This is seriously a major problem. And given that Ewing is likely the coach for the foreseeable future, despite what any of us think, how is he going to improve these numbers? He has recognized defense as a problem the last two offseasons, but we saw no noticeable changes or improvement last season. So, what changes will we see, if any?
I've been a large critic of our defense, consider this my state of the union:
My fellow Hoyas, we have to accept the defense is a problem. In the past when I've quoted kenpom stats, I got some pushback that these stats unfairly penalize fast paced teams and benefit slower units. Maybe there is some truth to the benefit to slower units at the extremes, but we haven't played at a truly fast enough pace to skew these numbers in my opinion. I also engaged in a healthy debate about whether the defense was seeing gains before the transfers in those 7 games. I think those are generous at best, the numbers look only slightly better than the end result, and still worst in the Big East.
Second, players vs. scheme. In the first two years, Govan was a convenient defensive scapegoat. Maybe some of that was fair, but I think year 3 put that to rest imo. On separate individual player threads, the following players are at least given credit for being good to very good defenders: Mosely, Allen, Pickett, Wahab. Something has to give, it's really hard to defend scheme while also making the argument that these were all good defenders. You can argue the depth of the rotation played here. With the exception of the St Johns game, I didn't see our first half defense look great and then erode down the stretch. If anything, we started terribly consistently and picked it up as the game went along.
The size of the rotation can be used to argue that a press would've worked. I'm a seller of that argument but I get it. I do not think that against Big East teams, with time to prep for it, we can consistently press. It certainly bothered Penn St. in that game. We also tend to celebrate the turnovers and ignore when it gets broken for a 3 or a dunk. I imagine Ewing is still a buyer of this and we'll see more press consistently with 10 players again. But Ewing generally breaks out the press when we're behind so I'm not really sure it's his preference.
Ok, with that out of the way:
I do not think we really have much of a scheme with defined responsibilities. It really seems to be guard your man, help when someone gets beat, and recover. That seems simple enough and sure that's basic basketball, but when it's not clearly defined who should be helping and where that help is coming from, you run into situations where multiple people help and we're out of position for a 2nd rotation. Re-watch the Butler game in DC when McDermott went off. Yes, Pickett helped off McDermott multiple consecutive times. But there wasn't a second rotation to help because both players on that side would crash. It all feels so haphazard.
Which goes into another key point, attention to detail. I have no doubt the team does advanced scouting, but somehow it doesn't translate to games. We make terrible decisions on who to help off of, we run at bad 3 point shooters and leave good ones open. The Nova game in Philly was excruciating. We just consistently overhelped off shooters, went under screens, and were shocked when the world rained down on us. The Creighton Omaha game was a similar story.
And we simply cannot have this discussion without the hard hedge on pick and rolls. No, we cannot lay all of the blame on this aspect of the scheme. But it is the most obvious area where improvement is needed. The inherent function of the hard hedge is to be aggressive, which fits Ewing persona, dictate to the offense, and force the ballhandler to give up the ball. The problems are:
1. By definition the hard hedge involves a 3rd defender, the weak side defender who has to tag the roll man to buy time for the big man to recover. Opponents consistently abused this. Pickett in the 1st half of the Seton Hall NJ game was criticized by Len Elmore for not helping and the roll man got a dunk. But it's not that simple, he's guarding a 3 point threat who's a pass away. It's a terrible choice between giving up a dunk or a 3, exactly what the offense wants.
2. If the hard hedge fails to get set, there's almost no recovery possible. Two defenders are out of the play, and someone has a free run to the hoop and it leads to a really quality shot. There are so many ways the hard hedge can fail to get set....
• Guard splits the big man and has a full head of steam to the hoop
• Guard rejects the screen, and the big man is already anticipating the screen and is in no position to help
• Big man slips the screen, big man already anticipating so it’s a clean stroll before any help can come
• Screen the screener action so our big is trailing and not in a position to get out and set the hedge
• Guard drives hard at big man and beats him to spot and turns corner quickly or draws a foul
3. Even if the hedge gets set correctly, you’re immediately putting the defense in rotation to cover. That is exactly what offenses want. There are advanced basketball studies that show offensive efficiency is correlated to defensive movement. It looks great when our defense is scrambling around and helping, but that’s exactly what the offense wants and it leads to a good shot. For a team that struggles w rotations, it’s really dangerous to have a scheme that inherently requires so many rotations.
I would strongly recommend a combo of ICE and / or Drop coverage in pick and rolls. This is all the rage across college hoops and Chris Beard really made it work. ICE the wing ball screens and force the driver baseline and have the big waiting back. Middle of the court you can do more drop coverage and dare them to try and lob the ball or hit a floater over Q. Wahab is a huge presence at the rim, we should be doing everything we can to keep him at the rim and encourage teams to settle for mid range jumpers. We do the opposite.
I would also love to see more switches 1-4. Force teams into games of 1-on-1 and stall out their offense. There are very few players who can make you pay for that decision. Either way, the answer is more variability, however you want to go about doing it so the defense is guessing
And yes we have to mention the zone defense, or really lack thereof. This is clearly not a preference for Ewing and something that has only been used when we were down to 5 or 6 players or foul trouble. Our personnel really isn’t well suited for a zone though, and I’m not 100% sure the current incoming class fits either. You want as much length as possible, active hands blocking passing lanes and contesting shots. Berger is maybe the only backcourt player with size coming in. I do not think a zone can hide 2 bigs as one has to be on the wing contesting 3s. Wahab struggled as the wing in a zone w Yurt7 on the rare occasions that took place. I would’ve been interested in a 1-3-1 halfcourt zone w Pickett at the top and LeBlanc running the baseline and it minimizes Yurt7 movement. But I digress.
Lastly, while I like the offensive sets Ewing has put in, you would think intuitively the defense should be easier to fix. There is an inherent ceiling to the impact a coach can have on an offense, either guys can make shots or they cant. But on defense, especially with a roster that was all your recruits last year (except Mosely who wasn’t the problem), we don’t have that excuse.
Thank you for your time, and may God bless Jeff Green. I will now start drinking