EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,861
|
Post by EtomicB on Jan 20, 2020 21:01:11 GMT -5
Which game would you say Gtown ran it the best? I'd like to go back & rewatch what I'm missing. They had quite a few plays in Marquette and Seton Hall where it worked (many in Seton Hall), but both also had flubs and need to find a game and timestamps. The game where they got it going properly was Duke after some early game disasters most times they ran it. There is a 10 minute highlight film of Marquette game scoring plays there are only two scoring plays off hard hedge in the highlights, but the first Yurtseven never gets there as Marquette gets hit with hard pick before he gets to the lane that frees Jonhson to set the high pick and roll. There are a quite a few plays early where Yurt is rotating out on top to cover a wide open Howard shooting as Mosely and Allen got caught in cross screens and or double side picks (Marquette was running an insane number of cross picks on the side and double picks), which has nothing to do with a hard hedge, but everything to do with a really good player being aware with defense breaks down and Yurt gets out to get a hand in Howards face but still buckets. At 5:17 - - is a failed hard hedge as Yurtseven doesn't get there in time and then get above the guard, which should never happen and can't recover to get to Howard. At 5:29 - - you see a good hard hedge at the end after the offensive big rolled and Yurt has stayed in front of the guard to cut off the line with his arms up. The hard hedge did its job and Marquette kicks out to the top where Howard does a hezzie Mosely bites on and drive the lane left to Yurtseven who is in foul trouble so doesn't contest. That could have been done better with Mosely contesting more on top, but the hard hedge did its job. At 5:54 - - The hard hedge works on the roll, but Howard goes straight across and does not move to stay closer to the 3 line, which Mosely is in good position to cover and Howard takes a deep 3 off the move horizontally. It is a bad shot for Howard, who has been making similar. But, the hedge works. Had Howard stayed home Yurtseven is in the correct position to deny the pass to the offesive big. Wahab runs it perfectly with Mac at 7:13 - (he flubbed it by going way too high two or three plays prior and on the same possession does it again at 7:27 - - and the guard dribbles out and passes to a deep Howard who is covered at normal depth by Mosely who stayed home and did exactly what he should do. There is a flubbed hard hedge around 6 mintue mark where Howard doesn't wait for the pick and goes away from it as Yurt is coming to hedge and Howard splits both defenders to get to the lane for a bucket (smart tough play by Howard). This doesn't show where they have done it best, but the video shows 3 times it didn't work as not run properly as and two where Yurtseven was picked hard on the away middle to free Johnson to set the pick and not have the hard hedge get set (why on earth do you want the hard hedge to be in place if is utterly sucks, oh because it actually works). So 5 hard hedge attempts got beat and there are four in the highlights where the hard hedge works properly (and one where Wahab nails it twice) and the scoring is against man properly in place. This doesn't show the times it work and no scoring happened on that play as this is highlights that got a large percentage of the points for both teams. The play @ 5:54 where Howard takes the long 3 he could have easily got deep into the lane if he wanted to. The play with Wahab & Mac looked to be more of a drag & replace type play, McEwen wasn't aggressive at all there, he was looking for Howard on the pop-out and got it when Mosely got distracted with the roller... The play @ 5:42 when Howard goes away from Yurtsevens hedge and then gives him a hesitation move before scoring on the floater, right after that the announcer states that "Marquette will keep going to that because Gtown can't stop it" I understand that Gtown uses it successfully during games but does the success outweigh the failures?
|
|
mdtd
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,567
|
Post by mdtd on Jan 20, 2020 21:35:13 GMT -5
Here's a link showing exactly what I am explaining. It should start at 1:29, but if it doesn't that's around the time to skip to. Some screening the screener action and then some not. Then some reading helpside rotations (which are needed to hedge.) If I'm still wrong after finding evidence of the methods I described being used against the hard hedge then I don't know what to tell you man. The first 1:29 goes through two things that we agreed beat the hard hedge with a star guard, at least I think we agreed on it. But since you are so intelligent, I assume that you came up with something that would prove me, a non-sense talker wrong. Good grief you are showing me a play where it isn't run remotely correctly as they flipping abandon the guard not stay in their face and that leads to an alley oop. Do you really not have a clue about how it is run or what they heck hard hedge actually is. You are farther away than you were before. Also watch Hoyas run it, there are time they run it poorly and it still works well. As long as the big stays below the guard and on the side as the big, and the guard on defense gets back to position on the guard. You are showing play not run well at all, but not every play is run well, which is how the other team scores and no hard hedge was harmed in the scoring, which is 98% of basketball. And you want to show how little you know about it repeatedly? We don't have differences, you have no idea what you are talking about and can't find anything to back you up. The goal was for you to see the full thing which I even mentioned in my little piece, but this clearly isn't working. You are just angry now and don't seem to be adding anything of substance. Your just attacking as you don't totally understand the concept, but have some of the basics down. Which is fine and totally isn't a bad thing so long as you don't call someone out on something which you don't seem to understand. You have turned this discussion from a discussion on the merits of a hard hedge, to yours and my knowledge, which isn't where it was intended to go. So, this has been enough. You don't seem to understand the full concept and the problem the Hoyas have in coverage. Your lack of understanding on screen coverage, yet assurance that you are right is baffling to me. So, we are now on totally different sides and not having a good, calm, well-informed discussion like we were before. It's a shame tat you couldn't resort to anything other than personal attacks on this, but hey we disagree. There are other things we will agree on. Both of us want the Hoyas to succeed and know this discussion has gone nowhere. I'm going to switch my Hoyas based focus to the Xavier game, where I really don't like the spot.
