First post in a long time - Ft. Wayne game thoughts

[Kazhoosier]

Long time lurker who briefly joined the forum and started posting in maybe 1999 or 2000 when Clubjockey was writing his fictional account about a student at Purdue trying to get Bob Knight fired. I was living overseas at the time and the fictional student CJ wrote about was from the country I was living in then. Once Coach Knight was fired, I lost a lot of interest and stopped posting, then I lost my login and never tried signing up again, though I still lurk regularly.

I have some thoughts about the Ft. Wayne game that I would be interested in hearing input on from those of you who enjoy analyzing the tactics of the game:

Our pick and roll defense was problematic, to put it mildly. There have been some games this year when the other team would have a big set a screen then roll to the basket. We would double the guard and when the other team’s big rolled to the basket, IU’s weakside forward would come into the lane to guard the rolling big until IU’s big could recover. Usually the skip pass to the weakside forward was not available because the guard could not see over our big. However, Ft. Wayne had bigs who could shoot, so they were setting screens on the wing and instead of rolling to the rim, they were flaring to the ballside corner (or slipping the screen to the corner) where there was no help. Then it was an easy pass to a wide open big on the same side of the court, with no help within 30 feet. I thought it was a great plan of attack by Ft. Wayne.

The only adjustment Coach Miller made was to go small, but he kept the exact same approach to doubling the ball. The defensive advantage of going small is that you can switch on every screen (like Golden State does), but we never made that adjustment - we just kept doubling the ball and leaving the big wide open in the corner, even though we could have switched on the screens.

On offense, we do not have anyone who can consistently create his own shot, so our best half-court offense all year has been to get the ball into Davis or Morgan in the post. If a double team comes, it creates a wide open opportunity for someone. If there is no double team, Davis and Morgan can both score one-on-one in the post or draw fouls. But we cannot create offense off the dribble. By not playing Davis and with Morgan being in foul trouble in the first half, our offense was stagnant.

I think a possible adjustment would have been to stay big and go to a zone defensively. Then on offense slow the game down, pound the ball inside to Davis and Morgan and get Ft. Wayne's team in foul trouble. Instead, it seemed like we wanted to play fast and just kept committing turnovers that led to a ton of points for Ft. Wayne. Going small and switching on screens might have helped defensively, but we do not have any consistent outside shooting threat at this time, so when we go small we really struggle on offense unless Morgan is in the lineup and we run the offense through him in the post.

It appeared to me that the players were executing what the coaching staff wanted and we just got outcoached in this game. Hopefully the coaching staff will learn from this game and make adjustments, especially on how we defend the pick and roll.

Those are my thoughts for what they are worth. I would enjoy hearing any other analysis of what we could have done differently to win.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

Good thoughts, thanks for sharing....and post more often!

 

[IUNorth]

Long time lurker who briefly joined the forum and started posting in maybe 1999 or 2000 when Clubjockey was writing his fictional account about a student at Purdue trying to get Bob Knight fired. I was living overseas at the time and the fictional student CJ wrote about was from the country I was living in then. Once Coach Knight was fired, I lost a lot of interest and stopped posting, then I lost my login and never tried signing up again, though I still lurk regularly.

I have some thoughts about the Ft. Wayne game that I would be interested in hearing input on from those of you who enjoy analyzing the tactics of the game:

Our pick and roll defense was problematic, to put it mildly. There have been some games this year when the other team would have a big set a screen then roll to the basket. We would double the guard and when the other team’s big rolled to the basket, IU’s weakside forward would come into the lane to guard the rolling big until IU’s big could recover. Usually the skip pass to the weakside forward was not available because the guard could not see over our big. However, Ft. Wayne had bigs who could shoot, so they were setting screens on the wing and instead of rolling to the rim, they were flaring to the ballside corner (or slipping the screen to the corner) where there was no help. Then it was an easy pass to a wide open big on the same side of the court, with no help within 30 feet. I thought it was a great plan of attack by Ft. Wayne.

The only adjustment Coach Miller made was to go small, but he kept the exact same approach to doubling the ball. The defensive advantage of going small is that you can switch on every screen (like Golden State does), but we never made that adjustment - we just kept doubling the ball and leaving the big wide open in the corner, even though we could have switched on the screens.

On offense, we do not have anyone who can consistently create his own shot, so our best half-court offense all year has been to get the ball into Davis or Morgan in the post. If a double team comes, it creates a wide open opportunity for someone. If there is no double team, Davis and Morgan can both score one-on-one in the post or draw fouls. But we cannot create offense off the dribble. By not playing Davis and with Morgan being in foul trouble in the first half, our offense was stagnant.

