” flat in the backcourt with below average length to boot and other defensive shortcomings like poor iq (MAC) and limited strength (Akinjo) it magnifies the lack of length. Not every player 6’0” has the same defensive chops. Actual question: do you have any examples of average-above average defensive backcourts that have done it with a 6’0” and a 6’2” guard that both had below average length and one with average explosion but poor strength? Particularly one so young? Or it doesn’t have to be that specific just any two guards of their stature who prove “other teams do it”? Yes, plenty of championship teams, but I'm not going to look for you because height/length has been discussed ad nauseam here. From experience, IMO it's an excuse for lack of cojones.
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Defense
May 17, 2020 17:48:07 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by rockhoya on May 17, 2020 17:48:07 GMT -5
Not height, length. Combined with lack of explosion (Akinjo) and defensive awareness (MAC). Height is a problem when you also don’t know how to play defense, if you average 6’0”/6’1” flat in the backcourt with below average length to boot and other defensive shortcomings like poor iq (MAC) and limited strength (Akinjo) it magnifies the lack of length. Not every player 6’0” has the same defensive chops. Actual question: do you have any examples of average-above average defensive backcourts that have done it with a 6’0” and a 6’2” guard that both had below average length and one with average explosion but poor strength? Particularly one so young? Or it doesn’t have to be that specific just any two guards of their stature who prove “other teams do it”? Yes, plenty of championship teams, but I'm not going to look for you because height/length has been discussed ad nauseam here. From experience, IMO it's an excuse for lack of cojones. Fair I think there are a few examples but not plenty and even so it’s about the right mix of players. And like I said for the scheme WE run, the short guards have been the biggest killer. They might’ve done better with different schemes. Whether or not we should be employing a scheme that exposes our backcourt like that is another question, but I’m of the mind “if you build it they will come”. Ewing tried to hammer squares into circles and it did not work. But I think the fact that he’s working on creating the circles is the important part, hopefully he’s gone out and gotten the right pieces. And I agree with you it does have something to do with cojones, and unfortunately one of our 6’1” guards had little defensive awareness and little cojones on that end.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,952
|
Defense
May 17, 2020 17:49:33 GMT -5
Post by EtomicB on May 17, 2020 17:49:33 GMT -5
Not height, length. Combined with lack of explosion (Akinjo) and defensive awareness (MAC). Height is a problem when you also don’t know how to play defense, if you average 6’0”/6’1” flat in the backcourt with below average length to boot and other defensive shortcomings like poor iq (MAC) and limited strength (Akinjo) it magnifies the lack of length. Not every player 6’0” has the same defensive chops. Actual question: do you have any examples of average-above average defensive backcourts that have done it with a 6’0” and a 6’2” guard that both had below average length and one with average explosion but poor strength? Particularly one so young? Or it doesn’t have to be that specific just any two guards of their stature who prove “other teams do it”? Yes, plenty of championship teams, but I'm not going to look for you because height/length has been discussed ad nauseam here. From experience, IMO it's an excuse for lack of cojones. Uconn's last championship had two small guards but the team still played very well defensively... L'ville with Russ Smith & Peyton Siva also come to mind...
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,357
|
Post by prhoya on May 17, 2020 17:58:01 GMT -5
Yes, plenty of championship teams, but I'm not going to look for you because height/length has been discussed ad nauseam here. From experience, IMO it's an excuse for lack of cojones. Uconn's last championship had two small guards but the team still played very well defensively... L'ville with Russ Smith & Peyton Siva also come to mind... Exactly. I posted about them on a championship list several years ago when another poster was trying to make the same point.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,357
|
Defense
May 17, 2020 18:02:09 GMT -5
Post by prhoya on May 17, 2020 18:02:09 GMT -5
Yes, plenty of championship teams, but I'm not going to look for you because height/length has been discussed ad nauseam here. From experience, IMO it's an excuse for lack of cojones. Fair I think there are a few examples but not plenty and even so it’s about the right mix of players. And like I said for the scheme WE run, the short guards have been the biggest killer. They might’ve done better with different schemes. Whether or not we should be employing a scheme that exposes our backcourt like that is another question, but I’m of the mind “if you build it they will come”. Ewing tried to hammer squares into circles and it did not work. But I think the fact that he’s working on creating the circles is the important part, hopefully he’s gone out and gotten the right pieces. And I agree with you it does have something to do with cojones, and unfortunately one of our 6’1” guards had little defensive awareness and little cojones on that end. Which one? They were awful. Rock, it's pretty simple. It has been documented that for a long time other teams make fun of our defense and how soft our team is. Until that changes, the scheme does not matter. Cojones... The new recruits look promising.
|
|