Is Buzz good at coaching defense?

[Blackhat]

After a year and a quarter, give or take,  I still can't decide.   Some games (early BE home games last year, OSC this year) he looks like he's a defensive wizard keeping teams in check with non-optimal pieces.   Then other games his defenses fall apart (Dayton, Villanova, NC State this year) and it looks like our guys haven't spent five minutes on defense in practice.

Fundamentals come and go with Buzz's teams not a good thing imo. 

[rocky_warrior]

With a young team, it's hard to tell.  However, I think he is good at coaching defense.  If you look only at our first halves, the team has effectively "shut down" each of the opponent's top players.  That says to me he puts together a good defensive plan, and the players understand it. 

Seconds halves are a different story.  I think that's partially youth.  Buzz has at least a couple days to explain the defensive plan for the fist half, but when the opponents make adjustments, even if Buzz recognizes that and wants to alter the defensive plan, I don't think it's as easy to get the players to understand what they need to do in the 2min period of a timeout.

Personally, I've been pleased with his defensive plans this year, and I think the players will get better at executing them over time.

[muarmy81]

After a year and a quarter, give or take,  I still can't decide.   
Fundamentals come and go with Buzz's teams not a good thing imo. 

Should you be making any decision based on such a small sample size?

[muphan]

I feel that defense is Buzz's pride and joy. In all of Buzz's interviews and player interviews they preach defense, esp playing D before the touch. I think that our defense will either make or break our season.

[Blackhat]

I think you can glean a feeling for if a guy can coach off a year and change data.     I think you can throw any 5 mutts out there and you'll know a Bo Ryan defense when you see it (i.e., great fundamentals, excellent help d, know who to defend picks, etc.)  


The basic things come and go with Buzz's d's and that's been the scary thing in watching his teams, cause that's probably the one thing that could lead him to being a losing coach, etc.  Offense should always be here with Buzz because he's recruited surprisingly well so far.  

[Nukem2]

Actually, a lot of the problem on defense vs. NC St. ( and FSU as well ) stemmed from the many offensive turnovers and poor shot selection.  MU commited far too many turnovers leading to easy hoops for NC St. and then shot selection and early shots led to far too many missed shots.  As such MU was no longer able to push the ball out high and prevent interior passes as the opponent is already into their pattern.  NC St. runs a lot of set plays so disrupting the play is very important.  Did not happen in the second half. For a very small team that plays defense this way, the offensive woes spelled doom for the Warriors.  As small as this team is (and that includes the backcourt), I'm not sure MU can be an effective zone team against most opponents.  This team absolutely need to protect the ball and take good shots.

[tower912]

Yes.   This year's team is limited by size and depth.    Also, as more tape becomes available, teams are going to be better prepared to face MU's (shudder) 'junkyard dog' defense.   What they did to XU and UM defensively was nothing short of remarkable.   When FSU made the adjustment to a 4 guard set (still taller than us) it negated our advantage.    When things came off the rails offensively against NCSU, our defensive energy suffered.   Too small and not deep enough to get away with supbar defensive effort.      So, answering the original question, Buzz is a good defensive coach.  Witness last year's seamless switches from M2M to 1-3-1. Hopefully, someday he will have a team tall enough, deep enough, and healthy enough to prove it.

[g0lden3agle]

Yes.   This year's team is limited by size and depth.    Also, as more tape becomes available, teams are going to be better prepared to face MU's (shudder) 'junkyard dog' defense.   What they did to XU and UM defensively was nothing short of remarkable.   When FSU made the adjustment to a 4 guard set (still taller than us) it negated our advantage.    When things came off the rails offensively against NCSU, our defensive energy suffered.   Too small and not deep enough to get away with supbar defensive effort.      So, answering the original question, Buzz is a good defensive coach.  Witness last year's seamless switches from M2M to 1-3-1. Hopefully, someday he will have a team tall enough, deep enough, and healthy enough to prove it.

Have we shown the 1-3-1 at all yet this year? Would a set like Acker-DJO-Butler-Lazar-Fulce/Maymon be lengthy (is that correct?) enough?

[Murffieus]

The answer is that up to this point, no----at UNO his teams was ranked #323 in defense by Pomeroy-----last year MU was #15 in FG percentage allowed amongst the 16 BE teams. (That was opposed to a #5 ranking Crean's last year)

Chief problem is not handling ball screens properly----he has the dribbler's man going deep behind the screen
rather than slide through one man removed where he is able to pick up the dribbler properly on the other side of the screen.

On Saturday, by sliding behind the screen the dribbler is given daylight on the other side of the screen and was able to breakdown our defense taking it to the hole from the other side of the screen (our  defender gets to the other side of the screen late as a result of going the long way (deep) around the screen).

But there is hope-----A simple slide through one man removed from the dribbler would fix that.

[Blackhat]

The answer is that up to this point, no----at UNO his teams was ranked #323 in defense by Pomeroy-----last year MU was #15 in FG percentage allowed amongst the 16 BE teams. (That was opposed to a #5 ranking Crean's last year)

Chief problem is not handling ball screens properly----he has the dribbler's man going deep behind the screen
rather than slide through one man removed where he is able to pick up the dribbler properly on the other side of the screen.

