Effort/Rebounding

[Paterfamilias]

Hearing about lack of effort is starting to get tiresome. Reminds me of how Crean used to beg for "edge" and playing like "your hair is on fire"

There was no level of effort that would have saved that game yesterday imo. Michigan executed a game plan much better than IU on both ends of the floor. It's the far superior execution that makes the effort stats look so bad.

Take rebounding as an example. Michigan got 11 more defensive boards than IU, and 3 more offensive boards. Well IU missed 10 more fg attempts and 2 more ft attempts. Those extra misses are going to go to the defensive team 70 to 80 percent of the time, and ft misses are probably more like 90 percent.

So, disparity in defensive boards is almost all explained by the differential in shot quality the two teams had yesterday. It wasn't like the players just didn't give proper effort on the glass. No amount of increased rebounding effort would have made a tangible difference on the stat sheet. Far superior execution and game planning on both ends of the floor is what was needed.

Michigan did get about 3 offensive boards more than expected on 23 missed fg attempts, but it happens all the time when the offense has the defense scrambling the whole game.

Anyway, my point is (and I may just be wrong) that when I hear coaches blame effort over and over again... I start to think preparation and gameplan more and more.

 

[mushroomgod_1]

Hearing about lack of effort is starting to get tiresome. Reminds me of how Crean used to beg for "edge" and playing like "your hair is on fire"

There was no level of effort that would have saved that game yesterday imo. Michigan executed a game plan much better than IU on both ends of the floor. It's the far superior execution that makes the effort stats look so bad.

Take rebounding as an example. Michigan got 11 more defensive boards than IU, and 3 more offensive boards. Well IU missed 10 more fg attempts and 2 more ft attempts. Those extra misses are going to go to the defensive team 70 to 80 percent of the time, and ft misses are probably more like 90 percent.

So, disparity in defensive boards is almost all explained by the differential in shot quality the two teams had yesterday. It wasn't like the players just didn't give proper effort on the glass. No amount of increased rebounding effort would have made a tangible difference on the stat sheet. Far superior execution and game planning on both ends of the floor is what was needed.

Michigan did get about 3 offensive boards more than expected on 23 missed fg attempts, but it happens all the time when the offense has the defense scrambling the whole game.

Anyway, my point is (and I may just be wrong) that when I hear coaches blame effort over and over again... I start to think preparation and gameplan more and more.

Great points.......we were just completely incompetent both on offense and on defense. From the start of the game we had Brunk taking a high % of our shots....over a 7 footer. Meanwhile, they were getting open drives and lay-ups with their excellent execution. They looked like a Beilein team out there. We looked like a 6th grade team. It was pathetic.

 

[frikkenfrakken]

I didn't think effort was the problem either...and I also thought the refs were way better than normal.

Our problem was no one could stay in front of their guards. This lead to constant help and recover failures.

Archie is not perfect, and he seems over-committed to particular lineups. Davis and Thompson (when healthy) have been more effective than Brunk, especially in pick and roll defense. But, we still run Joey out there to start both halves.

 

[IUCrazy2]

Someone on another forum did the work.

The issue is our defensive hedging and switching consistently puts guys out of position which leads to easy shots.

 

[kkott]

Hearing about lack of effort is starting to get tiresome. Reminds me of how Crean used to beg for "edge" and playing like "your hair is on fire"

There was no level of effort that would have saved that game yesterday imo. Michigan executed a game plan much better than IU on both ends of the floor. It's the far superior execution that makes the effort stats look so bad.

Take rebounding as an example. Michigan got 11 more defensive boards than IU, and 3 more offensive boards. Well IU missed 10 more fg attempts and 2 more ft attempts. Those extra misses are going to go to the defensive team 70 to 80 percent of the time, and ft misses are probably more like 90 percent.

