|
Post by bsuwolf99 on Jan 29, 2018 8:22:20 GMT -6
I know that Whitford only really plays man defense (slack line); but I wonder if now with the lack of depth if he would consider some kind of zone defense. I know the first reaction to zone is that we would get killed by 3 pointers; but at this point, it seems like conference opponents are already dropping 3's on us at a fairly good clip so I can't imagine it getting a whole lot worse. In addition, the general feeling is that our guards are slow of foot defensively so at least there would be some protection behind them with a zone. This is not meant as a cure all defensively; just a change of pace.
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Jan 29, 2018 8:44:12 GMT -6
I actually thought during the game Saturday that we ought to try a zone to try to A: get out on Ivey better, and B: maybe make it a little harder for them to get to the basket so easily on dribble drives. They killed us on the baseline. Ordinarily you might not want to give up a size advantage by going away from man but we weren't stopping them anyway. We just weren't quick enough. A zone also can save on fouls and fatigue, but I can't recall if we've ever played zone under Whit.
BTW, Whit admitted calling that TO before Ivey hit the 3 at the buzzer was stupid. Gave Akron a chance to set something up. Plus, he regretted not putting someone bigger on Ivey. Still making rookie mistakes 5 years in.....
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jan 29, 2018 9:57:16 GMT -6
Very solid thinking by RC. Agree on all counts. Plus, the changes we have been forced to make already need to be given a chance. The coaches know our players and their capabilities, know the opponents we will face.
Current starters do give us pretty good size, but putting Sellers at G is not ideal. Clearly, it hurts defense against quick guards. Does get Teague in the lineup where he doesn't have to guard the post and might avoid fouls.
Until Saturday the changes meant Tyler was our spark off the bench. It was a wild card that might produce the occasional big boost, but that spark fizzled often anyway... A solid 20+ minutes from Walker is hard to replace without him, Ish, Gunn, Francis have to improve for us to be decent the rest of the way, but starting Ish or Francis in a more conventional lineup requires that also.
No good answers here.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jan 29, 2018 10:09:43 GMT -6
I know that Whitford only really plays man defense (slack line); but I wonder if now with the lack of depth if he would consider some kind of zone defense...just a change of pace. He has done that in the past, and maybe not a completely radical change in approach from pack line in some ways, both are ball oriented and designed to provide help inside. If we had better on the ball defenders I'd hate to see us not use man defense, but we have not exactly shined in that department. I will not be surprised to see that zone against the quicker teams, and as you say maybe to slow the game pace, and protect Moses or Teague in foul trouble. Still, RC has a point that you don't want to abandon the principles you have been teaching all year, and as I said above about offense, all changes require time and we're already struggling with adjustments made.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jan 29, 2018 10:13:14 GMT -6
"rmcalhoun" is just being modest. He's actually Bonzi Wells.
But he did misname this thread. It should be titled "going around in endless circles" Gee, only until next year, Sherm. We can beat the BSU curse then.
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Jan 29, 2018 10:13:14 GMT -6
Well, I'd say if you don't have more than one defense available to you at this point in the season then you are limiting the tools available to you. And, as some of us have been saying, Whit only knows to play one way, or at least only has us play one way, which kinda backs you into a corner in terms of adjustments.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jan 29, 2018 10:20:06 GMT -6
Well, I'd say if you don't have more than one defense available to you at this point in the season then you are limiting the tools available to you. And, as some of us have been saying, Whit only knows to play one way, or at least only has us play one way, which kinda backs you into a corner in terms of adjustments. I am fine with one defense and playing it right. Adjustments, offense or defense, should not mean giving up basic ideas you work on from day 1, and have made adjustment to fit your existing personnel. The reason I think the zone idea may have legs is pack line already has at least some zone principle built into it anyway. And the loss of our quick guards is a pretty big change in personnel that does create some crisis. The zone to stop quickness and penetration may be something that makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Jan 29, 2018 10:33:21 GMT -6
But we don’t even play the one defense we play well.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jan 29, 2018 11:03:48 GMT -6
But we don’t even play the one defense we play well. Well that means you have to trust the process and continue to improve... But seriously folks we are not going to be a good man defensive team without more quickness and athleticism than we have. The rest of this year anyway. (Walton, Hazen, Acree, Coleman and any late recruits are bound to help with that. Walton a very good athlete all around, Acree and Coleman both are big guards, not real quick, but with wingspan and quick feet and good hands. Ish has some length and just has to learn how to play against college quickness, he's a good, but not great athlete. ) Zone won't solve that athleticism problem, we'll have trouble closing out on shooters just as we do now, although more length might help some in zone. The big lineup fits there, if we don't run out of gas playing Teague Mallers and Moses.
