Development Needs
- Thread starter Knight
- Start date
JohnnyFever
Active member
[quote="Knight" post=407000]I would like CMA to work the refs a bit more than he seems to be doing. I don’t know why he doesn’t complain about opponents’ guards using their free hand to fend off our guards that are playing defense.[/quote]
I've noticed this a lot. It's odd because refs these days call way more tic tac fouls, but they seem to let guards on offense push their defender off them to create room. That's not allowed. I see lots of teams do that to us and I think maybe 1 call all season so far. It's important we get those, because our pressure will likely lead to more frustrated opponents and it's often a move that comes out of frustration.
I've noticed this a lot. It's odd because refs these days call way more tic tac fouls, but they seem to let guards on offense push their defender off them to create room. That's not allowed. I see lots of teams do that to us and I think maybe 1 call all season so far. It's important we get those, because our pressure will likely lead to more frustrated opponents and it's often a move that comes out of frustration.
Alexander and Williams continue to get beat off the dribble consistently, way too much emphasis on looking for steals. I know McGriff does not have a "sexy" game but I do not think it is a coincidence he was on the floor when we blew the game open at the end of the half against Stony Brook and when we reduced the double figure deficit last night and got back in the game. Sound player on both sides of the ball and pretty much committed to keeping his man in front of him, there is something to be said for fundamentals.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.
Last edited:
[quote="Logen" post=407019]Alexander and Williams continue to get beat off the dribble consistently, way too much emphasis on looking for steals. I know McGriff does not have a "sexy" game but I do not think it is a coincidence he was on the floor when we blew the game open at the end of the half against Stony Brook and when we reduced the double figure deficit last night and got back in the game. Sound player on both sides of the ball and pretty much committed to keeping his man in front of him, there is something to be said for fundamentals.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.[/quote]
Totally agree Logen. The D is the primary area to improve. A little less “glitz” and more basics seems prudent. Cheating too much will burn you.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.[/quote]
Totally agree Logen. The D is the primary area to improve. A little less “glitz” and more basics seems prudent. Cheating too much will burn you.
Agree,that is why I made the statement that every team we played seemed to have faster guards since they get beat off the dribble everyttime
Not liking the 40 mins of hell which by the way I haven’t seen yet
Not to be neg but can see us beat the hall. If we do not change our game play ie stop the chasing it can be a 2o point loss
Not liking the 40 mins of hell which by the way I haven’t seen yet
Not to be neg but can see us beat the hall. If we do not change our game play ie stop the chasing it can be a 2o point loss
beast of the east
Active member
[quote="Knight" post=407000]I would like CMA to work the refs a bit more than he seems to be doing. I don’t know why he doesn’t complain about opponents’ guards using their free hand to fend off our guards that are playing defense.[/quote]
One of the most frustrating things for me in Mullin's last season was how undisciplined he had become with refs and how he allowed his players to follow suit. I believe Ponds alone had 7 technical fouls called on him during his final season here, almost all for being mouthy with refs.
There is a way to engage the refs without showing them up (remember the tirades of a younger Boeheim that showed what an ass he was and if effective was only because he intimidated the refs and may have had some control over who worked or got assigned). Just because CMA isn't demonstrably mouthing or wildly gesticulating doesn't mean he doesn't put in a word quietly.
The things that the best coaches would remind players is that refs are going to make mistakes, and for a player to focus on his own mistakes and correct those.
One of the most frustrating things for me in Mullin's last season was how undisciplined he had become with refs and how he allowed his players to follow suit. I believe Ponds alone had 7 technical fouls called on him during his final season here, almost all for being mouthy with refs.
There is a way to engage the refs without showing them up (remember the tirades of a younger Boeheim that showed what an ass he was and if effective was only because he intimidated the refs and may have had some control over who worked or got assigned). Just because CMA isn't demonstrably mouthing or wildly gesticulating doesn't mean he doesn't put in a word quietly.
The things that the best coaches would remind players is that refs are going to make mistakes, and for a player to focus on his own mistakes and correct those.
beast of the east
Active member
[quote="Logen" post=407019]Alexander and Williams continue to get beat off the dribble consistently, way too much emphasis on looking for steals. I know McGriff does not have a "sexy" game but I do not think it is a coincidence he was on the floor when we blew the game open at the end of the half against Stony Brook and when we reduced the double figure deficit last night and got back in the game. Sound player on both sides of the ball and pretty much committed to keeping his man in front of him, there is something to be said for fundamentals.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.[/quote]
Agree with your comments in concept, but would also add that as you add talented length, your interior defense improves and stops easy baskets off the dribble. Straight up D isn't about steals, but listening to Nolan Richardson at last years basketball kickoff dinner, the idea of 40 minutes of hell is predicated on forcing the opposition into turnovers that by all means rattle them. When you get the ball stolen off the dribble, or forced into a bad pass leading to a turnover, or travel because you lost composure in a swarming defense, it becomes the hel that gives your opponent energy, easy baskets, and a huge emotional edge. Straight up solid defense doesn't do that.