So, disparity in defensive boards is almost all explained by the differential in shot quality the two teams had yesterday. It wasn't like the players just didn't give proper effort on the glass. No amount of increased rebounding effort would have made a tangible difference on the stat sheet. Far superior execution and game planning on both ends of the floor is what was needed.

Michigan did get about 3 offensive boards more than expected on 23 missed fg attempts, but it happens all the time when the offense has the defense scrambling the whole game.

Anyway, my point is (and I may just be wrong) that when I hear coaches blame effort over and over again... I start to think preparation and gameplan more and more.

Chicken or the egg? I think our opponent's game plan and execution are going to be much improved when we have the lack of effort that we saw yesterday. Yes, UM was sharp and shot the ball really well. But I thought our defense was putrid. Both on the ball and help defense. There were so many times that we gave up easy drives and then no one rotated over to help. I'm not the tactician that some here are or claim to be, but I generally tape the games, and fast forward through commercials and halftime, so by the end of the game, I'm about caught up. Yesterday I kept falling further and further behind because I kept replaying possessions to see where the breakdowns were occurring for their guys to get so wide open. Generally it did look to me like effort. Our guys weren't moving their feet to get in front of guys and cut off drives, or got lost on simple back cuts and screens. Simpson made several passes that should have been deflected or intercepted, but our guys had their heads down, just as they did when they should have been helping. If this was "execution" honestly they were quite simple screens and backcuts that most 8th grade teams have learned. It's the first time I've noticed it so glaringly, but alot of these fell back to TJD not staying with his man or rotating over. I thought it was clearly his worst game. Maybe Juwan Howard is a coaching genius that made a sophisticated offense draw us out and confuse us, but it sure looked like just a really poorly prepared team that didn't, talk or want to compete and ultimately gave up when we got so far behind. To paraphrase The Tampa Bay Bucs first Coach John McKay: Reporter - "Coach, what did you think of your team's execution?" Coach - "I'm for it!".

 

[Paterfamilias]

Chicken or the egg? I think our opponent's game plan and execution are going to be much improved when we have the lack of effort that we saw yesterday. Yes, UM was sharp and shot the ball really well. But I thought our defense was putrid. Both on the ball and help defense. There were so many times that we gave up easy drives and then no one rotated over to help. I'm not the tactician that some here are ore claim to be, but I generally tape the games, and fast forward through commercials and halftime, so by the end of the game, I'm about caught up. Yesterday I kept falling further and further behind because I kept replaying possessions to see where the breakdowns were occurring for their guys to get so wide open. Generally it did look to me like effort. Our guys weren't moving their feet to get in front of guys and cut off drives, or got lost on simple back cuts and screens. Simpson made several passes that should have been deflected or intercepted, but our guys had their heads down, just as they did when they should have been helping. If this was "execution" honestly they were quite simple screens and backcuts that most 8th grade teams have learned. It's the first time I've noticed it so glaringly, but alot of these fell back to TJD not staying with his man or rotating over. I thought it was clearly his worst game. Maybe Juwan Howard is a coaching genius that made a sophisticated offense draw us out and confuse us, but it sure looked like just a really poorly prepared team that didn't want to compete. To paraphrase The Tampa Bay Bucs first Coach John McKay: Reporter - "Coach, what did you think of your team's execution?" Coach - "I'm for it!".

All of that is probably true in the bigger picture. I was really narrowing the focus to rebounding, because this is the third or fourth time I've seen Arch quote the rebounding stats then complain about effort on the boards.

It looks more like basic arithmetic to me. If you miss a bunch more shots than your opponent, you're bound to get whipped on the boards. Sometimes maybe you overcome the math a bit through size disadvantage or talent level, but mostly rebound differentials are just a result of shot quality differentials.

I'm sure Archie gets that and some of it is just coach speak. If effort is a big problem though, worrying about it after the ball is on the rim is way too late. Get the effort right during the whole of the defensive possession and the rebounding stats will take care of themselves. You can't overcome poor defense by extraordinary effort on the glass is what I'm driving at.... for better or worse

 

[fpeaugh]

I didn't think effort was the problem either...and I also thought the refs were way better than normal.

