MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Ellisium on November 19, 2014, 03:02:31 AM
-
Defense - MU was torched.... and torched badly. They haven't had such a poor performance defensively since 2000. There are several reasons for this:
Lack of Height - One of the main reasons Ohio St. effective FG% was 73% is that MU is just too small. MU doesn't have enough height to affect the opponent's interior shot selection. Not having a rim protector leads to easy baskets, of which, we saw many by Ohio St. Fischer's addition in a few weeks, should help take the burden off Taylor's shoulders.
One on One Defense - This is the main flaw in MU's game that falls upon Wojo. The team didn't play disciplined defense and help out others as well as they should have.
1. Steve Taylor - While he had a decent game offensively, he was horrid around the hoop on defense. Several times he didn't give help and for being the lone big man on the team, he ended up with a paltry 7 rebounds. He didn't hustle at all in transition and gave up several easy baskets. Many questioned why buzz sat him last year. This is the answer why. He gives up points almost as easily as he gets them.
2. The same can be said for Juan Anderson. He was toasted one on one several times. Again ..... Juan didn't play much either during Buzz's tenure because defense was #1. Too many people in here are focusing on his offense which was highly inconsistent.
3. Matt Carlino - This guy can't guard one on one against quick guards. Ohio St. overwhelmed Carlino with their quickness. This guy is a liability on the defensive end.
Offense
1. No True PG that can bring the ball up - How many times did Ohio St. pressure MU with a 3/4 court press? -- plenty. MU had too much difficulty getting the ball across half court. Any teams that have a physical press are going to give us issues. The absence of a quick PG who can handle the ball, really hurts our tempo on offense.
2. No player that can create his own shot - at times the offense lagged and we took some very poor shots where we were double teamed. There isn't anyone on this team yet, that can carry the load by being able to get their own shot. In time, Deonte Burton may become more effective along with Steve Taylor. The problem is that we're just too small, which allows the defense to stretch out. Carlino can't get open looks when this happens.
Regardless, I thought the game would be a 20+ point blowout. MU showed tenacity which is an extension of the coach. The zone offense effectively got the ball down to Steve Taylor, which looked promising. Sloppy play permeated the game for both teams. Had Marquette played more efficiently, it would have been closer. Of course, there were many stupid mistakes on our end. Taylor dribbling down the court and not passing it to the guard on the fast break ..... Juan Anderson's hideous shot selection, etc.
Fortunately, a lot of MU's mistakes are correctable and are due to youth. Remember these flaws and take a look to see if they have been cleaned up by the time conference play begins. That will be a great way to judge Wojo's ability to teach the game and develop players.
The season will be difficult, but there will be flashes of greatness that will get fans excited for next year , especially with the incoming #4 Nationally Ranked Recruiting Class. Work in progress. There will be disappointments, but this team is headed in the right direction. Wojo has the potential to do some great things here. Next year is when the magic will begin to happen. For now... let the trials and tribulations be the first chapter to an anthology of greatness.
-
Yeah I think this is a pretty good summary. Although I think Carlino is fine bringing up the ball. The final score is deceiving because MU got hot at the very end of the game.
-
Yeah, some miscues are related to youth, but Juan's a senior.
-
Let's face it, it was more like a scrimmage than a game. Did anyone take a charge? Lots of good film to watch and learn how to close the back door, run a fast break, and break a press. Work in process.
-
Actually, I was impressed by MU's ability to break the pressure and get the ball to half court. I was distracted during the game, but did we have a single 10 second violation? (I do recall one timeout called when things weren't working.)
-
By breaking the press I mean getting the opponent to take it off. OSU knew we were troubled by the press so they kept in on for most of the game.
-
I saw a team last night that lost by 11 because of some inexperience/immaturity - there was certainly no deficit of skill or talent - that encourages me. I thought in general we looked pretty relaxed on offense. Defense was not great; rotations were slow. Thought we were attacking with our D on the perimeter which is a strength but once OSU started attacking the post and kicking back out it was tough sledding. Likely going to be our Achilles heel until we can have Steve and Fish able to play man coverage down there - seemed like we were always double teaming and leaving a shooter open - congrats to OSU, they knocked down some open shots
MU RAH!!
-
Actually, I was impressed by MU's ability to break the pressure and get the ball to half court. I was distracted during the game, but did we have a single 10 second violation? (I do recall one timeout called when things weren't working.)
