I have to look at the second half of the game to get a feeling for the team. i dont think anyone expected to see such a different playing style from the Badgers . When u prepare for a style that has been used by the Badgers for the past ten years and they come in with something totally different it will take a while to adjust . I think we made adjustment s at the half although we still had major problems covering the 3 pt shot . We were able to run and get to the basket a lot better and overall our defense tightened up. sampson played much better , harrison played better, Sanchez was great in transition, jordan was more relaxed , Green speeded up the game , Pointer was inspiring , Obekpa and sanchez were victims of ridiculous foul calls . Branch is still on the bus .
Second half in the cornfield .
- Thread starter matt105
- Start date
What you say is true but throwing in "major problems covering the 3 pt shot" in the middle of there is deceiving. That was the game right there and that is not just about their style of play. This is the same we've seen consistently last season that cost us games and even the same that we saw in the exh games this season. Div II teams know to exploit it and of course Wisc did. Every team we face is going rain 3s because they will have a statistical advantage to do so. They can shoot 2s and get blocked or shoot 3s uncontested.
A 2-3 zone which doesn't switch on every back door and rotate all over the court would be ideal. We have the wings and the shot blocker to do it. Matter of fact if Sanchez, Sampson, and Obekpa are all in together that's what should be run.
Our guys jump at every single ball fake. Our big men reach 30 feet from the hoop. I love man and it shouldn't be difficult, but I think with this group the more simple the defense the better.
The problem with man is that you tend to have your big guys drawn away from the basket. The last thing we needed against Wisc would be to have Obekpa guarding their 7 footer on the perimeter. Also, we would get called on many fouls while trying to fight through screens. I like the matchup zone but the guys have to pick up the man in their zone rather than laying 5 feet off. I also like the 2-3. I think the 1-3-1 allows too many corner jumpers.
No matter how you want to make excuses we lost Covering the 3 was a major problem for us all last yr 1st game or not we should have been lights out with that aspect All those basketball minds on our staff we should have seen results. This was a very winnable game That being said I am not concerned. We will do much better but it was extremely disappointing
It's not going to matter what defense we are in as long as our players continue to show terrible defensive fundamentals.
We don't remain in the proper defensive stance (too upright most of the time).
We don't stay between man and basket.
We either don't help on defensive or overhelp (ie three players converging on one penetrater).
We don't understand the priciple of showing help ( a quick step towards the lane without overcomitting may be enough to get a ballhandler to think twice about dribble penetration without compromising your primary defensive assignment or blockout responsibility).
We don't fight through off the ball screens very well.
We don't understand spacing on the offensive side of the court, so I doubt we get it on the defensive side.
We don't box out and rely on athletic ability to secure rebounds.
These are the things that need to improve before we can improve on defense. That said, a zone that has less man-to-man principles will mask some of these flaws.
We don't remain in the proper defensive stance (too upright most of the time).
We don't stay between man and basket.
We either don't help on defensive or overhelp (ie three players converging on one penetrater).
We don't understand the priciple of showing help ( a quick step towards the lane without overcomitting may be enough to get a ballhandler to think twice about dribble penetration without compromising your primary defensive assignment or blockout responsibility).
We don't fight through off the ball screens very well.
We don't understand spacing on the offensive side of the court, so I doubt we get it on the defensive side.
We don't box out and rely on athletic ability to secure rebounds.
These are the things that need to improve before we can improve on defense. That said, a zone that has less man-to-man principles will mask some of these flaws.
beast of the east
Active member
Now this is just a crazy guess, but...
I do have a hunch that Lavin and his staff know basketball a little more than most of us, who may have coached in youth leagues or a little higher.
If you ask me, I think Lavin is trying to teach the zone, which you need to be pretty good at to get past your toughest competitors, especially deep into the tournament. His first year, we took our lumps with it (remember the Fordham debacle) until we gave it up and went primarily man the rest of the season.
Year two was a washout with Lavin sick and a very thin roster. Last year we played a lot of zone, but I also think he knew we weren't strong enough to be a serious tourney team.