Our problem was no one could stay in front of their guards. This lead to constant help and recover failures.

Archie is not perfect, and he seems over-committed to particular lineups. Davis and Thompson (when healthy) have been more effective than Brunk, especially in pick and roll defense. But, we still run Joey out there to start both halves.

Davis had one good career game and Thompson is horrendous. Absolutely awful. Brunk is by far the best of those 3 although none are good options.

And Archie is way closer to the opposite of perfect than he is to perfect. Calling him not perfect is the understatement of the year.

 

[twenty02]

Someone on another forum did the work.

The issue is our defensive hedging and switching consistently puts guys out of position which leads to easy shots.

The hedging has drove me nuts for while.....I wish we'd try something else.

 

[twenty02]

All of that is probably true in the bigger picture. I was really narrowing the focus to rebounding, because this is the third or fourth time I've seen Arch quote the rebounding stats then complain about effort on the boards.

It looks more like basic arithmetic to me. If you miss a bunch more shots than your opponent, you're bound to get whipped on the boards. Sometimes maybe you overcome the math a bit through size disadvantage or talent level, but mostly rebound differentials are just a result of shot quality differentials.

I'm sure Archie gets that and some of it is just coach speak. If effort is a big problem though, worrying about it after the ball is on the rim is way too late. Get the effort right during the whole of the defensive possession and the rebounding stats will take care of themselves. You can't overcome poor defense by extraordinary effort on the glass is what I'm driving at.... for better or worse

The effort in the 2nd half was terrible..... after UM made a intial small run, the effort went entirely down the drain. No reason for the rebounding discrepancy other than effort. The team has zero fight in them. When things aren't going well, they wilt.

 

[kkott]

All of that is probably true in the bigger picture. I was really narrowing the focus to rebounding, because this is the third or fourth time I've seen Arch quote the rebounding stats then complain about effort on the boards.

It looks more like basic arithmetic to me. If you miss a bunch more shots than your opponent, you're bound to get whipped on the boards. Sometimes maybe you overcome the math a bit through size disadvantage or talent level, but mostly rebound differentials are just a result of shot quality differentials.

I'm sure Archie gets that and some of it is just coach speak. If effort is a big problem though, worrying about it after the ball is on the rim is way too late. Get the effort right during the whole of the defensive possession and the rebounding stats will take care of themselves. You can't overcome poor defense by extraordinary effort on the glass is what I'm driving at.... for better or worse

I think Archie's human and I think when Wagner (I think it was him) came down with a rebound among 4 red shirts, he got tunnel vision on rebounding. What your saying makes perfect sense, but a lack of effort and "defeated" attitude will only heighten that disparity. I think our guys mailed it in in the 2nd half. The interview with Durham after the game only seemed to confirm that, but I was already pissed about the loss too, so maybe I just interpreted it that way, but I think these guys have gotten way too used to, and comfortable with, losing.

 

[frikkenfrakken]

Davis had one good career game and Thompson is horrendous. Absolutely awful. Brunk is by far the best of those 3 although none are good options.

And Archie is way closer to the opposite of perfect than he is to perfect. Calling him not perfect is the understatement of the year.

The O and D rating metrics suggest otherwise when you look at conference games. But...you'd actually have to go look at them.

I am looking forward to your post next week when you claim I guaranteed Race would win the Naismith award. Should be fun. You may now resume your thread derailing hot take shtick.

Here, I'll help: this thread is a DUMMMMSTER FYRE! All your guarantees were trash kiddo. Let the grownups talk now. You're always wrong. Just admit it!

 

[Radio Zero]

The O and D rating metrics suggest otherwise when you look at conference games. But...you'd actually have to go look at them.