I think a possible adjustment would have been to stay big and go to a zone defensively. Then on offense slow the game down, pound the ball inside to Davis and Morgan and get Ft. Wayne's team in foul trouble. Instead, it seemed like we wanted to play fast and just kept committing turnovers that led to a ton of points for Ft. Wayne. Going small and switching on screens might have helped defensively, but we do not have any consistent outside shooting threat at this time, so when we go small we really struggle on offense unless Morgan is in the lineup and we run the offense through him in the post.

It appeared to me that the players were executing what the coaching staff wanted and we just got outcoached in this game. Hopefully the coaching staff will learn from this game and make adjustments, especially on how we defend the pick and roll.

Those are my thoughts for what they are worth. I would enjoy hearing any other analysis of what we could have done differently to win.

Good thoughts. I share most of them.

I think there are 2 root causes to our problems right now. Both of which should be fixed with time, neither are likely to be "fixed" this season.

1. Our perimeter players just aren't upper B10 level players. Rob is, at times, but isn't consistent enough to be a reliable lead guard. And unfortunately, he's by far our best perimeter player. The rest of them just aren't all that good. We need Zach in the game for his defense and activity on the glass...but he's not an offensive threat. We need Devonte in the game for his offensive abilities, but he's struggling mightily with how and where to play defensively in the pack line.

2. I'm not sure its possible for two coaches/programs to be more different than Crean and Miller. On the defensive side of the ball, the pack line defense requires all its players to be on the same page, to be disciplined, to not gamble, to funnel the ball to the center of the court, etc... Our guys are used to pressuring the ball, denying, switching types of defenses, and as a result not really having any main goal or direction on where they want to funnel people...and I'm sure as a result, there are breakdowns in communication, responsibilities, etc... And unfortunately, the pack line defense doesn't hold up well when everyone isn't on the same page, and/or when guys are making mistakes. The pure nature of the defense, at that point, leaves huge open areas on the court. And any team with multiple perimeter threats, and guards that are good with moving the ball around, will end up getting a lot of open looks...most college teams that play like this have guys that will make open looks.

Offensively...refer to number 1 above...but even beyond that...Archie's style can't live when we're turning it over. Nothing wrong with his style...just too methodical to overcome lost possessions. Not gonna be very many explosive runs to cover up a string of turnovers.

 

[TR32]

I agree, Kazhoosier, that going zone could throw a wrench in their plans. But if you recall, Crean went zone some against them last year and it didn't work. They moved the ball and still got open looks.

I always think the way to stop a great 3pt shooting team is to simply try to fight through all high screens with a sagging big on those screens and force them to beat you on the drive or pick and pop. It is when they force the hedge that gives them the time to create spacing for those slip 3's that you are talking about.

I think IU has been better at hedging this year. A lot better. But they do not have a lot of long lanky athletic defenders that are quick enough to get a hand in the shooters face.

I think Archie is trying to teach them how he wants to play, and then get the athletes to do it.

OG Annunoby was sick during that game last year. He may have been the difference maker had he been healthier.

Maybe the more productive thing to do is to ask which player is going to contribute most to an improved defense on the perimeter next year?

 

[zibby43]

Outstanding analysis. Thanks for taking the time to share.

I mentioned in another thread that I watched the game with a friend that's a coach. He made several of the same observations: team was playing too fast, refusal to switch on screens was a killer, and that a switch to zone could've slowed the game down.

 

[.Gerdis]

Long time lurker who briefly joined the forum and started posting in maybe 1999 or 2000 when Clubjockey was writing his fictional account about a student at Purdue trying to get Bob Knight fired. I was living overseas at the time and the fictional student CJ wrote about was from the country I was living in then. Once Coach Knight was fired, I lost a lot of interest and stopped posting, then I lost my login and never tried signing up again, though I still lurk regularly.

Thanks for posting this. I remember fondly the old IIBF days. As a fan base it's been a rough couple of decades, and I suspect that may of the old posters from that era, like you, have lost a lot of interest, but may still lurk here.

The IU administration has tried to change IU basketball so severely, and in so many different directions that as a program we have lost our identity. Oh, we still have some dusty banners swaying in the rafters, but the identity of the program (driven by what type of basketball program the IU administration desires) has had some massive shifts.

I never viewed Mike Davis as a very strong leader. He seemed like a nice enough person, but I always viewed him as a puppet of an administration that wanted a 360 degree change for the basketball program. When Andrea Kramer asked Davis on ESPN what he wanted to change about IU basketball, he replied "Oh, everything". I cannot for a second believe that Mike Davis really wanted the entire program to change in all facets of it's existence. Surely something was salvageable? However, I do believe that the IU admin. did want to change
everything. The efforts that they made to rid IU basketball of all things "Knight" turned me off.