I think the solution to what you correctly observe is that defenders must pick their spots to gamble for the steal, and the guys defending off the ball have to work as hard if not harder to bottle up their guys while our guards are harassingly ballhandlers. It isn't always about the guards getting beat that is the problem, it sometimes is lax defense away from the ball, sort of like a pass rush in football if the secondary allows receivers to get wide open.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.[/quote]
Agree with your comments in concept, but would also add that as you add talented length, your interior defense improves and stops easy baskets off the dribble. Straight up D isn't about steals, but listening to Nolan Richardson at last years basketball kickoff dinner, the idea of 40 minutes of hell is predicated on forcing the opposition into turnovers that by all means rattle them. When you get the ball stolen off the dribble, or forced into a bad pass leading to a turnover, or travel because you lost composure in a swarming defense, it becomes the hel that gives your opponent energy, easy baskets, and a huge emotional edge. Straight up solid defense doesn't do that.
I think the solution to what you correctly observe is that defenders must pick their spots to gamble for the steal, and the guys defending off the ball have to work as hard if not harder to bottle up their guys while our guards are harassingly ballhandlers. It isn't always about the guards getting beat that is the problem, it sometimes is lax defense away from the ball, sort of like a pass rush in football if the secondary allows receivers to get wide open.
[quote="Beast of the East" post=407026][quote="Logen" post=407019]Alexander and Williams continue to get beat off the dribble consistently, way too much emphasis on looking for steals. I know McGriff does not have a "sexy" game but I do not think it is a coincidence he was on the floor when we blew the game open at the end of the half against Stony Brook and when we reduced the double figure deficit last night and got back in the game. Sound player on both sides of the ball and pretty much committed to keeping his man in front of him, there is something to be said for fundamentals.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.[/quote]
Agree with your comments in concept, but would also add that as you add talented length, your interior defense improves and stops easy baskets off the dribble. Straight up D isn't about steals, but listening to Nolan Richardson at last years basketball kickoff dinner, the idea of 40 minutes of hell is predicated on forcing the opposition into turnovers that by all means rattle them. When you get the ball stolen off the dribble, or forced into a bad pass leading to a turnover, or travel because you lost composure in a swarming defense, it becomes the hel that gives your opponent energy, easy baskets, and a huge emotional edge. Straight up solid defense doesn't do that.
I think the solution to what you correctly observe is that defenders must pick their spots to gamble for the steal, and the guys defending off the ball have to work as hard if not harder to bottle up their guys while our guards are harassingly ballhandlers. It isn't always about the guards getting beat that is the problem, it sometimes is lax defense away from the ball, sort of like a pass rush in football if the secondary allows receivers to get wide open.[/quote]
Respectfully disagree, if you are depending on rotations and rim protections as your primary defense as opposed to keeping the ball in front of you, IMO, you are beaten before you start. I may be a minority of one but the way they are playing defense, I find both Alexander and Williams significantly overrated by many on this board.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.[/quote]
Agree with your comments in concept, but would also add that as you add talented length, your interior defense improves and stops easy baskets off the dribble. Straight up D isn't about steals, but listening to Nolan Richardson at last years basketball kickoff dinner, the idea of 40 minutes of hell is predicated on forcing the opposition into turnovers that by all means rattle them. When you get the ball stolen off the dribble, or forced into a bad pass leading to a turnover, or travel because you lost composure in a swarming defense, it becomes the hel that gives your opponent energy, easy baskets, and a huge emotional edge. Straight up solid defense doesn't do that.
I think the solution to what you correctly observe is that defenders must pick their spots to gamble for the steal, and the guys defending off the ball have to work as hard if not harder to bottle up their guys while our guards are harassingly ballhandlers. It isn't always about the guards getting beat that is the problem, it sometimes is lax defense away from the ball, sort of like a pass rush in football if the secondary allows receivers to get wide open.[/quote]
Respectfully disagree, if you are depending on rotations and rim protections as your primary defense as opposed to keeping the ball in front of you, IMO, you are beaten before you start. I may be a minority of one but the way they are playing defense, I find both Alexander and Williams significantly overrated by many on this board.
beast of the east
Active member
[quote="Logen" post=407027][quote="Beast of the East" post=407026][quote="Logen" post=407019]Alexander and Williams continue to get beat off the dribble consistently, way too much emphasis on looking for steals. I know McGriff does not have a "sexy" game but I do not think it is a coincidence he was on the floor when we blew the game open at the end of the half against Stony Brook and when we reduced the double figure deficit last night and got back in the game. Sound player on both sides of the ball and pretty much committed to keeping his man in front of him, there is something to be said for fundamentals.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.[/quote]
Agree with your comments in concept, but would also add that as you add talented length, your interior defense improves and stops easy baskets off the dribble. Straight up D isn't about steals, but listening to Nolan Richardson at last years basketball kickoff dinner, the idea of 40 minutes of hell is predicated on forcing the opposition into turnovers that by all means rattle them. When you get the ball stolen off the dribble, or forced into a bad pass leading to a turnover, or travel because you lost composure in a swarming defense, it becomes the hel that gives your opponent energy, easy baskets, and a huge emotional edge. Straight up solid defense doesn't do that.
I think the solution to what you correctly observe is that defenders must pick their spots to gamble for the steal, and the guys defending off the ball have to work as hard if not harder to bottle up their guys while our guards are harassingly ballhandlers. It isn't always about the guards getting beat that is the problem, it sometimes is lax defense away from the ball, sort of like a pass rush in football if the secondary allows receivers to get wide open.[/quote]
Respectfully disagree, if you are depending on rotations and rim protections as your primary defense as opposed to keeping the ball in front of you, IMO, you are beaten before you start. I may be a minority of one but the way they are playing defense, I find both Alexander and Williams significantly overrated by many on this board.[/quote]
Not saying that. I'm saying that strong interior defense with length allows guards better protection when they get beaten off the dribble. No one said anything about rim protection being primary. In terms of getting beaten off the dribble, I always preferred guys playing nose to nose rather than giving guys room respecting their quickness. Basketball is very geometric, and to me the closer you play a guy, you are cutting down his angles and making it harder for him to get around you.