I am looking forward to your post next week when you claim I guaranteed Race would win the Naismith award. Should be fun. You may now resume your thread derailing hot take shtick.

Here, I'll help: this thread is a DUMMMMSTER FYRE! All your guarantees were trash kiddo. Let the grownups talk now. You're always wrong. Just admit it!

Dumb post.

You’re acting like a hormone-poisoned teenaged girl.

Dumb.

 

[TommyCracker]

The hedging has drove me nuts for while.....I wish we'd try something else.

All year long. We been getting burned over and over and over on the initial, simple pick and roll ball screen at the top of the key and it has yet to be corrected.

That very simple defensive adjustment has made me lose whatever faith I had with Archie.

Every team defends it. Every team, for example Iowa, shows the hedge to the ball handler (a soft hedge) while somewhat staying with the post player.

Our posts, in particular Brunk, hedge so aggressively its basically a double team trap 35 feet from the hoop which I can't remember once it ever causing a turnover. It does cost us 10 to 14, points a game if I had to guess.

Hell Stevens against us, since we started our offense off with this pick and roll, adjusted in the 2nd half of the Barlow game and put his PG on Zeller and his post on Yogi or Hulls at the top of the key so when Zeller came up to set the pick, they just naturally switched to the proper defenders.

And Crean never adjusted.

Like Miller has never adjusted.

 

[mushroomgod_1]

Chicken or the egg? I think our opponent's game plan and execution are going to be much improved when we have the lack of effort that we saw yesterday. Yes, UM was sharp and shot the ball really well. But I thought our defense was putrid. Both on the ball and help defense. There were so many times that we gave up easy drives and then no one rotated over to help. I'm not the tactician that some here are or claim to be, but I generally tape the games, and fast forward through commercials and halftime, so by the end of the game, I'm about caught up. Yesterday I kept falling further and further behind because I kept replaying possessions to see where the breakdowns were occurring for their guys to get so wide open. Generally it did look to me like effort. Our guys weren't moving their feet to get in front of guys and cut off drives, or got lost on simple back cuts and screens. Simpson made several passes that should have been deflected or intercepted, but our guys had their heads down, just as they did when they should have been helping. If this was "execution" honestly they were quite simple screens and backcuts that most 8th grade teams have learned. It's the first time I've noticed it so glaringly, but alot of these fell back to TJD not staying with his man or rotating over. I thought it was clearly his worst game. Maybe Juwan Howard is a coaching genius that made a sophisticated offense draw us out and confuse us, but it sure looked like just a really poorly prepared team that didn't, talk or want to compete and ultimately gave up when we got so far behind. To paraphrase The Tampa Bay Bucs first Coach John McKay: Reporter - "Coach, what did you think of your team's execution?" Coach - "I'm for it!".

Durham got left in the dust twice by Brooks very early in the game. Matador defense right out of the gate. Like you, I had to stop the tape to see what happened.....both times he went right around Durham and straight to the basket with no opposition. Durham is weak, lacks balance, and plays too 'high' on D.
He's been playing much better on offense the last 6-7 games, but overall he's still a lisbility because he plays such poor D and can't rebound.

 

[MG80]

Chicken or the egg? I think our opponent's game plan and execution are going to be much improved when we have the lack of effort that we saw yesterday. Yes, UM was sharp and shot the ball really well. But I thought our defense was putrid. Both on the ball and help defense. There were so many times that we gave up easy drives and then no one rotated over to help. I'm not the tactician that some here are or claim to be, but I generally tape the games, and fast forward through commercials and halftime, so by the end of the game, I'm about caught up. Yesterday I kept falling further and further behind because I kept replaying possessions to see where the breakdowns were occurring for their guys to get so wide open. Generally it did look to me like effort. Our guys weren't moving their feet to get in front of guys and cut off drives, or got lost on simple back cuts and screens. Simpson made several passes that should have been deflected or intercepted, but our guys had their heads down, just as they did when they should have been helping. If this was "execution" honestly they were quite simple screens and backcuts that most 8th grade teams have learned. It's the first time I've noticed it so glaringly, but alot of these fell back to TJD not staying with his man or rotating over. I thought it was clearly his worst game. Maybe Juwan Howard is a coaching genius that made a sophisticated offense draw us out and confuse us, but it sure looked like just a really poorly prepared team that didn't, talk or want to compete and ultimately gave up when we got so far behind. To paraphrase The Tampa Bay Bucs first Coach John McKay: Reporter - "Coach, what did you think of your team's execution?" Coach - "I'm for it!".