If I had to guess, we will see a lot of zone on the weak side of our schedule until December 15th, and if we haven't shown signs of a really good zone developing, will be playing a lot of man vs. Syracuse and going forward.
Just a guess.
I do have a hunch that Lavin and his staff know basketball a little more than most of us, who may have coached in youth leagues or a little higher.
If you ask me, I think Lavin is trying to teach the zone, which you need to be pretty good at to get past your toughest competitors, especially deep into the tournament. His first year, we took our lumps with it (remember the Fordham debacle) until we gave it up and went primarily man the rest of the season.
Year two was a washout with Lavin sick and a very thin roster. Last year we played a lot of zone, but I also think he knew we weren't strong enough to be a serious tourney team.
If I had to guess, we will see a lot of zone on the weak side of our schedule until December 15th, and if we haven't shown signs of a really good zone developing, will be playing a lot of man vs. Syracuse and going forward.
Just a guess.
westchesterjoe
Active member
Our team defense has stunk for Lavin's time here. The Hardy team were a little better than this group but, not great.
As many have said, this team's defensive fundamentals are weak and this has been a ongoing problem.. Kids have to be proud of their defensive skills and most of these guys don't have that mindset. I don't think, except for Pointer and Jordan, maybe Sanchez, the rest of the guys don't have that shut down mentality in their BB GENES. There are too many matadors out there on the Court.
Plus, Lavin has not shown a lot of Coaching expertise in teaching good fundamentals. That's in his DNA too..We may have to live with a weak D ALL YEAR.
And that's not good if you want to be a league or NCAA contender. Especially, since most opposing Coaches appear to know exactly what Defense Lavin will put out there and they take advantage of those weaknesses game in and game out.
As many have said, this team's defensive fundamentals are weak and this has been a ongoing problem.. Kids have to be proud of their defensive skills and most of these guys don't have that mindset. I don't think, except for Pointer and Jordan, maybe Sanchez, the rest of the guys don't have that shut down mentality in their BB GENES. There are too many matadors out there on the Court.
Plus, Lavin has not shown a lot of Coaching expertise in teaching good fundamentals. That's in his DNA too..We may have to live with a weak D ALL YEAR.
And that's not good if you want to be a league or NCAA contender. Especially, since most opposing Coaches appear to know exactly what Defense Lavin will put out there and they take advantage of those weaknesses game in and game out.
A good post.
I was teling a poster last night that there also seems to be a lack of "wanting it" on defense from several of the players.
By the way, the only one who seemed to box out was Sanchez. Gift will occasionally box it (although he also finds himself not boxing out either). But he tends to make up for it by hustling. I liked Gift was playing on Friday night. Wished he had gotten more minutes.
Agree!
I agree. Even Norm's undermanned teams pulled off an occasional upset playing man. Now we have big time depth and athleticism and we watch them wave at threes all night. There is no accountability with the current format and even good defenders like Dom are a step late covering for others. The simple fact is that zone leads to threes. When teams are hot with it we don't have a chance..In 2010 we used man to up the tempo and it worked. I don't see the effort right now and the teamwork is lacking. This reverts directly to Lavin and changes have to be made now to be effective. If guys are dogging on "D" they should sit but it's hard to identify it in this format and provide performance incentives.
I could be mistaken but I don't remember that 2011 team playing primarily man defense down the stretch. I just remember the zone becoming a little better game by game.
All true.
IMHO the answer is either to play man or teach and play the zone better. Right now I think that playing the zone is hurting some of the fundamentals described above. That might get better as the season goes on and they players understand it better but really I would have hoped that it would be better already.
I could understand playing zone the last couple of years when we had no depth. With this year's depth and athleticism, I don't understand not playing more man. D'Angelo, Dom, and Jordan would be lights out man defenders. Obekpa might have a problem down low against legit big men, but nothing's perfect.
But clearly Coach is married to the zone so hopefully at some point he will get it organized to stop the rain of uncontested 3s. It really isn't that hard to understand that the other team is going to swing or reverse the ball and to get that spot covered at least a little better than we have for the past 2 years. Especially given the length we have at this point.