|
|
saxagael
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,894
|
Post by saxagael on Jan 20, 2020 21:57:46 GMT -5
They had quite a few plays in Marquette and Seton Hall where it worked (many in Seton Hall), but both also had flubs and need to find a game and timestamps. The game where they got it going properly was Duke after some early game disasters most times they ran it. There is a 10 minute highlight film of Marquette game scoring plays there are only two scoring plays off hard hedge in the highlights, but the first Yurtseven never gets there as Marquette gets hit with hard pick before he gets to the lane that frees Jonhson to set the high pick and roll. There are a quite a few plays early where Yurt is rotating out on top to cover a wide open Howard shooting as Mosely and Allen got caught in cross screens and or double side picks (Marquette was running an insane number of cross picks on the side and double picks), which has nothing to do with a hard hedge, but everything to do with a really good player being aware with defense breaks down and Yurt gets out to get a hand in Howards face but still buckets. At 5:17 is a failed hard hedge as Yurtseven doesn't get there in time and then get above the guard, which should never happen and can't recover to get to Howard. At 5:29 you see a good hard hedge at the end after the offensive big rolled and Yurt has stayed in front of the guard to cut off the line with his arms up. The hard hedge did its job and Marquette kicks out to the top where Howard does a hezzie Mosely bites on and drive the lane left to Yurtseven who is in foul trouble so doesn't contest. That could have been done better with Mosely contesting more on top, but the hard hedge did its job. At 5:54 The hard hedge works on the roll, but Howard goes straight across and does not move to stay closer to the 3 line, which Mosely is in good position to cover and Howard takes a deep 3 off the move horizontally. It is a bad shot for Howard, who has been making similar. But, the hedge works. Had Howard stayed home Yurtseven is in the correct position to deny the pass to the offesive big. Wahab runs it perfectly with Mac at 7:13 (he flubbed it by going way too high two or three plays prior and on the same possession does it again at 7:27 - - and the guard dribbles out and passes to a deep Howard who is covered at normal depth by Mosely who stayed home and did exactly what he should do. There is a flubbed hard hedge around 6 mintue mark where Howard doesn't wait for the pick and goes away from it as Yurt is coming to hedge and Howard splits both defenders to get to the lane for a bucket (smart tough play by Howard). This doesn't show where they have done it best, but the video shows 3 times it didn't work as not run properly as and two where Yurtseven was picked hard on the away middle to free Johnson to set the pick and not have the hard hedge get set (why on earth do you want the hard hedge to be in place if is utterly sucks, oh because it actually works). So 5 hard hedge attempts got beat and there are four in the highlights where the hard hedge works properly (and one where Wahab nails it twice) and the scoring is against man properly in place. This doesn't show the times it work and no scoring happened on that play as this is highlights that got a large percentage of the points for both teams. The play @ 5:54 where Howard takes the long 3 he could have easily got deep into the lane if he wanted to. The play with Wahab & Mac looked to be more of a drag & replace type play, McEwen wasn't aggressive at all there, he was looking for Howard on the pop-out and got it when Mosely got distracted with the roller... The play @ 5:42 when Howard goes away from Yurtsevens hedge and then gives him a hesitation move before scoring on the floater, right after that the announcer states that "Marquette will keep going to that because Gtown can't stop it" I understand that Gtown uses it successfully during games but does the success outweigh the failures? A play that is used to shut down one successful play type, the pick and roll, when a team is thin and you can run it and have 75% success is really good. There isn't another defense against it with that success. The hard hedge works if you have good players who are disciplined and have the athleticism to run it. Not many college teams run it as they don't have the players. Big East runs a lot of pick and rolls, but against a team really thin on wings and bigs and is mostly a small team it is used to run the defensive team into the ground as much as it is to score. The hard hedge cuts down on the hard picks and chasing with the big just needing two steps to get back on physical coverage of the other big and by runinng in a direct line between the big and guard the guard with the ball can't get the ball to the big as can't throw through the big and an alleyoop has line of sight blocked as was done against Seton Hall. The defensive guard should be in position to defend what ever follows when his big release back. With the Marquette game the highlights showed not so great execution of the hard hedge working. With the 5:42 play the announcer said that but Howard never did it again, mostly because Yurt didn't bite and the other times guard was back in position. The 5:54 Howard would run right into Pickett if he drives, could float over too, but other players start reacting and adjuting. He doesn't quite have a deep drive, but a mid-range jumper at the line is about the best clean he could get. Agree with Mac and Wahab, Mac is the weakest guard on hard hedge. But, Wahab also ran hard hedge on the side when they used it twice in one possession. You never really want to ever use it on the side as the big has too much room to roam that is out of the defensive big being able to maintain the line to block out a pass around the defensive big. Players getting distracted isn't the hard hedge breaking down, but players getting distracted and that happens in every defensive play. Hard hedge has a few pieces that need to be done right to work and the right players. Hoyas have the players and coaching and the players have learned it. But, other options against pick and roll have much higher offensive success rates.