I agree. Overall the team was successful in getting the ball up court. There was a brief stretch in the first half where we seemed to have 2 or 3 turnovers (and that called timeout) in a row, but we made it through that. While I wasn't so keen to see Juan bring it up, I imagine Wojo's thinking is that he is taller and so can pass over the defense more easily, making OSU less likely to double team him and leave someone else open.
The one drawback to not effectively breaking the press (and leading OSU to call it off) was that we started virtually all of our offensive sets with only about 26 seconds on the shot clock.
My guess is that Wojo saw a lot of things to work on from this game, unlike the exhibition and cupcake so far. The team will get better, though I'll assume that inconsistency will be a hallmark of the season.
-
Our game plan was to not commit fouls and win with our superior shooting ability. OSU had a game plan to commit fouls and win with their superior shooting ability. OSU won.
-
I saw a lot of promise in last night's game. Not happy with the result, but optimistic. Taylor doesn't kick the breakaway dunk out of bounds, TreyJ finishes that dunk (or makes a three), or tOSU just shoots a normal 3P% in the first half, all of the sudden this could have been a close ball game. Getting Derrick/Duane to full strength will help, hopefully Dawson will earn some playing time, and Luke transferring in will all be great assets in curing what ails this team.
-
It's not difficult, just change the game plan next time.
-
The one drawback to not effectively breaking the press (and leading OSU to call it off) was that we started virtually all of our offensive sets with only about 26 seconds on the shot clock.
Not necessarily a bad thing. Wojo eventually wants to play a fast-paced, pressing style but he knows that this team at this time is not going to stay with OSU playing that style. MU wanted to slow the pace in the half-court anyway and the offense ran rather smoothly (for the most part). I don't recall any desperation shots late in the shot clock.
If MU consistently shoots 46% from the floor, 35% from 3 and assists on nearly three-quarters of the FGs, they're going to win a lot of games.
Defense on the other hand, that needs some cleaning up.
-
Our game plan was to not commit fouls and win with our superior shooting ability. OSU had a game plan to commit fouls and win with their superior shooting ability. OSU won.
I don't think any team has ever had a game plan that included "commit fouls."
-
It's not difficult, just change the game plan next time.
To what?
-
Not necessarily a bad thing. Wojo eventually wants to play a fast-paced, pressing style but he knows that this team at this time is not going to stay with OSU playing that style. MU wanted to slow the pace in the half-court anyway and the offense ran rather smoothly (for the most part). I don't recall any desperation shots late in the shot clock.
If MU consistently shoots 46% from the floor, 35% from 3 and assists on nearly three-quarters of the FGs, they're going to win a lot of games.
Defense on the other hand, that needs some cleaning up.
Good points. But, I gotta say that I didn't see any indication of this team being able to run, to play a fast-paced, pressing style, whether against OSU or anyone else. (I didn't see Friday's game where I know we had better pressure and created turnovers.) De Wilson is just so tentative/conservative bringing the ball up, Carlino didn't seem quick in terms of getting the ball up court, Du Wilson didn't show much at all for pushing the ball. I'll have to see it before I am convinced that this is a team that can run effectively.
-
I saw a lot of promise in last night's game. Not happy with the result, but optimistic. Taylor doesn't kick the breakaway dunk out of bounds, TreyJ finishes that dunk (or makes a three), or tOSU just shoots a normal 3P% in the first half, all of the sudden this could have been a close ball game.
And if tOSU doesn't have 13 mostly unforced TOs in the first half their 20 point lead with 3 minutes left would have been 30. Sorry, but in reality this game was no closer than our win over Tennessee-Martin. The second half was a lay up line for the Buckeyes.
-
While I wasn't so keen to see Juan bring it up, I imagine Wojo's thinking is that he is taller and so can pass over the defense more easily, making OSU less likely to double team him and leave someone else open.
Quoting myself here, but now I'm wondering if Dawson might've been an option to try in that role instead of (or in addition to) Juan. He's a bit taller than other guards and has a decent handle.
-
Defense - MU was torched.... and torched badly. They haven't had such a poor performance defensively since 2000. There are several reasons for this:
Lack of Height - One of the main reasons Ohio St. effective FG% was 73% is that MU is just too small. MU doesn't have enough height to affect the opponent's interior shot selection. Not having a rim protector leads to easy baskets, of which, we saw many by Ohio St. Fischer's addition in a few weeks, should help take the burden off Taylor's shoulders.