Agree totally that bad on ball defense, is bad defense period. But beating someone off the dribble shouldn't mean easy baskets. Just ask Shamorie Ponds about the second half of his last season here.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.[/quote]
Agree with your comments in concept, but would also add that as you add talented length, your interior defense improves and stops easy baskets off the dribble. Straight up D isn't about steals, but listening to Nolan Richardson at last years basketball kickoff dinner, the idea of 40 minutes of hell is predicated on forcing the opposition into turnovers that by all means rattle them. When you get the ball stolen off the dribble, or forced into a bad pass leading to a turnover, or travel because you lost composure in a swarming defense, it becomes the hel that gives your opponent energy, easy baskets, and a huge emotional edge. Straight up solid defense doesn't do that.
I think the solution to what you correctly observe is that defenders must pick their spots to gamble for the steal, and the guys defending off the ball have to work as hard if not harder to bottle up their guys while our guards are harassingly ballhandlers. It isn't always about the guards getting beat that is the problem, it sometimes is lax defense away from the ball, sort of like a pass rush in football if the secondary allows receivers to get wide open.[/quote]
Respectfully disagree, if you are depending on rotations and rim protections as your primary defense as opposed to keeping the ball in front of you, IMO, you are beaten before you start. I may be a minority of one but the way they are playing defense, I find both Alexander and Williams significantly overrated by many on this board.[/quote]
Not saying that. I'm saying that strong interior defense with length allows guards better protection when they get beaten off the dribble. No one said anything about rim protection being primary. In terms of getting beaten off the dribble, I always preferred guys playing nose to nose rather than giving guys room respecting their quickness. Basketball is very geometric, and to me the closer you play a guy, you are cutting down his angles and making it harder for him to get around you.
Agree totally that bad on ball defense, is bad defense period. But beating someone off the dribble shouldn't mean easy baskets. Just ask Shamorie Ponds about the second half of his last season here.
[quote="Beast of the East" post=407030][quote="Logen" post=407027][quote="Beast of the East" post=407026][quote="Logen" post=407019]Alexander and Williams continue to get beat off the dribble consistently, way too much emphasis on looking for steals. I know McGriff does not have a "sexy" game but I do not think it is a coincidence he was on the floor when we blew the game open at the end of the half against Stony Brook and when we reduced the double figure deficit last night and got back in the game. Sound player on both sides of the ball and pretty much committed to keeping his man in front of him, there is something to be said for fundamentals.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.[/quote]
Agree with your comments in concept, but would also add that as you add talented length, your interior defense improves and stops easy baskets off the dribble. Straight up D isn't about steals, but listening to Nolan Richardson at last years basketball kickoff dinner, the idea of 40 minutes of hell is predicated on forcing the opposition into turnovers that by all means rattle them. When you get the ball stolen off the dribble, or forced into a bad pass leading to a turnover, or travel because you lost composure in a swarming defense, it becomes the hel that gives your opponent energy, easy baskets, and a huge emotional edge. Straight up solid defense doesn't do that.
I think the solution to what you correctly observe is that defenders must pick their spots to gamble for the steal, and the guys defending off the ball have to work as hard if not harder to bottle up their guys while our guards are harassingly ballhandlers. It isn't always about the guards getting beat that is the problem, it sometimes is lax defense away from the ball, sort of like a pass rush in football if the secondary allows receivers to get wide open.[/quote]
Respectfully disagree, if you are depending on rotations and rim protections as your primary defense as opposed to keeping the ball in front of you, IMO, you are beaten before you start. I may be a minority of one but the way they are playing defense, I find both Alexander and Williams significantly overrated by many on this board.[/quote]
Not saying that. I'm saying that strong interior defense with length allows guards better protection when they get beaten off the dribble. No one said anything about rim protection being primary. In terms of getting beaten off the dribble, I always preferred guys playing nose to nose rather than giving guys room respecting their quickness. Basketball is very geometric, and to me the closer you play a guy, you are cutting down his angles and making it harder for him to get around you.
Agree totally that bad on ball defense, is bad defense period. But beating someone off the dribble shouldn't mean easy baskets. Just ask Shamorie Ponds about the second half of his last season here.[/quote]
Pretty much agree.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.[/quote]
Agree with your comments in concept, but would also add that as you add talented length, your interior defense improves and stops easy baskets off the dribble. Straight up D isn't about steals, but listening to Nolan Richardson at last years basketball kickoff dinner, the idea of 40 minutes of hell is predicated on forcing the opposition into turnovers that by all means rattle them. When you get the ball stolen off the dribble, or forced into a bad pass leading to a turnover, or travel because you lost composure in a swarming defense, it becomes the hel that gives your opponent energy, easy baskets, and a huge emotional edge. Straight up solid defense doesn't do that.
