MU's philosophy on D is really man principles with the weak side defender in the lane to stop the drive, the unfortunate idea in my mind enables the driver to kick to an open wing player, yesterday it was #20, who hit a few J's. Not sure this philosophy works. Just watch the two MU's games against Creighton, they got crushed twice. You might as well play zone which
they really are, but in a two/three zone you stop the easy open jump shoots the other team is getting. Other teams can zone MU because they know one player is not going to shot the ball, and if he does he will not make it. They can pack it in on MU, yesterday they knew were Jake was and he was not open as much as the earlier games. As long as Derrick does not shoot,
they can pack it in and that is where Todd got in trouble a few times. It was nice to see Todd realized he had the open shot. Not sure Dawson was the answer, as who comes in after 5 seconds and jacks up a three and driving on the big 1-4. Just think this team did not have a high IQ on the court. Burton has a lot to learn but he should be fun to watch the next 3 years,
but he will be frustrating at times as well.
I think is a good discussion topic. While Buzz adapts the offense year to year to suit the personnel, the defensive philosophy seems to be very much the same year to year. I don't think we had the athletes to pull it off as successfully this year.
One of the things I think we all thought this year is that Marquette didn't hustle like in years past. I don't think that is necessarily true. I think we just weren't as quick to the ball as we have been in years past, and a lot of 50/50 balls that we used to get we didn't get this season. Because of that decrease of overall quickness, I think more zone principles were in order.
An interesting topic. When there is quickness throughout the line up and a team that has experience with the scheme, the defense can be very tough. However, all it takes is one person to not understand the concepts and execute perfectly for it to break down. In the first half last night, Todd repeatedly got caught in the lane looking to be weakside help. A skip pass and he got caught in traffic and was still two steps away from the 3 pt shooter as the ball went up.
Next year, it would behoove Buzz to simplify it, or go to a different concept.
Quote from: CTWarrior on March 14, 2014, 09:23:48 AM
I think is a good discussion topic. While Buzz adapts the offense year to year to suit the personnel, the defensive philosophy seems to be very much the same year to year. I don't think we had the athletes to pull it off as successfully this year.
One of the things I think we all thought this year is that Marquette didn't hustle like in years past. I don't think that is necessarily true. I think we just weren't as quick to the ball as we have been in years past, and a lot of 50/50 balls that we used to get we didn't get this season. Because of that decrease of overall quickness, I think more zone principles were in order.
+1
I will say this is a fairly common practice. I mean, Boeheim never changes from zone and Smart never leaves HAVOC. But the personnel we had could not handle these schemes. As a result, it kept our most talented players on the bench
How good of a coach are you when you coach defense first but only one year (2012) you've had a good defensive team?
Solidifies my opinion that we have a great recruiter and motivator who we hired who happens to be an average basketball coach.
Speaking of defense, as in mixing it up, I thought Providence was rather gutsy to throw a zone at the Blue Ducks. Who ever heard of using a zone against a jump shooting/3 point team?
Caught them so flat footed that by the time they woke-up the Friars had the confidence to win.
Also, interesting that Providence decided to play this defense, and set it up, in the 24 hours between games.
No guts, no glory ... it was good for Providence, the Garden and the Big East.
MU's defense results in three point opportunites. Overall the defense works, but it is not a good defense against a Creighton type team.