|
|
saxagael
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,894
|
Post by saxagael on Jan 20, 2020 22:04:53 GMT -5
Good grief you are showing me a play where it isn't run remotely correctly as they flipping abandon the guard not stay in their face and that leads to an alley oop. Do you really not have a clue about how it is run or what they heck hard hedge actually is. You are farther away than you were before. Also watch Hoyas run it, there are time they run it poorly and it still works well. As long as the big stays below the guard and on the side as the big, and the guard on defense gets back to position on the guard. You are showing play not run well at all, but not every play is run well, which is how the other team scores and no hard hedge was harmed in the scoring, which is 98% of basketball. And you want to show how little you know about it repeatedly? We don't have differences, you have no idea what you are talking about and can't find anything to back you up. The goal was for you to see the full thing which I even mentioned in my little piece, but this clearly isn't working. You are just angry now and don't seem to be adding anything of substance. Your just attacking as you don't totally understand the concept, but have some of the basics down. Which is fine and totally isn't a bad thing so long as you don't call someone out on something which you don't seem to understand. You have turned this discussion from a discussion on the merits of a hard hedge, to yours and my knowledge, which isn't where it was intended to go. So, this has been enough. You don't seem to understand the full concept and the problem the Hoyas have in coverage. Your lack of understanding on screen coverage, yet assurance that you are right is baffling to me. So, we are now on totally different sides and not having a good, calm, well-informed discussion like we were before. It's a shame tat you couldn't resort to anything other than personal attacks on this, but hey we disagree. There are other things we will agree on. Both of us want the Hoyas to succeed and know this discussion has gone nowhere. I'm going to switch my Hoyas based focus to the Xavier game, where I really don't like the spot. You are showing a play that isn't run close to right and trying to make it a point. If the neither the guard nor big are close to doing what they have to be doing. Of course they get an easy basket. Show me it run properly. I have examples from the Marquette game, go look at those. Hoyas aren't running it perfectly in the highlights but it is working as it should. There if run right geometry and physics of not being able to pass the ball through the big to get the ball to your big is how they play works, that is how it is done. There are four examples of the Hoyas executing well on defense when the highlights show offensive highlights. There are also highlights that show Marquette scoring on Hoyas who flubbed execution of it. You are bringing up a screen? Hard hedge is or should only be used on a pick (you know pick where the player plants next to the defender not a screen which a player is caught running through). You are calling things hard hedge that aren't and thinking hard hedge is the problem. That is what I'm trying to explain. Yes, I'm peeved you are showing something that isn't quite hard hedge and the defense isn't even defending tightly, which is part of hard hedge and trying to make a point. It is like pointing to a motorcycle and saying see cars can tip over (not quite that bad, but you are getting close). You understand most of it, but showing when it isn't run close to right to make a point isn't helping anybody think you know what you are talking about. No more. Not worth the time nor the noise.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,861
|
Post by EtomicB on Jan 20, 2020 22:20:04 GMT -5
The play @ 5:54 where Howard takes the long 3 he could have easily got deep into the lane if he wanted to. The play with Wahab & Mac looked to be more of a drag & replace type play, McEwen wasn't aggressive at all there, he was looking for Howard on the pop-out and got it when Mosely got distracted with the roller... The play @ 5:42 when Howard goes away from Yurtsevens hedge and then gives him a hesitation move before scoring on the floater, right after that the announcer states that "Marquette will keep going to that because Gtown can't stop it" I understand that Gtown uses it successfully during games but does the success outweigh the failures? A play that is used to shut down one successful play type, the pick and roll, when a team is thin and you can run it and have 75% success is really good. There isn't another defense against it with that success. The hard hedge works if you have good players who are disciplined and have the athleticism to run it. Not many college teams run it as they don't have the players. Big East runs a lot of pick and rolls, but against a team really thin on wings and bigs and is mostly a small team it is used to run the defensive team into the ground as much as it is to score. The hard hedge cuts down on the hard picks and chasing with the big just needing two steps to get back on physical coverage of the other big and by runinng in a direct line between the big and guard the guard with the ball can't get the ball to the big as can't throw through the big and an alleyoop has line of sight blocked as was done against Seton Hall. The defensive guard should be in position to defend what ever follows when his big release back. With the Marquette game the highlights showed not so great execution of the hard hedge working. With the 5:42 play the announcer said that but Howard never did it again, mostly because Yurt didn't bite and the other times guard was back in position. The 5:54 Howard would run right into Pickett if he drives, could float over too, but other players start reacting and adjuting. He doesn't quite have a deep drive, but a mid-range jumper at the line is about the best clean he could get. Agree with Mac and Wahab, Mac is the weakest guard on hard hedge. But, Wahab also ran hard hedge on the side when they used it twice in one possession. You never really want to ever use it on the side as the big has too much room to roam that is out of the defensive big being able to maintain the line to block out a pass around the defensive big. Players getting distracted isn't the hard hedge breaking down, but players getting distracted and that happens in every defensive play. Hard hedge has a few pieces that need to be done right to work and the right players. Hoyas have the players and coaching and the players have learned it. But, other options against pick and roll have much higher offensive success rates. I don't think Gtown is successful 75% of the times they hedge, that seems way too high... Marquette/Howard ran the high screen play on the next possession, Howard missed an open 3 but got his own rebound and was fouled. Their next possession after that they ran it again, this time Howard split the hedge and hit a pull up from the foul line. Their next possession they ran it again and Wahab fouled Howard on the hedge. The game went to a tv time out at that point. Marquette definitely went back to the play again and it wasn't defended any better.