I think the solution to what you correctly observe is that defenders must pick their spots to gamble for the steal, and the guys defending off the ball have to work as hard if not harder to bottle up their guys while our guards are harassingly ballhandlers. It isn't always about the guards getting beat that is the problem, it sometimes is lax defense away from the ball, sort of like a pass rush in football if the secondary allows receivers to get wide open.[/quote]
Respectfully disagree, if you are depending on rotations and rim protections as your primary defense as opposed to keeping the ball in front of you, IMO, you are beaten before you start. I may be a minority of one but the way they are playing defense, I find both Alexander and Williams significantly overrated by many on this board.[/quote]
Not saying that. I'm saying that strong interior defense with length allows guards better protection when they get beaten off the dribble. No one said anything about rim protection being primary. In terms of getting beaten off the dribble, I always preferred guys playing nose to nose rather than giving guys room respecting their quickness. Basketball is very geometric, and to me the closer you play a guy, you are cutting down his angles and making it harder for him to get around you.
Agree totally that bad on ball defense, is bad defense period. But beating someone off the dribble shouldn't mean easy baskets. Just ask Shamorie Ponds about the second half of his last season here.[/quote]
Pretty much agree.
Coming into this season I thought that Coach Anderson had upgraded the talent level on the team but that he was going to have a fairly long to-do list.
The first few items were integrating the (many) new faces with the returning players, finding the right role for everyone in what is fundamentally a completely different team than last year, working on the adjustment for the JUCOs and the freshmen, and teaching the newcomers the system.
I think he's made fair progress on most of those items. The divide between new players/returning players seems much less obvious than it was at the beginning of the season. All of the roles haven't quite been nailed down, but they're getting there. Cole and Moore seem much more comfortable. Posh and Wusu are having growing pains, but as they say the best thing about freshmen is they become sophomores.
There are still a whole lot of development needs for this team. Somewhat surprisingly for a Mike Anderson team, the main one is defense.
As Logen pointed out on another thread, our guards do not stop the ball at all. McGriff might actually be the best of the lot at the moment. Alexander is playing like early-era Ponds on defense - all hat and no cattle, if he can't get the steal then he is out of position to do anything else useful on defense. Williams is a little better, but not much. Hopefully the return of Dunn will help stabilize that issue some.
With regard to guard defense, Anderson's system is a risk/reward approach - you're going to get turnovers and runouts, but sometimes you're going to get beat. Right now the players have not gotten good enough at the system for the reward to consistently outweigh the risk, but I have a fair amount of confidence that they'll get there. It's just a different approach from old school man defense, but if it's a net positive then that's what matters. And realistically they don't have the personnel to play old school man defense, which brings us to...
The post defense is truly horrible Truly. Horrible. I have commented about Moore's ineffectiveness as a "big man" from early on, and he has not gotten any better. He grabs his fair share of rebounds because of his length and athleticism, but he does not box out effectively, does not rotate to provide help, and is just a very weak post defender all around. Roberts is better, but Anderson has clearly made a decision that he'd rather have Moore's offense on the floor than Roberts defense (and I guess hope that Moore's defense comes along). The real disappointment is Toro, I had expected more from him but he has been flat awful. So you can see why the staff went out and got another big.
The offense is not exactly a work of art, but it's ahead of the defense and I don't think it amounts to a problem. There are enough shooters to take advantage of a zone and to keep the defense honest.
In terms of individual development it seems to me that Cole, Moore, and Earlington are finding their roles. Williams is starting to grow into the role of being one of the top options on offense. Champagnie is a pleasure to watch. As for Posh, I had posted previously that I wasn't ready to build a statute of him, and to me he has a long way to go in just about every aspect of the game. To some extent I think McGriff is a more complete player than Alexander - he has better court vision, stops the ball better, doesn't force his shots. Alexander has more upside, but he could learn a few things from McGriff's game.
The good news with all of it is that I have confidence that the staff sees the same holes and will plug them all. It's just going to be a work in progress for awhile is all.
The first few items were integrating the (many) new faces with the returning players, finding the right role for everyone in what is fundamentally a completely different team than last year, working on the adjustment for the JUCOs and the freshmen, and teaching the newcomers the system.
I think he's made fair progress on most of those items. The divide between new players/returning players seems much less obvious than it was at the beginning of the season. All of the roles haven't quite been nailed down, but they're getting there. Cole and Moore seem much more comfortable. Posh and Wusu are having growing pains, but as they say the best thing about freshmen is they become sophomores.
There are still a whole lot of development needs for this team. Somewhat surprisingly for a Mike Anderson team, the main one is defense.
As Logen pointed out on another thread, our guards do not stop the ball at all. McGriff might actually be the best of the lot at the moment. Alexander is playing like early-era Ponds on defense - all hat and no cattle, if he can't get the steal then he is out of position to do anything else useful on defense. Williams is a little better, but not much. Hopefully the return of Dunn will help stabilize that issue some.
With regard to guard defense, Anderson's system is a risk/reward approach - you're going to get turnovers and runouts, but sometimes you're going to get beat. Right now the players have not gotten good enough at the system for the reward to consistently outweigh the risk, but I have a fair amount of confidence that they'll get there. It's just a different approach from old school man defense, but if it's a net positive then that's what matters. And realistically they don't have the personnel to play old school man defense, which brings us to...
The post defense is truly horrible Truly. Horrible. I have commented about Moore's ineffectiveness as a "big man" from early on, and he has not gotten any better. He grabs his fair share of rebounds because of his length and athleticism, but he does not box out effectively, does not rotate to provide help, and is just a very weak post defender all around. Roberts is better, but Anderson has clearly made a decision that he'd rather have Moore's offense on the floor than Roberts defense (and I guess hope that Moore's defense comes along). The real disappointment is Toro, I had expected more from him but he has been flat awful. So you can see why the staff went out and got another big.