On Saturday, by sliding behind the screen the dribbler is given daylight on the other side of the screen and was able to breakdown our defense taking it to the hole from the other side of the screen (our  defender gets to the other side of the screen late as a result of going the long way (deep) around the screen).

But there is hope-----A simple slide through one man removed from the dribbler would fix that.

I'll pay more attention to that going forward.  But that's basketball 101 on defense, I learned that when I was 12 in regards how off man slides out, on ball slides through.  Something so basic is what is eating us up?   I hope not. 

[Murffieus]

When you get hit up for 49 points in 2nd half as we did on Saturday to a team which will be fighting to stay out of the ACC cellar-----there has to be a major problem-----and I have isolated it for you and for the coaching staff.

All they have to do is look at game tape and they will see that I am correct.

[Blackhat]

When you get hit up for 49 points in 2nd half as we did on Saturday to a team which will be fighting to stay out of the ACC cellar-----there has to be a major problem-----and I have isolated it for you and for the coaching staff.

All they have to do is look at game tape and they will see that I am correct.

It horrifies me to think that cropped up as a problem to begin with, if you are correct.   

[DaCoach]

The answer is that up to this point, no----at UNO his teams was ranked #323 in defense by Pomeroy-----last year MU was #15 in FG percentage allowed amongst the 16 BE teams. (That was opposed to a #5 ranking Crean's last year)

Chief problem is not handling ball screens properly----he has the dribbler's man going deep behind the screen
rather than slide through one man removed where he is able to pick up the dribbler properly on the other side of the screen.

On Saturday, by sliding behind the screen the dribbler is given daylight on the other side of the screen and was able to breakdown our defense taking it to the hole from the other side of the screen (our  defender gets to the other side of the screen late as a result of going the long way (deep) around the screen).

But there is hope-----A simple slide through one man removed from the dribbler would fix that.

That is exactly what has been happening. We never fight through picks and the defender is too often late getting back on the ball. Add to that the lack of a big man who can help and you see all the lay ups. To assess our guard play we also have to look at how many points our guards are surrendering. I'd like to see more switches on the picks even though it creates some mismatches. But with our team speed most times we should be able to switch back before the damage is done.

Bottom line is that we are very predictable in this area and that is a recipe for disaster.

[Murffieus]

Actually one doesn't have to "fight through" the screen------all that has to happen is that the defender on the screener has to lossen on the screener giving the defender of the dribbler room to slide through just one man removed from the dribbler and be able to pick up the dribbler a half a body ahead of him on the other side of the screen. Currently our defender on the dribbler goes deep behind everyone involved in the ball screen and therefore is apt to trail the dribbler coming off the screen-----hence the dribbler proceeds to break down our defense.

[Golden Avalanche]

With a young team, it's hard to tell.  However, I think he is good at coaching defense.  If you look only at our first halves, the team has effectively "shut down" each of the opponent's top players.  That says to me he puts together a good defensive plan, and the players understand it. 

Seconds halves are a different story.  I think that's partially youth.  Buzz has at least a couple days to explain the defensive plan for the fist half, but when the opponents make adjustments, even if Buzz recognizes that and wants to alter the defensive plan, I don't think it's as easy to get the players to understand what they need to do in the 2min period of a timeout.

Personally, I've been pleased with his defensive plans this year, and I think the players will get better at executing them over time.

I've been debating this in my head over the last week. We are inexperienced in some key areas but I don't think we are that young. In fact, I think it's a crutch that will be used throughout the year.

Hayward, Acker, Cubillan, and Butler are not young. All have played a major part in this program during their time in Milwaukee. That's half our rotation.

Fulce's game action is limited but he's been in the program long enough to know how not to get rattled especially since he came from the JUCO ranks. Throw in two JUCOs who have played with better competition then most true Freshmen and you get a rotation that isn't young but simply is incomplete.

Ironically, the guys we're missing (Cadougan, Otule, Maymon, Williams, Mbao) are the ones who would most qualify for not knowing what is going on due to being young.

[Nukem2]

I've been debating this in my head over the last week. We are inexperienced in some key areas but I don't think we are that young. In fact, I think it's a crutch that will be used throughout the year.

Hayward, Acker, Cubillan, and Butler are not young. All have played a major part in this program during their time in Milwaukee. That's half our rotation.

Fulce's game action is limited but he's been in the program long enough to know how not to get rattled especially since he came from the JUCO ranks. Throw in two JUCOs who have played with better competition then most true Freshmen and you get a rotation that isn't young but simply is incomplete.

Ironically, the guys we're missing (Cadougan, Otule, Maymon, Williams, Mbao) are the ones who would most qualify for not knowing what is going on due to being young.

Cooby and Acker are playing full-time for the 1st time and they don't always match up well defensively with bigger/athletic guards that we saw with FSU and NC ST.  I color them inesxperienced.

[Golden Avalanche]

Cooby and Acker are playing full-time for the 1st time and they don't always match up well defensively with bigger/athletic guards that we saw with FSU and NC ST.  I color them inesxperienced.