I respect Jerome Hunter trying so hard to come back from injury, but he’s just an awful defender, especially on the P&R and the back cuts. Absolutely lost. Where is the coaching???

 

[frikkenfrakken]

The hedging has drove me nuts for while.....I wish we'd try something else.

Especially Brunk. The others can do it somewhat effectively.

What bugs me is that Clifton Moore couldn't get time in part because he couldn't hedge either. But this year, "can you defend?" doesn't seem to be the primary question.

 

[kkott]

Someone on another forum did the work.

The issue is our defensive hedging and switching consistently puts guys out of position which leads to easy shots.

Durham got left in the dust twice by Brooks very early in the game. Matador defense right out of the gate. Like you, I had to stop the tape to see what happened.....both times he went right around Durham and straight to the basket with no opposition. Durham is weak, lacks balance, and plays too 'high' on D.
He's been playing much better on offense the last 6-7 games, but overall he's still a lisbility because he plays such poor D and can't rebound.

The first of those videos was the early play with Durham. It didn't look like it had anything to do with hedging, which actually might have helped because Smith's man was going to screen Durham, but he goes under the screen anyway and then loses track of his man who is above the screener and Smith who also was below the screen (if he had hedged, me might have contested the pass), but when Durham recognizes his guy is going to get the ball he closes out late and by that time his guy is already moving towards the basket. To me this is just poor court awareness and lack of communication. Durhams man is a shooter, so he shouldn't be so far away from him to begin with.

 

[Hatchets7times]

Coach I know ..That coached in the Mountain West.
Literally told me ..He'd have guy's walking out of the tunnel ..Saying.. I'm not into this tonight..
That's the crap coaches deal with today..

 

[ams66]

Coach I know ..That coached in the Mountain West.
Literally told me ..He'd have guy's walking out of the tunnel ..Saying.. I'm not into this tonight..
That's the crap coaches deal with today..

Participation trophies. Helicopter parents. "Time to be selfish." It all adds up. In theory it isn't that way in elite prep and college programs, but the mindsets are established at age 8, 10 yo.

 

[kkott]

Participation trophies. Helicopter parents. "Time to be selfish." It all adds up. In theory it isn't that way in elite prep and college programs, but the mindsets are established at age 8, 10 yo.

popular sentiment, but how does that explain how programs like UVA, Fl St, Purdue, AR get kids from the same generation to commit to working hard on the defensive end? I would agree that a kid who isn't predisposed to defending might never be an outstanding defender, but CAM recruits include: RP, JRT, B, TJD, JH, AF, DA, so we have several on the floor together most often, and of course JS is supposed to be a good defender too. This should be a better defenstive team consistently than we see.

 

[ams66]

popular sentiment, but how does that explain how programs like UVA, Fl St, Purdue, AR get kids from the same generation to commit to working hard on the defensive end? I would agree that a kid who isn't predisposed to defending might never be an outstanding defender, but CAM recruits include: RP, JRT, B, TJD, JH, AF, DA, so we have several on the floor together most often, and of course JS is supposed to be a good defender too. This should be a better defenstive team consistently than we see.