The offense is not exactly a work of art, but it's ahead of the defense and I don't think it amounts to a problem. There are enough shooters to take advantage of a zone and to keep the defense honest.
In terms of individual development it seems to me that Cole, Moore, and Earlington are finding their roles. Williams is starting to grow into the role of being one of the top options on offense. Champagnie is a pleasure to watch. As for Posh, I had posted previously that I wasn't ready to build a statute of him, and to me he has a long way to go in just about every aspect of the game. To some extent I think McGriff is a more complete player than Alexander - he has better court vision, stops the ball better, doesn't force his shots. Alexander has more upside, but he could learn a few things from McGriff's game.
The good news with all of it is that I have confidence that the staff sees the same holes and will plug them all. It's just going to be a work in progress for awhile is all.
[quote="Beast of the East" post=407025][quote="Knight" post=407000]I would like CMA to work the refs a bit more than he seems to be doing. I don’t know why he doesn’t complain about opponents’ guards using their free hand to fend off our guards that are playing defense.[/quote]
One of the most frustrating things for me in Mullin's last season was how undisciplined he had become with refs and how he allowed his players to follow suit. I believe Ponds alone had 7 technical fouls called on him during his final season here, almost all for being mouthy with refs.
There is a way to engage the refs without showing them up (remember the tirades of a younger Boeheim that showed what an ass he was and if effective was only because he intimidated the refs and may have had some control over who worked or got assigned). Just because CMA isn't demonstrably mouthing or wildly gesticulating doesn't mean he doesn't put in a word quietly.
The things that the best coaches would remind players is that refs are going to make mistakes, and for a player to focus on his own mistakes and correct those.[/quote]
I too didn’t like the way Mullin or Boeheim abuse officials. However, I think it’s important for players to know their coach has their backs and make their cases for them.
One of the most frustrating things for me in Mullin's last season was how undisciplined he had become with refs and how he allowed his players to follow suit. I believe Ponds alone had 7 technical fouls called on him during his final season here, almost all for being mouthy with refs.
There is a way to engage the refs without showing them up (remember the tirades of a younger Boeheim that showed what an ass he was and if effective was only because he intimidated the refs and may have had some control over who worked or got assigned). Just because CMA isn't demonstrably mouthing or wildly gesticulating doesn't mean he doesn't put in a word quietly.
The things that the best coaches would remind players is that refs are going to make mistakes, and for a player to focus on his own mistakes and correct those.[/quote]
I too didn’t like the way Mullin or Boeheim abuse officials. However, I think it’s important for players to know their coach has their backs and make their cases for them.
[quote="lawmanfan" post=407038]Coming into this season I thought that Coach Anderson had upgraded the talent level on the team but that he was going to have a fairly long to-do list.
The first few items were integrating the (many) new faces with the returning players, finding the right role for everyone in what is fundamentally a completely different team than last year, working on the adjustment for the JUCOs and the freshmen, and teaching the newcomers the system.
I think he's made fair progress on most of those items. The divide between new players/returning players seems much less obvious than it was at the beginning of the season. All of the roles haven't quite been nailed down, but they're getting there. Cole and Moore seem much more comfortable. Posh and Wusu are having growing pains, but as they say the best thing about freshmen is they become sophomores.
There are still a whole lot of development needs for this team. Somewhat surprisingly for a Mike Anderson team, the main one is defense.
As Logen pointed out on another thread, our guards do not stop the ball at all. McGriff might actually be the best of the lot at the moment. Alexander is playing like early-era Ponds on defense - all hat and no cattle, if he can't get the steal then he is out of position to do anything else useful on defense. Williams is a little better, but not much. Hopefully the return of Dunn will help stabilize that issue some.
With regard to guard defense, Anderson's system is a risk/reward approach - you're going to get turnovers and runouts, but sometimes you're going to get beat. Right now the players have not gotten good enough at the system for the reward to consistently outweigh the risk, but I have a fair amount of confidence that they'll get there. It's just a different approach from old school man defense, but if it's a net positive then that's what matters. And realistically they don't have the personnel to play old school man defense, which brings us to...
The post defense is truly horrible Truly. Horrible. I have commented about Moore's ineffectiveness as a "big man" from early on, and he has not gotten any better. He grabs his fair share of rebounds because of his length and athleticism, but he does not box out effectively, does not rotate to provide help, and is just a very weak post defender all around. Roberts is better, but Anderson has clearly made a decision that he'd rather have Moore's offense on the floor than Roberts defense (and I guess hope that Moore's defense comes along). The real disappointment is Toro, I had expected more from him but he has been flat awful. So you can see why the staff went out and got another big.
The offense is not exactly a work of art, but it's ahead of the defense and I don't think it amounts to a problem. There are enough shooters to take advantage of a zone and to keep the defense honest.
In terms of individual development it seems to me that Cole, Moore, and Earlington are finding their roles. Williams is starting to grow into the role of being one of the top options on offense. Champagnie is a pleasure to watch. As for Posh, I had posted previously that I wasn't ready to build a statute of him, and to me he has a long way to go in just about every aspect of the game. To some extent I think McGriff is a more complete player than Alexander - he has better court vision, stops the ball better, doesn't force his shots. Alexander has more upside, but he could learn a few things from McGriff's game.