That's why I called this team incomplete. Not young.

But if people are going to blame all of our miscues on being young -- turnover prone; bad passing; weak rebounding; bad second halves -- I find that a crutch and not true.

Our main players have all had extended runs in their career where they have been in the "big moment". They should know how not to choke on an 11 or 12 point lead.

[NotAnAlum]

I have felt this same thing.  To call the team young is incorrect.  We start 2 seniors, 2 juniors and a soph.  First 2 guys off the bench (Acker, Fulce) are upper classmen.  This team is not young (if you want a young team look at the 3 Amigos first year)
What they are is new at playing together and new in the system.  Frankly I expected this to be a big problem on offense and defense.  In Orlando it looked like "no problem".  Second half of NC State it looked like a huge problem.  We'll have to see what comes next but I really don't want to hear that its due to young players.

[Badgerhater]

Actually, a lot of the problem on defense vs. NC St. ( and FSU as well ) stemmed from the many offensive turnovers and poor shot selection.  MU commited far too many turnovers leading to easy hoops for NC St. and then shot selection and early shots led to far too many missed shots.  As such MU was no longer able to push the ball out high and prevent interior passes as the opponent is already into their pattern.  NC St. runs a lot of set plays so disrupting the play is very important.  Did not happen in the second half. For a very small team that plays defense this way, the offensive woes spelled doom for the Warriors.  As small as this team is (and that includes the backcourt), I'm not sure MU can be an effective zone team against most opponents.  This team absolutely need to protect the ball and take good shots.

+1

The turnover numbers by MU in the two Halves from Hell are are mind boggling.  22 of the teams 100 TOs have come in those 40 minutes.

[mug644]

I have felt this same thing.  To call the team young is incorrect.  We start 2 seniors, 2 juniors and a soph.  First 2 guys off the bench (Acker, Fulce) are upper classmen.  This team is not young (if you want a young team look at the 3 Amigos first year)
What they are is new at playing together and new in the system.  Frankly I expected this to be a big problem on offense and defense.  In Orlando it looked like "no problem".  Second half of NC State it looked like a huge problem.  We'll have to see what comes next but I really don't want to hear that its due to young players.

I like that. They are not young, nor (necessarily) inexperienced, but they have very limited experience playing together as a team. I think part of the benefit Buzz had last year was that he was coaching a team that had loads of experience playing together (think about it: only Jimmy Butler was a regular player that was new to the team last year.

[Lennys Tap]

That's why I called this team incomplete. Not young.

But if people are going to blame all of our miscues on being young -- turnover prone; bad passing; weak rebounding; bad second halves -- I find that a crutch and not true.

Our main players have all had extended runs in their career where they have been in the "big moment". They should know how not to choke on an 11 or 12 point lead.

Our rotation as of today consists of 3 seniors (Hayward, Cubillan and Acker), 3 juniors (Butler, Buycks and Fulce), one sophmore (DJO) and one freshman (Maymon). Not "young" at all if you go by age/class. But if you include injury in the equation we have 4 first year and 1 second year (Butler) MU players in the group and only one legit big east player with more than one year's experience (Hayward).
TC left behind one real big east player in three classes and Williams has had to play catch up. Injury has made the task that much harder.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Our rotation as of today consists of 3 seniors (Hayward, Cubillan and Acker), 3 juniors (Butler, Buycks and Fulce), one sophmore (DJO) and one freshman (Maymon). Not "young" at all if you go by age/class. But if you include injury in the equation we have 4 first year and 1 second year (Butler) MU players in the group and only one legit big east player with more than one year's experience (Hayward).
TC left behind one real big east player in three classes and Williams has had to play catch up. Injury has made the task that much harder.

Actually he left several Big East players....one transferred  after Buzz took the job and went to Minnesota.  One transferred and is playing at Kansas.  One transferred to play at Indiana.  Another transferred to play at Iowa State.  For whatever reason, those guys wanted to play for Tom Crean (man who can't recruit, coach, etc) but didn't want to play for Buzz (unfortunately, because we could use them all). 

[MR.HAYWARD]

great players make great coaches.  the 3 amigos allowed Crean to keep his job at MU were it not for them after the 2004 and 2005 debacles he would not be employed at either MU or IU

christopherson and Williams are not half the players djo and buycks are,  they would not help us this year. 

[Jay Bee]

Actually he left several Big East players....one transferred  after Buzz took the job and went to Minnesota.  One transferred and is playing at Kansas.  One transferred to play at Indiana.  Another transferred to play at Iowa State.  For whatever reason, those guys wanted to play for Tom Crean (man who can't recruit, coach, etc) but didn't want to play for Buzz (unfortunately, because we could use them all). 

  Not sure I'd call all of those transfers, technically.  At any rate, to oversimplify and say that each of these kid's decision was black and white: Crean, yes, Buzz, no... is silly.  There's a lot more to it than, "I wanted to play for Tim Cream but I don't want to play for Buzz, therefore I do not want to be at Marquette this coming season".

[PE8983]

Mbakwe was gone anyway before TC left, he just decided to take advantage of MU with rehab and summer school.
Taylor was just looking for a way out when Kansas had an opening.