I don't know. Maybe those programs identify bad apples better than CAM and CTC do/did. And it doesn't have to be every kid. A few bad attitudes, especially when tolerated by the coaching staff, and rewarded with playing time, can kill the motivation of the whole team. Why should I work hard when he mails it in and still gets minutes? Solve that problem, and others start working again when they see that there is a point to it.

 

[Katrina Hoosier]

I didn't think effort was the problem either...and I also thought the refs were way better than normal.

Our problem was no one could stay in front of their guards. This lead to constant help and recover failures.

Archie is not perfect, and he seems over-committed to particular lineups. Davis and Thompson (when healthy) have been more effective than Brunk, especially in pick and roll defense. But, we still run Joey out there to start both halves.

 

[Katrina Hoosier]

I’ll ask this again, but do on-ball defenders not overplay the strong hand anymore? And do off-ball defenders ever space ball-you-man? These were fundamental defensive principles not borne of some fad, but by physics. I just don’t see it much anymore.

 

[T.M.P.]

Hearing about lack of effort is starting to get tiresome. Reminds me of how Crean used to beg for "edge" and playing like "your hair is on fire"

There was no level of effort that would have saved that game yesterday imo. Michigan executed a game plan much better than IU on both ends of the floor. It's the far superior execution that makes the effort stats look so bad.

Take rebounding as an example. Michigan got 11 more defensive boards than IU, and 3 more offensive boards. Well IU missed 10 more fg attempts and 2 more ft attempts. Those extra misses are going to go to the defensive team 70 to 80 percent of the time, and ft misses are probably more like 90 percent.

So, disparity in defensive boards is almost all explained by the differential in shot quality the two teams had yesterday. It wasn't like the players just didn't give proper effort on the glass. No amount of increased rebounding effort would have made a tangible difference on the stat sheet. Far superior execution and game planning on both ends of the floor is what was needed.

Michigan did get about 3 offensive boards more than expected on 23 missed fg attempts, but it happens all the time when the offense has the defense scrambling the whole game.

Anyway, my point is (and I may just be wrong) that when I hear coaches blame effort over and over again... I start to think preparation and gameplan more and more.

Though game plans may be lacking, I've pointed to them for two years now, and why, it had nothing to do with Michigan. That was without doubt a lack of effort.

Proof .. Michigan didn't crash off boards they only sent 1 to 2 and the rest got back to prevent run outs. They also went to a soft zone which has a weakness in controlling the boards. So, they basically through their strategy were willing to give up the board battle... and we lost it anyways.

That's effort my friend not strategy or tactics... Michigan didnt design anything to make us passive on the boards and didn't run anything special to make us passive on defense. It was simply an IU team playing passive and scared.. no strategy will work if you don't play with urgency confidence and aggression, especially on the road.

Rebound battle .. in a game where the Michigan strategy favored IU

btw - this is how you compare rebounding by percentage.

IU .259 off boards.
Mich .476 off board. (this years average for them is 24.8 percent - not a good off rebounding team more concerned with getting back on D- they almost doubled their normal output.)


IU .524 def boards (average 78.2)
Mich .741 def boards.

That's not game plan or strategy related .. that's lack of effort.

 

[T.M.P.]

All year long. We been getting burned over and over and over on the initial, simple pick and roll ball screen at the top of the key and it has yet to be corrected.

Not really .. we a majority of the time impact the ballhandler and make them reset. and don't allow the guard to turn the corner. So the hedge itself is generally effective and does what it's supposed to do. It's what happens after when the hedge is weak .. the help out of position, the rotation back is too slow and it becomes ineffective...

I would love to see the splits on this .. would need Synergy to do it it costs 8500 per year but I suspect TJD, Race and Smith would have good percentages on impacting the play, while Brunk, well ..

Also remember it's not just the responsibility of the hedger, it's also on the help defenders to be aware and in position to prevent a face cut or pass to the middle and on the guard to go over it with urgency and then to rotate effectively. The hedge doesn't bother me when it's aggressive and a double, but when the guard drops back with the roller and leaves the big by himself .. that's what drives me nuts. That's putting the big and guard into precarious situations..

