Coaching Strategy

[BCHoopster]

It was obvious last night that MU looked a little out of sync.  But maybe just maybe it was the style of play that
Louisville plays.  What really bugs me is the inability to guard the 3 point line.  Marra was on fire so MU leaves him
open all game.  What is discussed in the huddle?  After one of the time-outs, Blue slides into the middle again, and
leaves him wide open.  13 threes, that is ridiculous.  Rather give a team 13 lay-ups.  But there you can have Otule
try and defend that shot.  39 points vs. 26 points??  Louisville is known to want to shoot the three, so play a 1-3-1
zone, MU's 2/3 is to easy to beat.  Tired, disagree, how about bad strategy!

[GGGG]

We were obviously tired. Our rotations were even slower than usual.

[Abode4life]

Louisville did have some ridiculous three point shots that were pretty well defended, especially in the first half.  On the other hand, they also had some wide open threes.

[MUMac]

If I read this correctly, I think Louisville might have some players on scholarship, too.  Sometimes you tip your cap to the other team.  Siva did a good job of penetrating, leaving the open man.  They also did a nice job of passing the ball.  In fact, ball movement reminded me a lot of last years MU team.  4 guys on the 3 point line and moving the ball before the defense can react.

When we played them in Louisville, they missed some 3's early and got out of that offense.  Last night, they hit them early and often.

[NersEllenson]

The primary reason for MU's 3 point defense being suspect, is the inability to stop penetration.  Siva is a very good point guard, very quick, great at collapsing the D.  All defenses are coached to shut off penetration/defend the paint first.

This MU team my need to trust Otule more and not collapse on penetration to the extent they have been.  I did think Lville hit a fair amount of contested/challenging 3's..but there definitely were some wide open looks in the corners for Kuric.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

This MU team my need to trust Otule more and not collapse on penetration to the extent they have been.  I did think Lville hit a fair amount of contested/challenging 3's..but there definitely were some wide open looks in the corners for Kuric.

That is an interesting point. I don't know if you will see much change this season, but possibly next season.

If MU is going to extend the defense and play aggressive help, they could probably speed up the rotations if they didn't collapse as aggressively. Having 4 MU players in the lane leads to open 3's and long offensive rebounds that MU can't get to.

Otule (and Jae) are pretty good defending around the rim. Might be worth it to let them challenge guys rather than collapse the entire team. With this said, Chris, Jae and Erik Williams will have to consistently stay out of foul trouble, and Gardner will have to improve his mobility for that to have any chance of working.

[NersEllenson]

That is an interesting point. I don't know if you will see much change this season, but possibly next season.

If MU is going to extend the defense and play aggressive help, they could probably speed up the rotations if they didn't collapse as aggressively. Having 4 MU players in the lane leads to open 3's and long offensive rebounds that MU can't get to.
Otule (and Jae) are pretty good defending around the rim. Might be worth it to let them challenge guys rather than collapse the entire team. With this said, Chris, Jae and Erik Williams will have to consistently stay out of foul trouble, and Gardner will have to improve his mobility for that to have any chance of working.

Very good point bolded, as are the others.  Probably would be best to go more zone with Gardner in games next year - fit the defense to the personnel.  Zoning with DG in the game would prevent him from having to hedge on screens, and also wouldn't make him susceptible to penetration/defending the rim.  Seems more and more teams are going to the 2/3 zone..and I'm sure these are 2 of the reasons.  Additionally, playing zone minimizes the energy expended - compared to man defense.  I don't see Buzz ever going exclusively zone - but I believe there are significant advantages..

[groove]

Very good point bolded, as are the others.  Probably would be best to go more zone with Gardner in games next year - fit the defense to the personnel.  Zoning with DG in the game would prevent him from having to hedge on screens, and also wouldn't make him susceptible to penetration/defending the rim.  Seems more and more teams are going to the 2/3 zone..and I'm sure these are 2 of the reasons.  Additionally, playing zone minimizes the energy expended - compared to man defense.  I don't see Buzz ever going exclusively zone - but I believe there are significant advantages..

The one negative with the zone for DG would be blocking out for rebounds would be more difficult.  With DG's lack of jumping ability, positioning is vital for him. Just one of the trade offs.

[NersEllenson]

The one negative with the zone for DG would be blocking out for rebounds would be more difficult.  With DG's lack of jumping ability, positioning is vital for him. Just one of the trade offs.

Agree to an extent - a negative of the zone is thought to be more difficulty in boxing "your man" out.  Yet with the extent the MU man D has been getting collapsed, and put into rotation mode - it often makes boxing out just as, if not more difficult than what we'd experience in a zone.

[MUMac]

The one negative with the zone for DG would be blocking out for rebounds would be more difficult.  With DG's lack of jumping ability, positioning is vital for him. Just one of the trade offs.

He does not block out playing man very well either.  None of our bigs really do.  We were spoiled watching Hayward, as he really worked hard to get position and keep position.  The current group tends to watch more and not find their man, body their man, or make their bodies bigger.  This is really a fundamentally bad rebounding team.