Great Article about Buzz in SI

[rocky_warrior]

How many days has Buzz now been the coach?

To make it easier for Buzz, and MUScoopers to keep track, I've added a convenient counter to the MUScoop stats page.

http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?action=stats

Whew - no more calculations by hand.  Hopefully this will save buzz at least a minute every day 

[Henry Sugar]

It's a lot of work to go and click on that link.  I mean... I'd have to move my mouse and bookmark the link or something...

Could you make it show up on the front page of the site like the consolidated recruiting info or scholarship link?

[Marquette84]

TC went perimeter against UCONN last year (started Fitz, and dCube and Mo got good minutes, while the 4/5's had plenty of pine time).  I actually liked the TC move for its creativity.  Result, we got absolutely hammered, down 67-38 at one point.  UCONN shot 39 FT's

Here's the stats, including the  play by play:
http://www.bigeast.org/fls/19400/stats/mbasketball/2007-2008/MMUCONN.HTM

The interesting is the +/- on Barro.  With Barro in the game UConn outscored MU 48 to 16.  With Barro on the bench, MU outscoured UConn 57 to 41.

[Big Daddy Z]

it's called a ZONE

[Pardner]

Here's the stats, including the  play by play:
http://www.bigeast.org/fls/19400/stats/mbasketball/2007-2008/MMUCONN.HTM

The interesting is the +/- on Barro.  With Barro in the game UConn outscored MU 48 to 16.  With Barro on the bench, MU outscoured UConn 57 to 41.

Point being?  That in the last ten minutes MU almost doubled their points in garbage time?  That Lazar and Fitz were so mismatched that they fouled out, leaving Mo to go at Thabeet?  That TC had to keep running in Ooze as the mismatch wasn't working?  That UCONN had their 2nd highest FG% game of the season?  That UCONN held the shot block advantage 10-2 as we kept trying to drive right into the heart of the frontline?  That MU was outrebounded 34-19?  Like I said, creative thought by TC considering the mismatch, but you cannot be arguing that it was successful?--TC himself didn't think so as he never tried this again (starting all perimeter players).  Finally, I will leave the final word to the opposing HOF coach if you don't agree with me:

"I felt Hasheem owned the middle," Calhoun said. "We decided to take advantage of our size right away by going inside on offense and that's what allowed us to be 5-for-11 on 3s."

Powned and Zoned!

[Marquette84]

Point being?  That in the last ten minutes MU almost doubled their points in garbage time?  That Lazar and Fitz were so mismatched that they fouled out, leaving Mo to go at Thabeet?  That TC had to keep running in Ooze as the mismatch wasn't working?  That UCONN had their 2nd highest FG% game of the season?  That UCONN held the shot block advantage 10-2 as we kept trying to drive right into the heart of the frontline?  That MU was outrebounded 34-19?  Like I said, creative thought by TC considering the mismatch, but you cannot be arguing that it was successful?--TC himself didn't think so as he never tried this again (starting all perimeter players).  Finally, I will leave the final word to the opposing HOF coach if you don't agree with me:

"I felt Hasheem owned the middle," Calhoun said. "We decided to take advantage of our size right away by going inside on offense and that's what allowed us to be 5-for-11 on 3s."

***Like I said, creative thought by TC considering the mismatch, but you cannot be arguing that it was successful?

Actually, it was unsuccessful because Crean only used the mismatch for the first four minutes of the game, then wound up giving Barro his season average in minutes. 

Lets forget garbage time and only consider the first half.

UConn had a 15 point half time lead.  Guess how much of that lead was built with Barro in the game.  ALL OF IT!!!  100%.   In other words, the mismatch worked--the traditional approach didn't.

In the 7 minutes Barro was on the bench, (4 minutes to start the game, and 3 minutes from 8:00 to 5:00),  the "mismatch" played UConn to a 11-11 tie.   In the 13 minutes Barro was in the game, UConn's scoring advantage was 28 - 13.

That's not garbage time--that's the first half.

UConn finished the first half with a 15 point lead--and NONE of that lead was due to a mismatch of running 5 perimeter players at the Huskies. 

