Just had to start a new topic about defense.
Just read though all the threads from yesterdays game, and can't believe the number of people saying that we can't play against the zone. We didn't do awesome, but we did score 72 points and shoot 41.7% for the game. That's not bad, and I'd even say it's good enough to win 90% of the time.
The reason we lost? Not the zone, but rather the fact that we didn't stop ANYONE on Syracuse from scoring. They scored 87 points on 58% shooting.
We lost the game fair and square, but it's wasn't because of the zone. Our defense is the sole reason. Bad match ups? Yes. But we also just didn't cover people very well.
Preach on brother man! I have been beating this drum all season, and continually get frustrated seeing people talk about lack of shooting,, or inability to attack a zone, and while technically those things may be true, they only become a factor when we fail to play good D. That is where it all begins and ends for MU. As with nearly all of our losses - Georgetown being an obvious exception (although there were a couple bad individual defensive plays that really hurt) - we lose because we don't defend, and we let missed shots and struggles offensively affect they way we play D, it snowballs, and we end up getting blown out. That inability to focus defensively no matter what has been my number frustration with this group of players.
Quote from: rocky_warrior on March 09, 2008, 12:18:00 PM
Just had to start a new topic about defense.
Just read though all the threads from yesterdays game, and can't believe the number of people saying that we can't play against the zone. We didn't do awesome, but we did score 72 points and shoot 41.7% for the game. That's not bad, and I'd even say it's good enough to win 90% of the time.
The reason we lost? Not the zone, but rather the fact that we didn't stop ANYONE on Syracuse from scoring. They scored 87 points on 58% shooting.
We lost the game fair and square, but it's wasn't because of the zone. Our defense is the sole reason. Bad match ups? Yes. But we also just didn't cover people very well.
We lost the game in the paint. The Cuse scored at will inside. Without a strong big man, the half court game come tourney time will be dismal for us.
In all our losses, we were 2-3ed. We had more TO's yesterday against it than we forced. In a 2-3, there is no viable option in our O for a 5 as the baseline option is zoned out--since our 5's don't post up--unless Ooze can get behind it in transition. Our spacing gets clogged, our options are reduced, and our guards have to think rather than react. We will see it in every game here on out.
That said, I do agree our strength is our pressure D (downside is all the FT's we give up like yesterday). It ignites us when we are clicking on O. Why TC hasn't pressed more is one of the mysteries of life I haven't come to understand yet. I am hoping he is saving it for the post-season.
What was out deflection count?
That said, I think we once again have lost our identity. Of offense, Al used to say that some nights the basket was big as a rain barrel and other nights it was the size of a thimble, meaning that to win consistently you couldn't count on your offense evey night as your shooting may be off,but you CAN control the effort you make on defense on every possession. That's an area we need to look at.
Flynn and Harris are good guards, but there is no excuse for not pressuring the snot out of them. If you allow them to set up without pressure, you allow the entry pass to the post. THAT sure worked well, didn't it? Of course, having Jerel guarding a guy 9 inches taller down low may not have beent he best matchup. For this team to succeed, the guards have got to pressure, pressure, pressure.
Yep, the guards have to pressure, pressure, pressure. Our problem comes after that. We reach, we get out of position. We would be far better if we stayed on the ball and denied the passing lanes. Instead we reach, not move our feet, and get beat off the dribble. We are quicker than a lot of teams, and I hate to say, how about moving instead of reaching.
I think the reason we have not pressed as much is because we gamble a lot. High risk reward but lately only risk. I would like to see a half court trap once in a while, we can move, we just have to put our minds to it.
Quote from: 21Jumpstreet on March 09, 2008, 01:37:29 PM
Yep, the guards have to pressure, pressure, pressure. Our problem comes after that. We reach, we get out of position. We would be far better if we stayed on the ball and denied the passing lanes. Instead we reach, not move our feet, and get beat off the dribble. We are quicker than a lot of teams, and I hate to say, how about moving instead of reaching.
I think the reason we have not pressed as much is because we gamble a lot. High risk reward but lately only risk. I would like to see a half court trap once in a while, we can move, we just have to put our minds to it.
I believe that w/ the undersized team we field that, while we'd have the speed to trap but not the length and we'd give up lay-ups being unable to stop opponents guards passing over us.
Need to play in-your-face defense and keep your opponent off balance. Reaching in has become a huge problem in some games as our guys often over run their guy who is then open or can make a soled entry pass. Happened over and over again.
I agree 100% with rocky that defense was the problem yesterday, not our offense. Our interior players cannot hold off other good big players. It all starts with our guards, who have to do everything they possibly can to make the entry passes to the post as difficult as possible.
Our guards are underrated, if you ask me. They have so many responsibilties that guards on other teams to do not have. Besides the regular guard things of handling the ball, finding the open man and defending the perimeter, we DEPEND on them to force tempo, to score, to rebound, and to defend the interior. When we are effective stopping the low box scorers it is because McNeal or James gets down there and doubles the interior player and gets a steal or forces a bad pass. If we leave it to our bigs to stop the low post players, they are abused. If our guards do not dominate, we lose. Fortunately, they are often up to the task.