And again, why were we hedging on Simpson? Was that by design or just mistakes? Who knows but he can't shoot so why hedge. We should have been going under the screen and playing straight up.

 

[snarlcakes]

All year long. We been getting burned over and over and over on the initial, simple pick and roll ball screen at the top of the key and it has yet to be corrected.

That very simple defensive adjustment has made me lose whatever faith I had with Archie.

Every team defends it. Every team, for example Iowa, shows the hedge to the ball handler (a soft hedge) while somewhat staying with the post player.

Our posts, in particular Brunk, hedge so aggressively its basically a double team trap 35 feet from the hoop which I can't remember once it ever causing a turnover. It does cost us 10 to 14, points a game if I had to guess.

Hell Stevens against us, since we started our offense off with this pick and roll, adjusted in the 2nd half of the Barlow game and put his PG on Zeller and his post on Yogi or Hulls at the top of the key so when Zeller came up to set the pick, they just naturally switched to the proper defenders.

And Crean never adjusted.

Like Miller has never adjusted.

It's become painfully obvious we don't have the personal to run it effectively. What makes it even dumber is there are maybe 2 point guards in the league you need to hedge aggressively against.

 

[Paterfamilias]

Though game plans may be lacking, I've pointed to them for two years now, and why, it had nothing to do with Michigan. That was without doubt a lack of effort.

Proof .. Michigan didn't crash off boards they only sent 1 to 2 and the rest got back to prevent run outs. They also went to a soft zone which has a weakness in controlling the boards. So, they basically through their strategy were willing to give up the board battle... and we lost it anyways.

That's effort my friend not strategy or tactics... Michigan didnt design anything to make us passive on the boards and didn't run anything special to make us passive on defense. It was simply an IU team playing passive and scared.. no strategy will work if you don't play with urgency confidence and aggression, especially on the road.

Rebound battle .. in a game where the Michigan strategy favored IU

btw - this is how you compare rebounding by percentage.

IU .259 off boards.
Mich .476 off board. (this years average for them is 24.8 percent - not a good off rebounding team more concerned with getting back on D- they almost doubled their normal output.)


IU .524 def boards (average 78.2)
Mich .741 def boards.

That's not game plan or strategy related .. that's lack of effort.

Yeah, I'm aware of rebounding %'s, which is why I said it was mathematics. They played more man than zone up until I quit paying attention. I know they switched to the zone periodically like I've seen them do in other games. Sometimes their man looks a bit like zone against us because they sagged so far off of non-shooters. They played smart position defense like they have for years.

You're probably right, but I know that the easier the shots you get are, the easier it becomes to get offensive rebounds. Shots don't come much easier than they did for Michigan yesterday.

Another thing, I might not get aggravated with coaches if they actually referenced Reb %, but they never do. They look at raw rebounds, then say "we didn't have it on the boards today". If you miss 15 shots more than your opponent, you'll always get whipped in raw rebounds... damn!

 

[T.M.P.]

Yeah, I'm aware of rebounding %'s, which is why I said it was mathematics. They played more man than zone up until I quit paying attention. I know they switched to the zone periodically like I've seen them do in other games. Sometimes their man looks a bit like zone against us because they sagged so far off of non-shooters. They played smart position defense like they have for years.

You're probably right, but I know that the easier the shots you get are, the easier it becomes to get offensive rebounds. Shots don't come much easier than they did for Michigan yesterday.

Another thing, I might not get aggravated with coaches if they actually referenced Reb %, but they never do. They look at raw rebounds, then say "we didn't have it on the boards today". If you miss 15 shots more than your opponent, you'll always get whipped in raw rebounds... damn!

They know they're speaking to fans and sportswriters, and using terminology they don't understand (ie Crean waving around a piece of paper going off about deflections) only confuses them. After he did that there were people on here who literally thought we deflected 38 passes..