One on One Defense - This is the main flaw in MU's game that falls upon Wojo. The team didn't play disciplined defense and help out others as well as they should have.
I never once felt like Ohio State's size was a reason for MU's defensive struggles. It's not like they were dumping it into the post, or cleaning up their own (rare) misses. The individual defense on the perimeter was poor. Their coverage on screens was laughable. Especially Taylor, who has apparently never seen a pick and roll in his life.
They scrambled a ton on defense, which let OSU get hot from three. It was five guys trying to guard as individuals, instead of communicating as a unit. It's correctable, but Wojo will have his work cut out for him.
-
As bad as we looked at times, I would rank this game as our toughest test of the entire season. Only our second game with a new coach and a young team going on the road against a far bigger and more talented team that will be in the mix for a Big Ten title. So we lost by 11. Last year we had a team that was light years ahead of this group, got OSU at home in front of a sellout crowd and they absolutely dismantled us in the second half to win by 17 and hold us to 35 points. We clearly have some flaws but we will get better, Luke is going to help quite a bit and overall I am encouraged.
-
O.K., then let me say, play aggressive and if you get called for a foul, so be it. Playing defensibly vs. aggressively is my point. The goal to me was to not commit fouls at any cost, even giving up a basket uncontested....
-
O.K., then let me say, play aggressive and if you get called for a foul, so be it. Playing defensibly vs. aggressively is my point. The goal to me was to not commit fouls at any cost, even giving up a basket uncontested....
I don't recall any lay-ups by OSU that could have been easily prevented by MU taking a foul. There's not a chance that Wojo's strategy was to avoid fouling, which is another way of telling your team to be tentative. Teams that don't foul are typically playing horrible defense...like MU last night.
-
I don't recall any lay-ups by OSU that could have been easily prevented by MU taking a foul. There's not a chance that Wojo's strategy was to avoid fouling, which is another way of telling your team to be tentative. Teams that don't foul are typically playing horrible defense...like MU last night.
This. You can't foul a guy going up for a lay up or a dunk if you're not within 5 feet of him.
-
You play defense with your feet, not your hands........ We were woefully beaten, often, by not being in the right place at the right time, or even close. the guys gotta communiucate, rotate and help each other. Our defense wasn't bad because they were bigger it was because we weren't where we should have been....... Definite work to do here. The only cure isn't waiting for a guy in December to help............
Offensively we looked tentative. ST has got to stop putting the ball on the floor each time he gets it. When he's close in he needs to go straight up with it......not dribble. We have to be quicker on offense. Though we won't be great we must capitalize on mismatches and quick openings to score.
Overall.........not bad as we feel ourselves and coach out in real games....who the players are, who listens and who tries..............
-
This team is two big men away from winning the big east. I love this team but they are just too small
-
I never once felt like Ohio State's size was a reason for MU's defensive struggles. It's not like they were dumping it into the post, or cleaning up their own (rare) misses. The individual defense on the perimeter was poor. Their coverage on screens was laughable. Especially Taylor, who has apparently never seen a pick and roll in his life.
They scrambled a ton on defense, which let OSU get hot from three. It was five guys trying to guard as individuals, instead of communicating as a unit. It's correctable, but Wojo will have his work cut out for him.
Agreed. MU wasn't helping each other out on double teams. There were way too many open lanes to the hoop. MU needs to learn how to seal off those lanes. I hope this youth related and not a coaching issue.
-
As bad as we looked at times, I would rank this game as our toughest test of the entire season. Only our second game with a new coach and a young team going on the road against a far bigger and more talented team that will be in the mix for a Big Ten title. So we lost by 11. Last year we had a team that was light years ahead of this group, got OSU at home in front of a sellout crowd and they absolutely dismantled us in the second half to win by 17 and hold us to 35 points. We clearly have some flaws but we will get better, Luke is going to help quite a bit and overall I am encouraged.
Wisconsin will be our toughest test. Ohio St. played well, but they're weak inside being a guard oriented team. I hate to say it, but Wisconsin is going to put a beating on MU with their height and our small rotation. Ohio St. didn't pound the ball inside and won handily. Wisconsin is a totally different animal with a much more balanced offense. I'm already taking out health insurance for this game.