After that failure, the IU administration tried to turn our program into Oklahoma. The blame for the whole Sampson fiasco lies squarely with the University that hired him. We tried to be sleazy-and we failed at it. That turned me off even further.

Then came Crean. It appeared that this hire was partially designed to send a message that we were again shifting course, and going back to being a program that wanted to do things the right way. Crean, it seemed to me, was not dirty, and he made a genuine effort to reach out to IU fans and unite what had become a very fractured fan base. He made efforts to embrace the IU basketball family (former coaches and players), and seemed to appreciate our storied past. As the years moved on it was clear that he was poor at roster development, had some issues with coaching (wink, wink), and our program had some off the court issues. The roster development is the one area that really haunts this program to this day. I remember listening to Crean talking on a podcast about how every year was a rebuilding year. And, I think we as fans felt that. I think he was caught flat footed when players left....whether they transferred, opted to the draft, or even in the rare case that they stayed long enough to graduate. He was playing checkers with building his roster, and everyone else was playing chess. As fans we saw this, and the creanings and eye rolling signings left us all shaking our heads. Crean treated our team like a fantasy football owner treats his roster. I don't believe he thought about developing a class, a team, or a program, but rather only about the individual talent. All of the intangibles that should exist for a successful program lacked.

Right now we do have some veteran players. However, it would be nice if we had a veteran class of players that came in together as Freshman, and when they came in they had a group of leaders ahead of them that taught them what IU basketball was all about. We haven't had that for a while.

Is Archie the man for the job? Heck, I don't know and I don't think anyone here does either. In any event, the IU administration has signaled that we are making another (long overdue, IMO) shift in what it wants the program to be. Right now more important than W's/Ls, more important that recruiting, more important than coaching adjustments on a pick and roll, is can we become a program that has an identity once again? We have lost our way. Hopefully coach Miller can help our program develop a new, strong identity.

 

[shawneebraves]

It is almost as if some of us care more than the players themselves, especially about losing to Fort Wayne. I see little to no emotion, I do not see anyone on this team willing to fit for a victory - maybe Mac - so is that what we are doing, waiting for the walk on to make a play.

 

[BigNutsIUFan]

I am wondering if the Packline defense will be effective for certain foes. Archie may need to take a long look at this approach and may need to tweak it, scrap it, or have a back up plan for certain opponents. Its possible that whatever has worked at Dayton may not work at IU. It may be just the personel he has this year to work with. I'm just hoping that in years to come if we face an opponent that has sharpshooters like Fort wayne that is smoking us that he has a different plan of attack in place.

 

[Kazhoosier]

I agree, Kazhoosier, that going zone could throw a wrench in their plans. But if you recall, Crean went zone some against them last year and it didn't work. They moved the ball and still got open looks.

I always think the way to stop a great 3pt shooting team is to simply try to fight through all high screens with a sagging big on those screens and force them to beat you on the drive or pick and pop. It is when they force the hedge that gives them the time to create spacing for those slip 3's that you are talking about.

I think IU has been better at hedging this year. A lot better. But they do not have a lot of long lanky athletic defenders that are quick enough to get a hand in the shooters face.

I think Archie is trying to teach them how he wants to play, and then get the athletes to do it.

OG Annunoby was sick during that game last year. He may have been the difference maker had he been healthier.

Maybe the more productive thing to do is to ask which player is going to contribute most to an improved defense on the perimeter next year?

I should have been a little clearer in my original post. To me the main advantage of going to a zone would have been on the offensive end - to allow Davis to keep playing, especially while Morgan was in foul trouble. Of course, part of this reasoning is based on an assumption that Davis only played 20 minutes because he could not guard out on the perimeter. But I agree that the zone may or may not have worked to slow them down, but I think it would have helped us keep our best offensive options in the game.

I am not opposed to a coach sticking to his guns and making players learn a system, even if it means taking some lumps early on. So if Coach Miller was thinking that taking a loss in the short term would help in the team's long term development, then I can support that completely.

The question I still have on the defensive end is what is the plan to guard the ball screen when the screener flares to the corner instead of rolling to the basket? Maybe our players were not doing what Coach Miller wanted them to do - that is definitely possible. But if the plan of attack is to hedge really hard or double team the ball, I think the ball side corner 3 is going to be wide open, and I'm not sure anyone is athletic enough to recover from outside the 3-point line all the way down to the corner. I would be interested in thoughts on how that play can be defended in the pack line defense, especially if a team can play a 5-out offense which would pull help away.

Thanks to everyone who has responded - it is a good thread and I appreciate everyone's comments. Go Hoosiers!!