The good news with all of it is that I have confidence that the staff sees the same holes and will plug them all. It's just going to be a work in progress for awhile is all.[/quote]
Solid post LMF
The first few items were integrating the (many) new faces with the returning players, finding the right role for everyone in what is fundamentally a completely different team than last year, working on the adjustment for the JUCOs and the freshmen, and teaching the newcomers the system.
I think he's made fair progress on most of those items. The divide between new players/returning players seems much less obvious than it was at the beginning of the season. All of the roles haven't quite been nailed down, but they're getting there. Cole and Moore seem much more comfortable. Posh and Wusu are having growing pains, but as they say the best thing about freshmen is they become sophomores.
There are still a whole lot of development needs for this team. Somewhat surprisingly for a Mike Anderson team, the main one is defense.
As Logen pointed out on another thread, our guards do not stop the ball at all. McGriff might actually be the best of the lot at the moment. Alexander is playing like early-era Ponds on defense - all hat and no cattle, if he can't get the steal then he is out of position to do anything else useful on defense. Williams is a little better, but not much. Hopefully the return of Dunn will help stabilize that issue some.
With regard to guard defense, Anderson's system is a risk/reward approach - you're going to get turnovers and runouts, but sometimes you're going to get beat. Right now the players have not gotten good enough at the system for the reward to consistently outweigh the risk, but I have a fair amount of confidence that they'll get there. It's just a different approach from old school man defense, but if it's a net positive then that's what matters. And realistically they don't have the personnel to play old school man defense, which brings us to...
The post defense is truly horrible Truly. Horrible. I have commented about Moore's ineffectiveness as a "big man" from early on, and he has not gotten any better. He grabs his fair share of rebounds because of his length and athleticism, but he does not box out effectively, does not rotate to provide help, and is just a very weak post defender all around. Roberts is better, but Anderson has clearly made a decision that he'd rather have Moore's offense on the floor than Roberts defense (and I guess hope that Moore's defense comes along). The real disappointment is Toro, I had expected more from him but he has been flat awful. So you can see why the staff went out and got another big.
The offense is not exactly a work of art, but it's ahead of the defense and I don't think it amounts to a problem. There are enough shooters to take advantage of a zone and to keep the defense honest.
In terms of individual development it seems to me that Cole, Moore, and Earlington are finding their roles. Williams is starting to grow into the role of being one of the top options on offense. Champagnie is a pleasure to watch. As for Posh, I had posted previously that I wasn't ready to build a statute of him, and to me he has a long way to go in just about every aspect of the game. To some extent I think McGriff is a more complete player than Alexander - he has better court vision, stops the ball better, doesn't force his shots. Alexander has more upside, but he could learn a few things from McGriff's game.
The good news with all of it is that I have confidence that the staff sees the same holes and will plug them all. It's just going to be a work in progress for awhile is all.[/quote]
Solid post LMF
I was wondering if there was some sort of rule change wrt how often hands/arms get thrown out at Posh and there is no call. Regarding getting beat off dribble risk/reward I will say that when I learned basketball you kept your man in front of you and there was emphasis on your footwork. That said, the way Posh and Williams are playing is I think, by design. Not simply bad basketball. They intentionally get behind the man they are guarding. McGriff tried to do the same thing against rider but the distance his man got was way too much for him. He doesn't have that explosive quickness to close the gap the way Posh does.
Moore: he does not have natural post instincts or tools other than his length. And he is NOT particularly athletic nor explosive and I don't think he'll ever be a great post presence for us. His propensity to dunk the ball (which I like) is not based upon athleticism. It is based upon how easy it is for him to do so with a 6'11 frame and a 7'5" wing span. My fear for him coming into the season was that he was going to come in and sit on the 3pt line. When he did that he was terrible and disrupted our offense but what he does bring and what we should appreciate is 1) phenomenal full court. He is consistently the fastest guy on the floor up and down the court and it does not affect his stamina. This is almost unheard of in a 6'10+ guy. 2) though not particularly athletic, he is COORDINATED. It is very rare for a guy as long as him to be so coordinated. So to me he is a tweener 3/stretch 4 with extra length but doesn't bring any power or presence to the post other than his vertical. He will score points for us and will be a major asset in transition when that is working for us. He will finish hard which so many of our guys have not done over the years. He's confident and aggressive.
Other development needs: Cole. He needs to stop thinking and play. I can tell he has worked on his defense and position and he is doing good things I did not expect from him. But on offense he is always hesitating and just thinking too much. Last night he missed two or three FTs after being almost perfect for the season. Second half he seemed to shed some of that and hopefully it is gone for good. Williams same thing but he seems to have turned the corner. I'd also like to see some simple offense like two man and setups for Cole to give him open looks off a drive and kickout. Overall two things are a killer:
1) FINISH at the rim. HS!
2) Team needs to learn how to play with the lead.