-
To what?
To play better defense and score more points
-
I don't think any team has ever had a game plan that included "commit fouls."
You ever heard of "Hack a Shaq?"
-
My take on our first two games:
1) We have made a lot of silly errors related to inexperience. That was especially apparent in the OSU game. I was chided in here last year for acknowledging we were out of the tournament and needed to get JJJ, STjr and Deonte more time. The Hillbilly not doing that is coming home to roost.
2) Carlino is a leader. he had the right idea in reducing the deficit. The NCAA selection committee doesn't look at game film. It doesn't look at how the defense played in the last few minutes. It looks at results.
3) I'll be intrigued to see how this team plays differently once Luke Fischer arrives. I've got tickets to AZ State and I view this as the second season opener.
4) Overall, I'm encouraged. I see a coach that understands the dynamic of what's on the court from being a player. I also see a coach who was thought to be an average basketball player who "figured it out" and can impart that wisdom on his team. The differences in some of our team is stark. Some of it is a difference in style and approach from the Hillbilly to Wojo and some of it is just playing the game and "knowing."
5) I do think -- and its way early -- that the team plays better together this year than last. We'll see if this holds 10 games from now!
-
You ever heard of "Hack a Shaq?"
I assume you're being facetious but...
Hack-a-Shaq was an in-game strategy. No team's primary gameplan is to foul.
-
O.K., then let me say, play aggressive and if you get called for a foul, so be it. Playing defensibly vs. aggressively is my point. The goal to me was to not commit fouls at any cost, even giving up a basket uncontested....
Honestly, I don't think that was the strategy. I just think our bigs aren't very good at defense and weren't getting back. Luke is going to be a godsend for his defensive presence alone
-
To play better defense and score more points
By George! That's brilliant!
-
I just think our bigs aren't very good at defense and weren't getting back.
Bigs? You mean big, right? Steve Taylor is our only big at this point.
-
As bad as we looked at times, I would rank this game as our toughest test of the entire season. Only our second game with a new coach and a young team going on the road against a far bigger and more talented team that will be in the mix for a Big Ten title. So we lost by 11. Last year we had a team that was light years ahead of this group, got OSU at home in front of a sellout crowd and they absolutely dismantled us in the second half to win by 17 and hold us to 35 points. We clearly have some flaws but we will get better, Luke is going to help quite a bit and overall I am encouraged.
Agree with most everything -- certainly last night was more promising than last season's dismantling by OSU...@ the BC...when MU had a FAR more experienced team. Being on the road for the first time this season, with far less experience, far less size and our new coach's first test against a quality opponent, I'd say we showed reason for optimism. Tighten up the D, get Luke in the lineup, and this could become a solid team.
Not sure it'll be our toughest test (UW-Madison, Nova and possibly MSU and/or Kansas), but it was a difficult road game and our team showed promise.
-
This team is two big men away from winning the big east. I love this team but they are just too small
Add two of those Kentucky guys to any team in the Big East and you have a conference champion.
-
Sadly, Kentucky's bench is better than MU's starting 5.
-
Sadly, Kentucky's bench is better than MU's starting 5.
Kentucky's bench is better than a lot of top 20 teams' starting 5.
-
My take on our first two games:
1) We have made a lot of silly errors related to inexperience. That was especially apparent in the OSU game. I was chided in here last year for acknowledging we were out of the tournament and needed to get JJJ, STjr and Deonte more time. The Hillbilly not doing that is coming home to roost.
There is absolutely no proof of that whatsoever. My guess is that the results would have been largely the same.
-
Just for reference, when we're talking about "Game Experience", here is how a player's season will break-down (roughly).
- A player spends approximately 37,440min. practicing in a year.
- Approx. 30 games in a season.
- If you give a player an extra 10mpg, that is a MAX of 300 additional minutes.
Certainly a "game minute" is more valuable than a "practice minute", but is it 125times more valuable? Would giving X player 10mpg last season really make him much better this season?
-
There is absolutely no proof of that whatsoever. My guess is that the results would have been largely the same.
It's an OPINION!
I don't know whether game experience would matter this year, but I think it might have, which is why I said it. You may be right, but there can be no proof.