|
|
saxagael
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,894
|
Post by saxagael on Jan 20, 2020 22:41:26 GMT -5
A play that is used to shut down one successful play type, the pick and roll, when a team is thin and you can run it and have 75% success is really good. There isn't another defense against it with that success. The hard hedge works if you have good players who are disciplined and have the athleticism to run it. Not many college teams run it as they don't have the players. Big East runs a lot of pick and rolls, but against a team really thin on wings and bigs and is mostly a small team it is used to run the defensive team into the ground as much as it is to score. The hard hedge cuts down on the hard picks and chasing with the big just needing two steps to get back on physical coverage of the other big and by runinng in a direct line between the big and guard the guard with the ball can't get the ball to the big as can't throw through the big and an alleyoop has line of sight blocked as was done against Seton Hall. The defensive guard should be in position to defend what ever follows when his big release back. With the Marquette game the highlights showed not so great execution of the hard hedge working. With the 5:42 play the announcer said that but Howard never did it again, mostly because Yurt didn't bite and the other times guard was back in position. The 5:54 Howard would run right into Pickett if he drives, could float over too, but other players start reacting and adjuting. He doesn't quite have a deep drive, but a mid-range jumper at the line is about the best clean he could get. Agree with Mac and Wahab, Mac is the weakest guard on hard hedge. But, Wahab also ran hard hedge on the side when they used it twice in one possession. You never really want to ever use it on the side as the big has too much room to roam that is out of the defensive big being able to maintain the line to block out a pass around the defensive big. Players getting distracted isn't the hard hedge breaking down, but players getting distracted and that happens in every defensive play. Hard hedge has a few pieces that need to be done right to work and the right players. Hoyas have the players and coaching and the players have learned it. But, other options against pick and roll have much higher offensive success rates. I don't think Gtown is successful 75% of the times they hedge, that seems way too high... Marquette/Howard ran the high screen play on the next possession, Howard missed an open 3 but got his own rebound and was fouled. Their next possession after that they ran it again, this time Howard split the hedge and hit a pull up from the foul line. Their next possession they ran it again and Wahab fouled Howard on the hedge. The game went to a tv time out at that point. Marquette definitely went back to the play again and it wasn't defended any better. Keep in mind this is highlights and that means scoring possessions. Hard hedge is only part of a possession if pick and roll is run and only for the 3 to 5 second that portion of the possession. A possession may use 2 to 5 different schemes to adjust to what offense is doing, if doing something more than just man. It often is run about 8 to 20 times a game (Hall was close to 20). I counted about 7 times it was run in the Marquette game, but I missed a lot of plays (the play were Wahab has two tries at hard hedge was one). Howard splitting the hedge was good, but they Yurtseven hadn't got into position for the hedge, Howard didn't wait for the pick he just dove for a gap. Still can count it as hard hedge or trying to get to it. One thing that I'm hoping others don't follow is the hard screen / pick on Yurtseven just above the opposite block and freeing the Johnson to get to the pick for an easy play, which is what the hard hedge protects against. I'm mostly concerned about it as the screen is hard contact and could be a charge easily. The pick and roll should be set with everybody but the guard with the ball at the top and the big sitting out and away to clear the middle, so if the Hoya big isn't in place nobody else is there either. With 3 point shooting team the hard hedge keeps defenders out on the 3 point shooters and let the defensive guard and big do their work. Having a wing defender help opens up easy kickout for a 3 and why the hard hedge requires discipline. Howard is hard to control. But a double team on him would slow him down, but that has serious consequences too. The hard hedge is only run about 5% to 10% of the time as it is only 3 to 5 seconds of a possession and not run on every possession and there are 50 to 75 possession in each direction each game it isn't where many of the points are coming from.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,861
|
Post by EtomicB on Jan 20, 2020 23:17:42 GMT -5
I don't think Gtown is successful 75% of the times they hedge, that seems way too high... Marquette/Howard ran the high screen play on the next possession, Howard missed an open 3 but got his own rebound and was fouled. Their next possession after that they ran it again, this time Howard split the hedge and hit a pull up from the foul line. Their next possession they ran it again and Wahab fouled Howard on the hedge. The game went to a tv time out at that point. Marquette definitely went back to the play again and it wasn't defended any better. Keep in mind this is highlights and that means scoring possessions. Hard hedge is only part of a possession if pick and roll is run and only for the 3 to 5 second that portion of the possession. A possession may use 2 to 5 different schemes to adjust to what offense is doing, if doing something more than just man. It often is run about 8 to 20 times a game (Hall was close to 20). I counted about 7 times it was run in the Marquette game, but I missed a lot of plays (the play were Wahab has two tries at hard hedge was one). Howard splitting the hedge was good, but they Yurtseven hadn't got into position for the hedge, Howard didn't wait for the pick he just dove for a gap. Still can count it as hard hedge or trying to get to it. One thing that I'm hoping others don't follow is the hard screen / pick on Yurtseven just above the opposite block and freeing the Johnson to get to the pick for an easy play, which is what the hard hedge protects against. I'm mostly concerned about it as the screen is hard contact and could be a charge easily. The pick and roll should be set with everybody but the guard with the ball at the top and the big sitting out and away to clear the middle, so if the Hoya big isn't in place nobody else is there either. With 3 point shooting team the hard hedge keeps defenders out on the 3 point shooters and let the defensive guard and big do their work. Having a wing defender help opens up easy kickout for a 3 and why the hard hedge requires discipline. Howard is hard to control. But a double team on him would slow him down, but that has serious consequences too. The hard hedge is only run about 5% to 10% of the time as it is only 3 to 5 seconds of a possession and not run on every possession and there are 50 to 75 possession in each direction each game it isn't where many of the points are coming from. My bad I should have made it clear that I went back & watched the actual game on my dvr. The plays I'm referring to in my previous post occur from the 9:35 mark game time(5:42 on the youtube clips posted) until the 7:35 mark game time. During that 2 minute stretch, Marquette's high screen set worked 4 times in a row. That's where my frustration comes in, I get that PE's options are limited but sometimes you have to try anything when your best option isn't working at all especially in a close game.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,264
|
Post by prhoya on Jan 21, 2020 0:17:20 GMT -5
The hard hedge is only run about 5% to 10% of the time as it is only 3 to 5 seconds of a possession and not run on every possession and there are 50 to 75 possession in each direction each game it isn't where many of the points are coming from. Yet Qudus got two fouls hedging vs. MU. Be it personnel issues or whatever, it isn't worth the risk. Our bigs are getting into foul trouble, plus are using a lot of energy having to go to the perimeter to hedge and then sprint back to the post. Omer will be exhausted by March. What will happen next year if Omer leaves as he's said? Will Qudus be fouling 25 ft from the basket next year? Who will back him up? It's a recipe for disaster.