As far as zone, that's not as big a deal, just pointing out they were willing to give up boards on that end too.

The big deal .. Michigan a team whose strategy is to give up on offensive boards and instead focus on getting back, ended up with almost 50% of them... often with less athletic players, who didn't actually block out well nor were they overly physical. They barely had to try .. because IU wasn't.

This team has severe chemistry issues, again. Maybe it's the coach, maybe it's a couple veteran players .. but that's what lack of effort always points to a lack of buy in, and a lack of trust.

 

[TommyCracker]

It's become painfully obvious we don't have the personal to run it effectively. What makes it even dumber is there are maybe 2 point guards in the league you need to hedge aggressively against.

Man it's just our whole defense, like you said breaks down with about 20 seconds still on the shot clock once the pg gets through the hedge, or as I call it the trap.

Similar to a full court press after a team breaks the trap its pretty much open season for the offense.

I watched Iowa a couple of times and Garza follows his post player setting the initial pick up and does what I believe is a true hedge off the screen. He basically shows and says hello to the pg while staying an arms length to the screener. The angle of his hedge is probably around 40 to 45 degrees, not a 90 degree trap.

He does what he's supposed to do. Slow the pg and not allow him to turn the corner.

He doesn't leave the screener completely for a double team trap that pulls him out towards the half court line as the pg dribbles back.

I don't remember our posts doing this that dramatically in the past.

I do know that this is now our worst Def efficiency of his three years as we have fallen to around 68th in the country.

I was expecting this to be his best defensive team much less an elite defensive team.

It sucks because I really like Archie as a steward of the program but... I do worry he's a coach that needs to recruit superstuds vs a coach that can make a team better because they are better coached, etc.

He's not going to be able to cheat for recruits here.

 

[T.M.P.]

I’ll ask this again, but do on-ball defenders not overplay the strong hand anymore? And do off-ball defenders ever space ball-you-man? These were fundamental defensive principles not borne of some fad, but by physics. I just don’t see it much anymore.

Yes, of course they do. . when applicable.

 

[snarlcakes]

Man it's just our whole defense, like you said breaks down with about 20 seconds still on the shot clock once the pg gets through the hedge, or as I call it the trap.

Similar to a full court press after a team breaks the trap its pretty much open season for the offense.

I watched Iowa a couple of times and Garza follows his post player setting the initial pick up and does what I believe is a true hedge off the screen. He basically shows and says hello to the pg while staying an arms length to the screener. The angle of his hedge is probably around 40 to 45 degrees, not a 90 degree trap.

He does what he's supposed to do. Slow the pg and not allow him to turn the corner.

He doesn't leave the screener completely for a double team trap that pulls him out towards the half court line as the pg dribbles back.

I don't remember our posts doing this that dramatically in the past.

I do know that this is now our worst Def efficiency of his three years as we have fallen to around 68th in the country.

I was expecting this to be his best defensive team much less an elite defensive team.

It sucks because I really like Archie as a steward of the program but... I do worry he's a coach that needs to recruit superstuds vs a coach that can make a team better because they are better coached, etc.

He's not going to be able to cheat for recruits here.

At this point I assume it’s how Archie is teaching our bigs to hedge. They all do it. I always thought we were over extending the defense and it wasn’t needed, but what do I know.

The last 5 or 6 games it seems teams have abused us more. I haven’t went back and rewatched the games, but opponents seem to have more ball screens around the top of the key (center court) and it’s led to easy baskets on drives or slip screens. The wings are waiting for the guard to choose a side and are constantly a step slow or out of position.

 

[jsig]

Davis had one good career game and Thompson is horrendous. Absolutely awful. Brunk is by far the best of those 3 although none are good options.

And Archie is way closer to the opposite of perfect than he is to perfect. Calling him not perfect is the understatement of the year.

Maybe it just me but I really like Thompson