This isn't engineering, where we need emperical evidence for everything. It's basketball!
-
Too small. Too inexperienced. Some lack of discipline and patience. Some poor defensive mechanics. Some sloppiness. But mostly the first two "toos."
Better times ahead.
-
Look at the box score and with a little better defense we win the game. If we would have held them to 48% shooting overall and 40% from 3 pt. range we would have out scored them. Defense can be taught and improved.
The offense was fine except for the shooting percentages of JJJ and Carlino. They will have better shooting games.
-
Bigs? You mean big, right? Steve Taylor is our only big at this point.
Well yeah. I meant what passes for bigs on our team. Steve, Juan, and Cohen.
-
Look at the box score and with a little better defense we win the game. If we would have held them to 48% shooting overall and 40% from 3 pt. range we would have out scored them. Defense can be taught and improved.
The offense was fine except for the shooting percentages of JJJ and Carlino. They will have better shooting games.
OK, but what if Ohio State fans also look at the box score and say with a little better defense, they win the game by more. And if we don't score in garbage time, they win by more.
These exercises reveal little.
Ohio State is bigger, stronger, deeper and better than Marquette. I watched the game. I don't need to look at the box score to know all that (although I did).
-
There is absolutely no proof of that whatsoever. My guess is that the results would have been largely the same.
I usually agree with you, but not here. Experience is extremely valuable in college. The result may have been similar but it would have looked a lot different with experienced guys on the floor. JJJ, Deonte, Steve - all need minutes to understand the college game. They could have gotten some of those minutes on a team last year that was out of the dance before mid-season. Defense is guys working together in game situations. This team hasn't had that yet.
I think the team we see in the 2nd half of the conference schedule to be much different than the team we saw last night, at least defensively.
-
I usually agree with you, but not here. Experience is extremely valuable in college. The result may have been similar but it would have looked a lot different with experienced guys on the floor. JJJ, Deonte, Steve - all need minutes to understand the college game. They could have gotten some of those minutes on a team last year that was out of the dance before mid-season. Defense is guys working together in game situations. This team hasn't had that yet.
I think the team we see in the 2nd half of the conference schedule to be much different than the team we saw last night, at least defensively.
They're playing a different defense this season than they were last season. Also, Carlino and Cohen obviously weren't on the team last season and they played a combined 58 minutes last season. Unless a team is bringing back every major contributor (and the head coach), cohesiveness is going to be a rarity in game 2 of a season.
-
OK, but what if Ohio State fans also look at the box score and say with a little better defense, they win the game by more. And if we don't score in garbage time, they win by more.
These exercises reveal little.
Ohio State is bigger, stronger, deeper and better than Marquette. I watched the game. I don't need to look at the box score to know all that (although I did).
With this team, I do think these exercises reveal something because we should see a big improvement over the season. Especially with how the plays defense.
-
With this team, I do think these exercises reveal something because we should see a big improvement over the season. Especially with how the plays defense.
The teams we will play down the line also should see improvement, no? Or are our guys the only ones who get to improve?
Oh, never mind. Let's do it your way, go back to yesterday and start over.
Let's pretend we played better defense (and pretend Ohio State didn't), and therefore we earned a valuable make-believe victory!
We're No. Wishful 1! We're No. Wishful 1!
-
It's an OPINION!
I don't know whether game experience would matter this year, but I think it might have, which is why I said it. You may be right, but there can be no proof.
This isn't engineering, where we need emperical evidence for everything. It's basketball!
Here is what isn't an opinion: This year's game against OSU, with a team that lost 72% of its scoring from last year, was a hell of a lot more enjoyable to watch than was the debacle of last year's 35 point effort.
And there were many here who agreed with you that last year's team didn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of making the NCAA with the lineup Buzz chose to roll out. And another thing, playing in a game and under the lights is a hell of a lot different than practice. Practices are broken down into shell drills, lots of halfcourt O and D work, inbounds plays, implementing scouting reports - practices in no way are reflective of what game minutes/experience are.
-
Here is what isn't an opinion: This year's game against OSU, with a team that lost 72% of its scoring from last year, was a hell of a lot more enjoyable to watch than was the debacle of last year's 35 point effort.