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,641
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Jan 21, 2020 7:34:11 GMT -5
Next year is when we really feel the 4 defections.
|
|
saxagael
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,894
|
Post by saxagael on Jan 21, 2020 7:52:12 GMT -5
The hard hedge is only run about 5% to 10% of the time as it is only 3 to 5 seconds of a possession and not run on every possession and there are 50 to 75 possession in each direction each game it isn't where many of the points are coming from. Yet Qudus got two fouls hedging vs. MU. Be it personnel issues or whatever, it isn't worth the risk. Our bigs are getting into foul trouble, plus are using a lot of energy having to go to the perimeter to hedge and then sprint back to the post. Omer will be exhausted by March. What will happen next year if Omer leaves as he's said? Will Qudus be fouling 25 ft from the basket next year? Who will back him up? It's a recipe for disaster. The reason his screen is run is to do just what it is doing. It manufactures advantage really well, particularly if you have a player like Howard, which is why they run it a ton on everybody. Wahab is still learning and fouls were mostly being out of position. With Yurtseven being tired that can be an issue, I think less with taking the three steps to follow the big to get into coverage or the two steps to get back, but the cross screens and picks when is just above the block so to free the big and not allow Yurtseven to get into place. MU knows the hard hedge work if it gets set, so they running plays to not have it get set, which other teams hadn't been doing much. The other options to defend the high screen are usually playing long agile wing up top and having another covering their wing in the corner. We have only one wing and his lateral movement and agility isn't great, which makes him perfect defender for the corner, but not the helping up top (and there is nobody behind Pickett). Muresan has no capability to help up top and with Pickett lacking the skills it gets tough. Having a guard help up top to double means the big either gets to the basket easily or more than likely pass to a rolling guard or a the open player elsewhere. A 3 -2 defense gets shot over and 2 - 3 the gets a wide open shot over or mid range jumper. With bigs for next year there is Wahab and then Timmy (who is improving really quickly), and Wilson who also is looking a lot better in early pre-game warm-ups (he was really stiff and still growing into his body over summer and early in the year, the red-shirt year may have him as a real help next year). It is frustrating. Teams with a player like Howard are going to be really tough, as with Bey whose size and skill make for a really tough match-up give the Hoya roster.
|
|
rhw485
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 742
|
Post by rhw485 on Jan 21, 2020 7:59:35 GMT -5
Hard to say where the breakdowns occurred, but I do think the bigs got caught out too high on the hedge far too often today. None of those guys setting screens (John, Johnson) are 3 point or even rim-running threats, so we shouldn't have allowed Howard so many opportunities to split the hedge. It was a good adjustment by Wojo to recognize it as a weakness he could exploit; but we needed to do a better job recognizing and countering it. While I think Yurt has done a better job of late avoiding the dumb hedge fouls, I don't thing Q is there yet. He gets caught out of position (or gets a foul) far more than we'd like for relatively how few defensive possessions he is in for. I saw two plays were Hoyas got burned on the hedge and 8 where it saved them, but I didn't see everything today. Yurt did a great job with fouls until after half where he had one foul then two back to back-ish on the hedge that earned him and earful from Patrick. The hard hedge isn't perfect but it more than serves its purpose much of the time. Most of the time when the hard hedge fails is wh en the big has mental lapses and covers above the guard not just below the pick on the basket side (this is where the guard has an easy drive to the bucket, Yurt committed this a lot in the first few games of the year but is much better now), the big isn't on the same side as the other team's big (easy basket for the big), or doesn't get the line to disrupt the pass to the big (easy pass to the big, but often the Hoya big should be able to defend the shot). There may have been 3 to 5 times today where the Hoyas were burned (it seems to roughly be about 3 a game), but most often is it 10 to 15 plays it more than does its job and can and does lead to an empty position for the other team. Having 3 or even 5 buckets off blown hard hedge isn't bad when 10 to 15 or more work well. But, if the other 80% of the plays could run as well as the hard hedge helps (the use of the hard hedge is a defense for usually one of three or four plays each possession, if they Hoyas stop the second response too. Folks on the board complain about it as it isn't something that others run much, but when a lot of pick and rolls are run and have a short bench it is a decent option to use. You don't hear Syracuse fans complain about zone when other teams get 3 to 5 baskets against it (or more accurately 30+ baskets or more on average). Running hard hedge takes having long athletic-ish bigs which Georgetown has and is back recruiting again. Early this year I was on the hating the hard hedge as it was getting run really poorly, but after the third game the bigs started running it a lot better. I was away for the weekend and didn't get to post timely, but given I've been pretty open about my disdain for the hard hedge, some things I saw that stand out to me (apologies if this was covered elsewhere I'm not all the way through the thread yet): - There were multiples times where Marquette would flip the direction of the screen at the very last second. Essentially Yurt7 was hard hedging on the wrong side and completely taken out of the play. He has to take risks and get out there quickly otherwise he gets a cheap hip-check foul. - Additionally, Marquette was doing a lot of "screen the screener" action where Yurt7 would get picked by someone else so then he wasn't able to get out there fast enough as he was trailing his man. If you're asking him to hard hedge in that situation it's difficult - I do agree if there was a game to think the hard hedge is the best strategy, then it would be Marquette because you're trying to limit direct shots from Howard. But clearly that didn't work. Even when the hard hedge is executed correctly and the guard goes under the screen, there are multiple times a game where the big running back to the hoop actually gets in the way of the guard trying to get back to the ball and Howard still got a clean look from 3. - The statement bolded above makes me think we're not thinking about the hard hedge the same way. The way we're operating, we ask the big to come above the pick every time, with the goal being to force the guard to dribble away from the hoop or at least turn his back and stop having a direct line. If you want the big below the pick, that's a much softer hedge and there you're trying to string out the guard without committing too much. To me that's a completely different approach - My biggest issue with the hard hedge is it inherently involves a 3rd defender on the weakside help every time. Seton Hall destroyed us by putting that defender in a terrible spot of leaving a shooter and failing to recover. Multiple times a game nobody provides that help and it's a clean roll to the hoop - The only time we've abandoned the hard hedge was the 2nd half of the Seton Hall game. I'd love if anyone else can go back and confirm what I saw. It actually let our help defenders stay at home and we were able to force a lot of turnovers. The problem with the execution in that half was Yurt7 got beat for lobs too many times. Gil is 7'2 so thats tough but it was still relatively successful and something I would like to try more. I'm not an anti-Ewing or anti-Thompson person. I agree you can't stop every pick and roll, and a team will run 3 or 4 in a possession and it only takes one to break down. But our pick and roll defense is statistically terrible (Nolan on casualhoya podcast had us 298th a few weeks back), our defensive efficiency is now 128th, Ewing has never been able to break 90. These are all Ewing players except Mosely, who Ewing has said multiple times is our best defender. The lack of depth hurts but these issues were there with 11 guys also (we also can dictate pace and we still try to play pretty fast with only 7, that's our choice). I think Ewing is showing he's actually a very sound Xs and Os offensive coach, we have different sets and wrinkles every game, and each year he's tailored the offense to play to the strengths of the roster. On the defensive side, we've run the same system for basically three years, with very little success. I don't think it's crazy to suggest that we need to try something different. What's that definition of insanity again?