A five guard offense MAY have worked against UConn last year.  We don't really know because it wasn't actually tried--despite your comments to the contrary.

Its obvious that a traditional front line including Ooze at the 5 wasn't able to contain UConn defensively last year--I don't think we have anyone who will be any more effective this year.
   
So the approach that Buzz is outlining is simply this:  Why bother trying?  Simply focus your attention at putting the five best offensive players on the floor and outscoring the other team.  It's very likely that our five best offensive players will be perimeter/guard players.   

[Murffieus]

 Five guard offense is "pie in the sky"-----won't work unless we have 3-4 NBA types lining up.

The problem against UCONN last year is first of all we were on the road, secondly we had beaten them the previous 2 years, and finally they overwhelmed and overpowered us with size (Barro or no Barro). Their size dominance inside required that we don't play as tight to the outside as we had most of the year----leaving us very vulnerable on the perimeter.

[Blackhat]

The press would have to come with a 5 guard offense because there's no way you could win a half court battle for 40 minutes just based on rebounding and defense alone, i.e., higher percentage shot is a lay up than 10-22 footer.   I wouldn't mind seeing it as a change up before half or something like that but I think Buzz will utilize Burke as much as he can and hopefully Otule can play defense. 

[Marquette84]

Five guard offense is "pie in the sky"-----won't work unless we have 3-4 NBA types lining up.

The problem against UCONN last year is first of all we were on the road, secondly we had beaten them the previous 2 years, and finally they overwhelmed and overpowered us with size (Barro or no Barro). Their size dominance inside required that we don't play as tight to the outside as we had most of the year----leaving us very vulnerable on the perimeter.

Actually, UConn didn't overwhelm and overpowered us "Barro or no Barro."  They only overwhelmed and overpowered us with Barro in the game.  He was ineffective on defense, and made our offense 4 on 5. 

When he was on the bench, the game was even.

I know you don't like to hear it, but facts are facts.  We did not need "3-4 NBA types lining up" to play UConn even with a perimiter offense.  We did it with the lineup we had last season.

[Pardner]

Actually, UConn didn't overwhelm and overpowered us "Barro or no Barro."  They only overwhelmed and overpowered us with Barro in the game.  He was ineffective on defense, and made our offense 4 on 5. 

When he was on the bench, the game was even.

I know you don't like to hear it, but facts are facts.  We did not need "3-4 NBA types lining up" to play UConn even with a perimeter offense.  We did it with the lineup we had last season.

We started off down 7-1 when Barro was on the bench.  Thabeet had two blocks right off the bat, and TC ran Ooze in as we were getting dominated inside.  The real damage done was the last 4:00 minutes of the first half--with yes, Barro in the game...and with Mo, JM, Wes and DJ.  With Fitz and dCubes coming in for Wes and Mo in that span.  That was a perimeter game move by TC--and the same way he started the game.  If you can blame that blowout solely on Barro, so be it.  I wish Mo would have bitten Thabeet's knee cap a little harder--maybe we could have pulled out a W.

James keeps a stat that tracks when the game is statistically over.  This game ended at 9:31 of the second half--earlier than our game with UWM.  Going small against UCONN was fruitless.  Running Ooze in happenstance with a small line up against UCONN was bound to fail.  TC didn't even employ this against Stanford.

So, to be clear...are you arguing that the five guard line up is a good idea---or that Ooze sucked?  If the first, please provide an instance in the BE where this worked for a small team regularly vs. a team like UCONN on the road.  This may help me gain confidence that this may actually work.

[Murffieus]

SJS/84----you bet UCONN beats us "Barro or no Barro"-----UCONN shoots 51% (45% on treys) in the first half and meanwhile MU shoots only 27% ----some of that happened when Barro was in the game and some of it happened with him out of the game!

MU's problem vs UCONN and all year was very poor interior defense-----again with or without Barro!

[Marquette84]

SJS/84----you bet UCONN beats us "Barro or no Barro"-----UCONN shoots 51% (45% on treys) in the first half and meanwhile MU shoots only 27% ----some of that happened when Barro was in the game and some of it happened with him out of the game!