And there were many here who agreed with you that last year's team didn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of making the NCAA with the lineup Buzz chose to roll out. And another thing, playing in a game and under the lights is a hell of a lot different than practice. Practices are broken down into shell drills, lots of halfcourt O and D work, inbounds plays, implementing scouting reports - practices in no way are reflective of what game minutes/experience are.
They were 12 point dogs, they covered.
-
It's an OPINION!
I don't know whether game experience would matter this year, but I think it might have, which is why I said it. You may be right, but there can be no proof.
LOL what?
You said Buzz's coaching is "coming home to roost." Now you say "I don't know?" Puh-lease.
-
Here is what isn't an opinion: This year's game against OSU, with a team that lost 72% of its scoring from last year, was a hell of a lot more enjoyable to watch than was the debacle of last year's 35 point effort.
And there were many here who agreed with you that last year's team didn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of making the NCAA with the lineup Buzz chose to roll out. And another thing, playing in a game and under the lights is a hell of a lot different than practice. Practices are broken down into shell drills, lots of halfcourt O and D work, inbounds plays, implementing scouting reports - practices in no way are reflective of what game minutes/experience are.
If practices really aren't that valuable, then coaches should find more ways to have open scrimmages to try to create game-like scenarios. If game minutes are HUGELY valuable, then coaches should try to create them as much as possible.
(I'm being serious).
-
If practices really aren't that valuable, then coaches should find more ways to have open scrimmages to try to create game-like scenarios. If game minutes are HUGELY valuable, then coaches should try to create them as much as possible.
(I'm being serious).
There is very little that can be done to simulate a game environment. There are numerous cases of guys who are "practice players" and guys who are gamers. Our legendary Al McGuire said the same. Generally in most college basketball settings, less than 15% of the practice time is dedicated to actual full court scrimmaging.
Additionally, skill development is something that takes place primarily in the off-season. There isn't much skill work done during the season once the season is underway.
Having said all of this, I'm certainly not saying practices aren't valuable..at all. What their aim is, and general content is, is much more scouting report implementation, half court work, etc.
-
There is very little that can be done to simulate a game environment. There are numerous cases of guys who are "practice players" and guys who are gamers. Our legendary Al McGuire said the same. Generally in most college basketball settings, less than 15% of the practice time is dedicated to actual full court scrimmaging.
Additionally, skill development is something that takes place primarily in the off-season. There isn't much skill work done during the season once the season is underway.
Having said all of this, I'm certainly not saying practices aren't valuable..at all. What their aim is, and general content is, is much more scouting report implementation, half court work, etc.
That's fair, but I guess I'm really interested in how coaches evaluate players and pick their line-ups. I assume it's in practice, but maybe I'm being naive.
-
That's fair, but I guess I'm really interested in how coaches evaluate players and pick their line-ups. I assume it's in practice, but maybe I'm being naive.
No, you aren't being naive - coaches do go off of what they see in practice. Yet most coaches will adjust if a good practice player isn't getting the job done in games.
The problem again is that practice rarely simulates a game environment. The intensity and speed of a game are always just a notch above what occurs in practice. And since every coaches objective is to win games, they eventually have to take note of game performance and if it is lacking, try a different alternative. That was my frustration with Buzz all of last year...and I'm not going to knee jerk on Wojo at this point. I believe he has his reasons, and I believe he will adapt over the course of non-con. (And not saying that means Dawson will get more minutes come conference play - but I believe he will reduce Derrick to 10 minutes per game as a sole backup to Carlino with the "other Derrick" minutes being given to any of JJJ, Duane, Dawson or Cohen.
-
First road games are very tough to win.
I am not sure but I think we covered the Vegas line, so we did better than expected.
I am happy to see many flaws that can be corrected with practice. Much better than losing with no room for improvement.
-
I also feel that under the circumstances this year should have an aesterik next to it. OSU is tough to beat at home regardless of circumstances. Now you throw in a transition year, short bench, new system, etc. these flaws won't be long term, but they may haunt us all year. I'm not ambivalent about this team, but anything they accomplish will exceed my expectations. Next year is a completely different story.
-
Actually, I was impressed by MU's ability to break the pressure and get the ball to half court. I was distracted during the game, but did we have a single 10 second violation? (I do recall one timeout called when things weren't working.)
Would have had an eaier time brining the ball up if our ball handler would not give up the dribble 20 feet into the court. We gave up the dribble time after time. I think Carlino dribble through them a couple of times