|
|
saxagael
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,894
|
Post by saxagael on Jan 21, 2020 8:01:04 GMT -5
Next year is when we really feel the 4 defections. Sibley is coming next year and takes some of that pain away Hoyas are feeling now. There are scholarships to use to fill those gaps. What really hurts is with a new coach in a rebuild program it takes 2 to 3 full recruiting seasons to get a good class that is the coaches players. Having four leave like that ate a year or two of progress and Patrick is back scrambling to fill-in rather than getting the exact guys he wants. Having Williams decide not to come hurts a bit too, but I was deeply surprised he verbal committed as throughout the whole recruiting process he continually said he want to go to school away and experience something different, but his parents love Georgetown and Ewing. Guards and wings are needed badly.
|
|
saxagael
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,894
|
Post by saxagael on Jan 21, 2020 8:50:48 GMT -5
I saw two plays were Hoyas got burned on the hedge and 8 where it saved them, but I didn't see everything today. Yurt did a great job with fouls until after half where he had one foul then two back to back-ish on the hedge that earned him and earful from Patrick. The hard hedge isn't perfect but it more than serves its purpose much of the time. Most of the time when the hard hedge fails is wh en the big has mental lapses and covers above the guard not just below the pick on the basket side (this is where the guard has an easy drive to the bucket, Yurt committed this a lot in the first few games of the year but is much better now), the big isn't on the same side as the other team's big (easy basket for the big), or doesn't get the line to disrupt the pass to the big (easy pass to the big, but often the Hoya big should be able to defend the shot). There may have been 3 to 5 times today where the Hoyas were burned (it seems to roughly be about 3 a game), but most often is it 10 to 15 plays it more than does its job and can and does lead to an empty position for the other team. Having 3 or even 5 buckets off blown hard hedge isn't bad when 10 to 15 or more work well. But, if the other 80% of the plays could run as well as the hard hedge helps (the use of the hard hedge is a defense for usually one of three or four plays each possession, if they Hoyas stop the second response too. Folks on the board complain about it as it isn't something that others run much, but when a lot of pick and rolls are run and have a short bench it is a decent option to use. You don't hear Syracuse fans complain about zone when other teams get 3 to 5 baskets against it (or more accurately 30+ baskets or more on average). Running hard hedge takes having long athletic-ish bigs which Georgetown has and is back recruiting again. Early this year I was on the hating the hard hedge as it was getting run really poorly, but after the third game the bigs started running it a lot better. I was away for the weekend and didn't get to post timely, but given I've been pretty open about my disdain for the hard hedge, some things I saw that stand out to me (apologies if this was covered elsewhere I'm not all the way through the thread yet): - There were multiples times where Marquette would flip the direction of the screen at the very last second. Essentially Yurt7 was hard hedging on the wrong side and completely taken out of the play. He has to take risks and get out there quickly otherwise he gets a cheap hip-check foul. - Additionally, Marquette was doing a lot of "screen the screener" action where Yurt7 would get picked by someone else so then he wasn't able to get out there fast enough as he was trailing his man. If you're asking him to hard hedge in that situation it's difficult - I do agree if there was a game to think the hard hedge is the best strategy, then it would be Marquette because you're trying to limit direct shots from Howard. But clearly that didn't work. Even when the hard hedge is executed correctly and the guard goes under the screen, there are multiple times a game where the big running back to the hoop actually gets in the way of the guard trying to get back to the ball and Howard still got a clean look from 3. - The statement bolded above makes me think we're not thinking about the hard hedge the same way. The way we're operating, we ask the big to come above the pick every time, with the goal being to force the guard to dribble away from the hoop or at least turn his back and stop having a direct line. If you want the big below the pick, that's a much softer hedge and there you're trying to string out the guard without committing too much. To me that's a completely different approach - My biggest issue with the hard hedge is it inherently involves a 3rd defender on the weakside help every time. Seton Hall destroyed us by putting that defender in a terrible spot of leaving a shooter and failing to recover. Multiple times a game nobody provides that help and it's a clean roll to the hoop - The only time we've abandoned the hard hedge was the 2nd half of the Seton Hall game. I'd love if anyone else can go back and confirm what I saw. It actually let our help defenders stay at home and we were able to force a lot of turnovers. The problem with the execution in that half was Yurt7 got beat for lobs too many times. Gil is 7'2 so thats tough but it was still relatively successful and something I would like to try more. I'm not an anti-Ewing or anti-Thompson person. I agree you can't stop every pick and roll, and a team will run 3 or 4 in a possession and it only