Moore: he does not have natural post instincts or tools other than his length. And he is NOT particularly athletic nor explosive and I don't think he'll ever be a great post presence for us. His propensity to dunk the ball (which I like) is not based upon athleticism. It is based upon how easy it is for him to do so with a 6'11 frame and a 7'5" wing span. My fear for him coming into the season was that he was going to come in and sit on the 3pt line. When he did that he was terrible and disrupted our offense but what he does bring and what we should appreciate is 1) phenomenal full court. He is consistently the fastest guy on the floor up and down the court and it does not affect his stamina. This is almost unheard of in a 6'10+ guy. 2) though not particularly athletic, he is COORDINATED. It is very rare for a guy as long as him to be so coordinated. So to me he is a tweener 3/stretch 4 with extra length but doesn't bring any power or presence to the post other than his vertical. He will score points for us and will be a major asset in transition when that is working for us. He will finish hard which so many of our guys have not done over the years. He's confident and aggressive.
Other development needs: Cole. He needs to stop thinking and play. I can tell he has worked on his defense and position and he is doing good things I did not expect from him. But on offense he is always hesitating and just thinking too much. Last night he missed two or three FTs after being almost perfect for the season. Second half he seemed to shed some of that and hopefully it is gone for good. Williams same thing but he seems to have turned the corner. I'd also like to see some simple offense like two man and setups for Cole to give him open looks off a drive and kickout. Overall two things are a killer:
1) FINISH at the rim. HS!
2) Team needs to learn how to play with the lead.
Totally agree Logen. The D is the primary area to improve. A little less “glitz” and more basics seems prudent. Cheating too much will burn you.[/quote]
to paraphrase a good point guard, but lousy nba coach/exec, Isiah Thomas, you don't need to rely on interior defense or shot blocking if the point guards are doing their job on defense. Going for steals in the half court can only expose our inadequate interior defense and size. It is better to go for steals in the forecourt or mid court
to paraphrase a good point guard, but lousy nba coach/exec, Isiah Thomas, you don't need to rely on interior defense or shot blocking if the point guards are doing their job on defense. Going for steals in the half court can only expose our inadequate interior defense and size. It is better to go for steals in the forecourt or mid court
Last edited:
[quote="mm52" post=407144]Totally agree Logen. The D is the primary area to improve. A little less “glitz” and more basics seems prudent. Cheating too much will burn you.[/quote]
to paraphrase a good point guard, but lousy nba coach/exec, Isiah Thomas, you don't need to rely on interior defense or shot blocking if the point guards are doing their job on defense. Going for steals in the half court can only expose our inadequate interior defense and size. It is better to go for steals in the forecourt or mid court[/quote]
As a general rule, “good” steals are ones made by players benefitting from great pressure on the ball creating poor or panicked passes or blind side double teams because a ball handler is being turned. There are exceptions of course, pickpockets like Walt Frazier for example, but that is a rare art. Most players who play for one on one steals wind up getting broken down more often than not; IMO that is what we have seen too much of so far this year.
to paraphrase a good point guard, but lousy nba coach/exec, Isiah Thomas, you don't need to rely on interior defense or shot blocking if the point guards are doing their job on defense. Going for steals in the half court can only expose our inadequate interior defense and size. It is better to go for steals in the forecourt or mid court[/quote]
As a general rule, “good” steals are ones made by players benefitting from great pressure on the ball creating poor or panicked passes or blind side double teams because a ball handler is being turned. There are exceptions of course, pickpockets like Walt Frazier for example, but that is a rare art. Most players who play for one on one steals wind up getting broken down more often than not; IMO that is what we have seen too much of so far this year.
[quote="Beast of the East" post=407026][quote="Logen" post=407019]Alexander and Williams continue to get beat off the dribble consistently, way too much emphasis on looking for steals. I know McGriff does not have a "sexy" game but I do not think it is a coincidence he was on the floor when we blew the game open at the end of the half against Stony Brook and when we reduced the double figure deficit last night and got back in the game. Sound player on both sides of the ball and pretty much committed to keeping his man in front of him, there is something to be said for fundamentals.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.[/quote]
Agree with your comments in concept, but would also add that as you add talented length, your interior defense improves and stops easy baskets off the dribble. Straight up D isn't about steals, but listening to Nolan Richardson at last years basketball kickoff dinner, the idea of 40 minutes of hell is predicated on forcing the opposition into turnovers that by all means rattle them. When you get the ball stolen off the dribble, or forced into a bad pass leading to a turnover, or travel because you lost composure in a swarming defense, it becomes the hel that gives your opponent energy, easy baskets, and a huge emotional edge. Straight up solid defense doesn't do that.
I think the solution to what you correctly observe is that defenders must pick their spots to gamble for the steal, and the guys defending off the ball have to work as hard if not harder to bottle up their guys while our guards are harassingly ballhandlers. It isn't always about the guards getting beat that is the problem, it sometimes is lax defense away from the ball, sort of like a pass rush in football if the secondary allows receivers to get wide open.[/quote]
Wholeheartedly agree with this post. Also why we are leading the big East in steals by almost double everybody else.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.[/quote]
Agree with your comments in concept, but would also add that as you add talented length, your interior defense improves and stops easy baskets off the dribble. Straight up D isn't about steals, but listening to Nolan Richardson at last years basketball kickoff dinner, the idea of 40 minutes of hell is predicated on forcing the opposition into turnovers that by all means rattle them. When you get the ball stolen off the dribble, or forced into a bad pass leading to a turnover, or travel because you lost composure in a swarming defense, it becomes the hel that gives your opponent energy, easy baskets, and a huge emotional edge. Straight up solid defense doesn't do that.