|
|
|
Post by lmills72 on Jan 29, 2018 20:40:13 GMT -6
Guys the last thing you want is to blow this thing up and start radically changing roles 22 games into the season. That sends the message to your team that we are either panicking or playing for next year. We’ve moved on from Walker now and Tyler was a bench player. Losing both hurts and yes, it screws up our depth and rotation dramatically but some of the ideas being floated here are ridiculous at best and just a knee jerk reaction. Sorry, I disagree, primarily regarding your contention that this is blowing things up. It's merely evolving. Are you saying we should continue to bring Tahjai off the bench? Our front-line depth hasn't changed. Why alter any rotations there? In fact, had Moses not been hurt to start the season, that's basically what we would have done for the first 19 games of the season ... bring him off the bench. I guess maybe Whitford blew things up when he inserted Teague into the starting lineup 2 games ago. Before being inserted into the starting lineup, he had averaged less than 7 ppg in the previous 5 games. But, the reality is that Teague producing at the level he did last game is the only way we remain competitive. No other player left on this team has the ability to increase his production to the level that Teague can. Will he? I have my doubts. But, I do think he's the only hope. As for El-Amin, he and Tyler were basically getting the same amount of minutes. It's only natural that he would pick up more minutes, and it's hardly far-fetched to imagine Persons playing something of an off-guard position. This has already happened numerous times this year. It's not like it's going to drastically alter the amount of offensive opportunities he has. And here's another thought. You don't think that opponents are going to look at our lack of guard depth and begin to pressure Persons with the idea that they can wear down our best scorer just by making difficult for him to bring the ball up the court. More time for Ish allows Persons to conserve some energy, which he's gonna need.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jan 29, 2018 21:19:05 GMT -6
I think the current starting lineup has Teague out there. But with Moses. Ish on the bench. As a freshman he may benefit from watching before entering the game. He will certainly play some minutes with Persons.
Maybe it won't be that much different from your vision some of the time, but given the number of changes and transitions we are making, benching Moses, starting Ish and taking the ball out of Persons hands seems like a lot of change.
Persons as SG might be in the cards and work next season when we have time to work with him in preparation as an off guard, and add Walton who is always a threat to score with the ball on the drive to basket. We have to use his strengths and those of other newcomers, and also will see Persons become an even more important outside shooting threat. So maybe that makes a lot of sense to refocus him a little then.
This year, after all the disruption, both changing personnel, and changing how we use Persons in his current key role is too much.
|
|
|
Post by realitycheck on Jan 29, 2018 21:25:19 GMT -6
LMills you suggested we start Ish, bench Moses and “roll the dice” which is an appropriate analogy for your idea because it’s a pretty big gamble and makes no sense, IMO. Teague is starting because Kiapway has been awol and Whitford is tired of waiting for him to emerge from his season long funk. I agree Teague also has the most upside with additional minutes and gives us a better chance to win. Ish is gonna get more minutes now because they are available with Tyler and Walker gone and Kip in limbo. But he’s not ready for prime time and is only playing more because of that. The best “evolving” we can do is just give more minutes to the first five and hope Ish, Gunn, Kip and I guess Thompson can hold down the fort while the starters get a brief blow. Just my opinion.
|
|