Murff, let me remind you of the scoring:  In the 7 minutes Barro was on the bench, (4 minutes to start the game, and 3 minutes from 8:00 to 5:00),  the "mismatch" played UConn to a 11-11 tie.   In the 13 minutes Barro was in the game, UConn's scoring advantage was 28 - 13.

We can pretend that this was pure coincidence.  Or we can learn from it. 

My view of the lesson--don't bother trying to defend UConn inside--nobody is capable of doing so.  Put your five best offensive players on the court and hope your shots fall.

[Marquette84]

So, to be clear...

To be clear, here's what I'm saying:

DEFENSIVELY, I saw no difference in UConn's ability to score at will regardless of what lineup we had on the floor. 

OFFENSIVELY, MU performed better with a perimeter offense (meaning Ooze was on the bench).

You can argue that this was frutiless all you want, the scoring numbers back me up.  Whether you measure the first half only, or for the full game. 

I suppose you could argue that this was just a massive game-long coincidence.  That purely by chance during the 19 minutes Ooze was in the game MU only scored 16 points, and in the 21 minutes he was on the bench MU scored 48 points.  Just a great big coincidence.

BTW, I would say your example of a perimeter-oriented team that beat UConn at home is Providence.  Hanke--their only player taller than 6'8"--played just 13 minutes, and as with MU, the Friars played worse with him in the lineup than when he was on the bench.  In fact, despite only picking up 1 PF, Hanke went to the bench with 16:44 left in the game, and never saw action again. The proportion of minutes PC gave to guards and WFs was even more than MU vs. UConn. 

[Murffieus]

SJS/84----if UCONN did most of their net production with Barro playing, it's coincidence. Or it could be that Thebeet and other UCONN studs were on the bench when Barro was on the bench. Or it could have been that UCONN just came out of the box all pumped up because of two previous straight losses to MU. Or it could be that Burke was/is a better defender than Barro-----remember I said that MU interior defense was poor "with or without Barro".

BTW, as I recall what killed us in that first half against UCONN was their 50% trey shooting in the first half-----can't blame that on Barro!

[Marquette84]

SJS/84----if UCONN did most of their net production with Barro playing, it's coincidence. Or it could be that Thebeet and other UCONN studs were on the bench when Barro was on the bench. Or it could have been that UCONN just came out of the box all pumped up because of two previous straight losses to MU. Or it could be that Burke was/is a better defender than Barro-----remember I said that MU interior defense was poor "with or without Barro".

BTW, as I recall what killed us in that first half against UCONN was their 50% trey shooting in the first half-----can't blame that on Barro!

***--if UCONN did most of their net production with Barro playing, it's coincidence.


You miss the point.  I'm not talking about UConn's production--I'm talking about MU's ability to match or surpass it.

MU did most of their net production with Barro on the bench.  Given that Barro is not known for his gifted offensive skills, I don't believe that is a coincidence.



***. Or it could be that Thebeet and other UCONN studs were on the bench when Barro was on the bench.

Nope.  Thabeet played 32 minutes, Barro only 19.


***Or it could have been that UCONN just came out of the box all pumped up because of two previous straight losses to MU

I'm sure they were. 

Despite that, MU somehow managed to match UConn point for point whenever Barro was on the bench.  When he was in the game, they outscored us 3 to 1. 


***Or it could be that Burke was/is a better defender than Barro-----remember I said that MU interior defense was poor "with or without Barro".

Burke only played six minutes.  That means 15 minutes with neither Burke nor Barro in the game.

[Murffieus]

What's  your point? I said MU's interior defense was poor with or without Barro in the game----you seem to be swatting flies here.

[Marquette84]

What's  your point? I said MU's interior defense was poor with or without Barro in the game----you seem to be swatting flies here.

Once again, you're ignoring half the argument: 

A.  DEFENSIVELY, I saw no difference in UConn's ability to score at will regardless of what lineup we had on the floor. 

B.  OFFENSIVELY, MU performed better with a perimeter offense


You apparently agree with me on point A. 

So what about point B?