takes one to break down. But our pick and roll defense is statistically terrible (Nolan on casualhoya podcast had us 298th a few weeks back), our defensive efficiency is now 128th, Ewing has never been able to break 90. These are all Ewing players except Mosely, who Ewing has said multiple times is our best defender. The lack of depth hurts but these issues were there with 11 guys also (we also can dictate pace and we still try to play pretty fast with only 7, that's our choice). I think Ewing is showing he's actually a very sound Xs and Os offensive coach, we have different sets and wrinkles every game, and each year he's tailored the offense to play to the strengths of the roster. On the defensive side, we've run the same system for basically three years, with very little success. I don't think it's crazy to suggest that we need to try something different. What's that definition of insanity again? I deeply agree! MU did a great job not letting the hard hedge get set, which is good coaching. The only slight disagreement I have is the wing defenders shouldn't be helping, they should be staying home if the hard hedge is set. If it doesn't get set they may need to help, but MU game they mostly stayed home. If the wing defender does come in, it is often the big that should rotate out. Early in the game MU was running double screen across the top taking out Hoyas two guards (if not three players) leaving Yurtseven as the rotate to cover Howard (really smart play by Yurtseven and Wahab has been doing similar), which puts the big up top. Not a hard hedge at all, but puts the big up top through smart helping. Howard was nailing shots over a seven footer with a hand in his face, which is absolutely nuts. Agreeing with defensive efficiency, but hard hedge isn't the problem leading to that it is the team has been built (or framed) to be an athletic long team that can run and pressure full court all game. This is something that fits Pickett's game really well, but being short on players that agreesive model won't work and needs more lateral defense and long, which Hoya's don't have much of. That is where the defensive hole is, lack of depth and lack of wings to cover and deter.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jan 21, 2020 8:55:51 GMT -5
I'm not an anti-Ewing or anti-Thompson person. I agree you can't stop every pick and roll, and a team will run 3 or 4 in a possession and it only takes one to break down. But our pick and roll defense is statistically terrible (Nolan on casualhoya podcast had us 298th a few weeks back), our defensive efficiency is now 128th, Ewing has never been able to break 90. These are all Ewing players except Mosely, who Ewing has said multiple times is our best defender. The lack of depth hurts but these issues were there with 11 guys also (we also can dictate pace and we still try to play pretty fast with only 7, that's our choice). I think Ewing is showing he's actually a very sound Xs and Os offensive coach, we have different sets and wrinkles every game, and each year he's tailored the offense to play to the strengths of the roster. On the defensive side, we've run the same system for basically three years, with very little success. I don't think it's crazy to suggest that we need to try something different. What's that definition of insanity again? Lost in all the hard hedge talk is that Georgetown has not had a good defense in quite some time, back as far as 2015. Under Ewing, we have had defenses ranked 119 (9th of 10 in the Big East), 133 (9th of 10 in the Big East), and now 129 (10 of 10 in the Big East). This was a problem even when we had depth, though I agree lacking depth certainly doesn't help. The fact is, even if the hard hedge is working, then a lot of other things are wrong with the defensive scheme.
|
|
rhw485
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 742
|
Post by rhw485 on Jan 21, 2020 8:59:38 GMT -5
The one strategy thing I would like to see Coach Ewing employ a little more for the rest of the season is the use of some zone defense. Even if it was just as a change of base that he threw out there for a few possessions each half to change the momentum and pace of the games. It would give some of his big guys some rest (not having to chase guys on the high pick and roll every possession) and hopefully protect them from foul trouble. I don't think the Hoyas would be a good zone team if they tried to do it for extended periods because they lack length at the guard position, but sticking to the same man to man defensive principles all game against Marquette and Howard was not working. I realize playing zone against a team with a long distance shooter like Howard can be a problem but I would have liked to see if they could have made it work for a few minutes each half. Patrick does run 2-3 a bit, as well as 3-2. He rotates looks. But, Mosely and Pickett, and Allen have been able to run man well enough to use it much of the time. Patrick's preferred defense is a full court pressure / press the whole game. But that takes a good and somewhat deep bench with long athletic players. That vaporized. So we are at plan B. I have watched every Gtown possession this year. We ran the 2-3 zone in two games that i can recall, a very small amount in Cuse game and then a disastrous 3 min stretch against Providence in the first half. I have never seen us run a 3-2 zone. Is there a game you've seen that stick out so I can go back and watch? I think a lot of times our guards are just overhelping on drives so maybe it looks like a zone but they're following their man around until there's dribble penetration.