I think the solution to what you correctly observe is that defenders must pick their spots to gamble for the steal, and the guys defending off the ball have to work as hard if not harder to bottle up their guys while our guards are harassingly ballhandlers. It isn't always about the guards getting beat that is the problem, it sometimes is lax defense away from the ball, sort of like a pass rush in football if the secondary allows receivers to get wide open.[/quote]
Wholeheartedly agree with this post. Also why we are leading the big East in steals by almost double everybody else.
[quote="MCNPA" post=407176][quote="Beast of the East" post=407026][quote="Logen" post=407019]Alexander and Williams continue to get beat off the dribble consistently, way too much emphasis on looking for steals. I know McGriff does not have a "sexy" game but I do not think it is a coincidence he was on the floor when we blew the game open at the end of the half against Stony Brook and when we reduced the double figure deficit last night and got back in the game. Sound player on both sides of the ball and pretty much committed to keeping his man in front of him, there is something to be said for fundamentals.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.[/quote]
Agree with your comments in concept, but would also add that as you add talented length, your interior defense improves and stops easy baskets off the dribble. Straight up D isn't about steals, but listening to Nolan Richardson at last years basketball kickoff dinner, the idea of 40 minutes of hell is predicated on forcing the opposition into turnovers that by all means rattle them. When you get the ball stolen off the dribble, or forced into a bad pass leading to a turnover, or travel because you lost composure in a swarming defense, it becomes the hel that gives your opponent energy, easy baskets, and a huge emotional edge. Straight up solid defense doesn't do that.
I think the solution to what you correctly observe is that defenders must pick their spots to gamble for the steal, and the guys defending off the ball have to work as hard if not harder to bottle up their guys while our guards are harassingly ballhandlers. It isn't always about the guards getting beat that is the problem, it sometimes is lax defense away from the ball, sort of like a pass rush in football if the secondary allows receivers to get wide open.[/quote]
Wholeheartedly agree with this post. Also why we are leading the big East in steals by almost double everybody else.[/quote]
Steals, like blocked shots, can very much be fool’s gold. How’s that steals stat working out in terms of our overall defense? The idea is to stop the other team from scoring, from shooting a high percentage. We currently rank 5th in the NCAA in steals, with the 1st ranked team having played 2 games and the 2nd only one, but rank 262nd in field goal % defense. Subjective addition to that is our defense does not pass any eye test nor have we exactly played a Murderer’s Row of opponents. CMA has his style and is the coach but I would prefer a slightly more fundamental approach, especially on the ball and in constantly scrambling to double team in the half court.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.[/quote]
Agree with your comments in concept, but would also add that as you add talented length, your interior defense improves and stops easy baskets off the dribble. Straight up D isn't about steals, but listening to Nolan Richardson at last years basketball kickoff dinner, the idea of 40 minutes of hell is predicated on forcing the opposition into turnovers that by all means rattle them. When you get the ball stolen off the dribble, or forced into a bad pass leading to a turnover, or travel because you lost composure in a swarming defense, it becomes the hel that gives your opponent energy, easy baskets, and a huge emotional edge. Straight up solid defense doesn't do that.
I think the solution to what you correctly observe is that defenders must pick their spots to gamble for the steal, and the guys defending off the ball have to work as hard if not harder to bottle up their guys while our guards are harassingly ballhandlers. It isn't always about the guards getting beat that is the problem, it sometimes is lax defense away from the ball, sort of like a pass rush in football if the secondary allows receivers to get wide open.[/quote]
Wholeheartedly agree with this post. Also why we are leading the big East in steals by almost double everybody else.[/quote]
Steals, like blocked shots, can very much be fool’s gold. How’s that steals stat working out in terms of our overall defense? The idea is to stop the other team from scoring, from shooting a high percentage. We currently rank 5th in the NCAA in steals, with the 1st ranked team having played 2 games and the 2nd only one, but rank 262nd in field goal % defense. Subjective addition to that is our defense does not pass any eye test nor have we exactly played a Murderer’s Row of opponents. CMA has his style and is the coach but I would prefer a slightly more fundamental approach, especially on the ball and in constantly scrambling to double team in the half court.
Last edited:
TheArtest15
Member
[quote="Paultzman" post=407020][quote="Logen" post=407019]Alexander and Williams continue to get beat off the dribble consistently, way too much emphasis on looking for steals. I know McGriff does not have a "sexy" game but I do not think it is a coincidence he was on the floor when we blew the game open at the end of the half against Stony Brook and when we reduced the double figure deficit last night and got back in the game. Sound player on both sides of the ball and pretty much committed to keeping his man in front of him, there is something to be said for fundamentals.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.[/quote]
Totally agree Logen. The D is the primary area to improve. A little less “glitz” and more basics seems prudent. Cheating too much will burn you.[/quote]
Totally agree with all of this. They gamble way too much looking for steals. As a high school coach i see this all the time and Posh does it a few times a game- Gets beat and tries to swipe the ball from the player who beat him from behind. I always tell my team its just lazy defense.
One other point, we double team consistently on defense in the half court but too many times it seems to be going through the motions rather than going hard and harassing the man with the ball; that allows the easy pass out of the double to wide open shooters. Go hard with commitment or don't double.[/quote]
Totally agree Logen. The D is the primary area to improve. A little less “glitz” and more basics seems prudent. Cheating too much will burn you.[/quote]
Totally agree with all of this. They gamble way too much looking for steals. As a high school coach i see this all the time and Posh does it a few times a game- Gets beat and tries to swipe the ball from the player who beat him from behind. I always tell my team its just lazy defense.