|
|
rhw485
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 742
|
Post by rhw485 on Jan 21, 2020 9:28:10 GMT -5
I'm not an anti-Ewing or anti-Thompson person. I agree you can't stop every pick and roll, and a team will run 3 or 4 in a possession and it only takes one to break down. But our pick and roll defense is statistically terrible (Nolan on casualhoya podcast had us 298th a few weeks back), our defensive efficiency is now 128th, Ewing has never been able to break 90. These are all Ewing players except Mosely, who Ewing has said multiple times is our best defender. The lack of depth hurts but these issues were there with 11 guys also (we also can dictate pace and we still try to play pretty fast with only 7, that's our choice). I think Ewing is showing he's actually a very sound Xs and Os offensive coach, we have different sets and wrinkles every game, and each year he's tailored the offense to play to the strengths of the roster. On the defensive side, we've run the same system for basically three years, with very little success. I don't think it's crazy to suggest that we need to try something different. What's that definition of insanity again? Lost in all the hard hedge talk is that Georgetown has not had a good defense in quite some time, back as far as 2015. Under Ewing, we have had defenses ranked 119 (9th of 10 in the Big East), 133 (9th of 10 in the Big East), and now 129 (10 of 10 in the Big East). This was a problem even when we had depth, though I agree lacking depth certainly doesn't help. The fact is, even if the hard hedge is working, then a lot of other things are wrong with the defensive scheme. Here's the last 7 years from Kenpom. Yes there were cracks toward the end of the JT3 era, but no Ewing team has been able to beat the worst of JT3's last 4 years. So much of this was laid at Govan's feet for the first two Ewing years. That doesn't feel particularly fair in retrospect 2014: 91 2015: 33 2016: 81 2017: 58 ------------------ 2018: 119 2019: 133 2020: 128
|
|
hoya9797
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,201
|
Post by hoya9797 on Jan 21, 2020 9:32:14 GMT -5
This coaching staff has proven quite conclusively that they can not coach defense. But, for some reason, many people will not accept this fact. I guess one of the problems with hiring a legend into this job is that many people will try to defend the indefensible in order to avoid the uncomfortable idea that the legend is bad at this job and, soon, should not have it anymore.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,861
|
Post by EtomicB on Jan 21, 2020 10:08:41 GMT -5
Lost in all the hard hedge talk is that Georgetown has not had a good defense in quite some time, back as far as 2015. Under Ewing, we have had defenses ranked 119 (9th of 10 in the Big East), 133 (9th of 10 in the Big East), and now 129 (10 of 10 in the Big East). This was a problem even when we had depth, though I agree lacking depth certainly doesn't help. The fact is, even if the hard hedge is working, then a lot of other things are wrong with the defensive scheme. Here's the last 7 years from Kenpom. Yes there were cracks toward the end of the JT3 era, but no Ewing team has been able to beat the worst of JT3's last 4 years. So much of this was laid at Govan's feet for the first two Ewing years. That doesn't feel particularly fair in retrospect2014: 91 2015: 33 2016: 81 2017: 58 ------------------ 2018: 119 2019: 133 2020: 128 It wasn't fair back then either. I continually argued with folks who were beating up on Govan that this was a team issue mainly caused by a lack of communication on defense and/or a lack of attention to detail, it's the same this year in my view. There was a play in the Creighton game that Lappas criticized Allen on where he was defending Alexander on the sideline, had him shaded Heavily to force him back to the mid-court but one little fake from Alexander got him to bite which allowed Alexander to go baseline right by Yurtseven for a layup... Was the play Allens fault? Absolutely but not one of his teammates stepped up to help him out, that happens far too often for Gtown. I think it has a lot to do with PE always telling them to guard your ”man” and not the ”ball”, to me it makes them guard individually instead of as a team.
|
|
saxagael
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,894
|
Post by saxagael on Jan 21, 2020 10:16:24 GMT -5
Patrick does run 2-3 a bit, as well as 3-2. He rotates looks. But, Mosely and Pickett, and Allen have been able to run man well enough to use it much of the time. Patrick's preferred defense is a full court pressure / press the whole game. But that takes a good and somewhat deep bench with long athletic players. That vaporized. So we are at plan B. I have watched every Gtown possession this year. We ran the 2-3 zone in two games that i can recall, a very small amount in Cuse game and then a disastrous 3 min stretch against Providence in the first half. I have never seen us run a 3-2 zone. Is there a game you've seen that stick out so I can go back and watch? I think a lot of times our guards are just overhelping on drives so maybe it looks like a zone but they're following their man around until there's dribble penetration. I haven't seen them run 3 -2, but pointing out why it isn't an option on high screen.
|
|
saxagael
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,894
|
Post by saxagael on Jan 21, 2020 10:31:22 GMT -5
Here's the last 7 years from Kenpom. Yes there were cracks toward the end of the JT3 era, but no Ewing team has been able to beat the worst of JT3's last 4 years. So much of this was laid at Govan's feet for the first two Ewing years. That doesn't feel particularly fair in retrospect2014: 91 2015: 33 2016: 81 2017: 58 ------------------ 2018: 119 2019: 133 2020: 128 It wasn't fair back then either. I continually argued with folks who were beating up on Govan that this was a team issue mainly caused by a lack of communication on defense and/or a lack of attention to detail, it's the same this year in my view. There was a play in the Creighton game that Lappas criticized Allen on where he was defending Alexander on the sideline, had him shaded Heavily to force him back to the mid-court but one little fake from Alexander got him to bite which allowed Alexander to go baseline right by Yurtseven for a layup... Was the play Allens fault? Absolutely but not one of his teammates stepped up to help him out, that happens far too often for Gtown. I think it has a lot to do with PE always telling them to guard your ”man” and not the ”ball”, to me it makes them guard individually instead of as a team. Govan didn't move well inside nor out and required a help defender. Neither Yurtseven nor Wahab need that this year. Yes communication is huge and team defense awareness. I was looking for KenPom breakdown of the early games compared to after the four left, but could find it quickly. I'm mostly interested in the games after Akinjo and Leblanc left as it seemed the defense ran rather well for those few games. Akinjo was a rather good on ball defender, but his lack of size was getting exploited this year. Hoyas have had the players to mostly run man. Their awareness and help coverage has been fairly good. The KenPom number is high as other teams are running a lot of offensive plays aimed at running the Hoyas, which what Patrick's plan and worked fairly well when had larger roster. But, the KenPom ratings also are over relied on. He's got the Hoyas at 51 on this overall list, which means they are doing something well. Every team has its strengths and weaknesses, but if you can cover weaknesses with strengths you are often in good shape. Hoyas, when all are healthy have good offensive schemes that work well for their players. Defense since the four left has been a focus on preserving energy, reducing foul trouble, and not getting banged up nor hurt. Keeping the Hoyas in the Patrick talks about this a ton in interviews. Understanding strengths, weaknesses, and how to have the balance with the overall balance tipping in your favor is key. Hoyas mostly communicate well on defense, but they are running man a lot and situational schemes on occasion within possessions, like hard hedge. When my kid was little his preschool taught, "you get what you get and don't get upset", which may be what we live with as Hoya fans this year.
|
|