Solutions

[iubru242]

Every team we play seem to be quicker than us. We get beat on drives and don't defend the 3 well.
If we would go to a zone defense and play MgBako at the 2 along side Xavier and have Walker playing the 4 would let Reneau shoot more 3's and maybe open things up a little more for Ware.
Just a thought.

 

[bdhman]

Agree. Gallow first off the bench, followed by Leal/Cupps/Sparks then Banks/Gunn.

 

[T.M.P.]

Every team we play seem to be quicker than us. We get beat on drives and don't defend the 3 well.
If we would go to a zone defense and play MgBako at the 2 along side Xavier and have Walker playing the 4 would let Reneau shoot more 3's and maybe open things up a little more for Ware.
Just a thought.

Mgbako doesn't have the skills or ability to play the 2. Plus he's been pretty much awful on defense. He's constantly out of position and cheating too far to the lane ... but getting a little better each game.

Maybe the answer is for the interior players (and X) to do a better job passing for open looks when doubled and the guards and wings have to get the defensive rotations down .. They have a hardest job in our defense as they have to rotate to the nail, and be abke rotate back to shooters.. that's a lot of ground to cover... and they're just not very good at it.

Last night the over penetration against a swarming defense in the lane killed us. Trey and X needed to do a much better job and get rid of it earlier .. one dribble one step too many.

 

[SRThoosier]

Love the solutions. Do us a favor and sit down with Woody and staff to discuss ASAP as I’m certain he’s open to constructive criticism. And bring the the fellas a good cigar. Of course, if Dolson would have actually hired a college coach, then we wouldn’t need to offer suggestions 2.5 years into yet another failed coaching tenure.

 

[T.M.P.]

Love the solutions. Do us a favor and sit down with Woody and staff to discuss ASAP as I’m certain he’s open to constructive criticism. And bring the the fellas a good cigar. Of course, if Dolson would have actually hired a college coach, then we wouldn’t need to offer suggestions 2.5 years into yet another failed coaching tenure.

Dumb

 

[Bucket Getter]

Dumb

Part of it is; part of it isn’t. You decide.

 

[FormerRevMatt]

Every team we play seem to be quicker than us. We get beat on drives and don't defend the 3 well.
If we would go to a zone defense and play MgBako at the 2 along side Xavier and have Walker playing the 4 would let Reneau shoot more 3's and maybe open things up a little more for Ware.
Just a thought.

To be honest, I'm not sure that MM is a college 3 right now. He certainly isn't a college 2. He has trouble guarding out on the floor and can't handle the ball well.

 

[kkott]

Every team we play seem to be quicker than us. We get beat on drives and don't defend the 3 well.
If we would go to a zone defense and play MgBako at the 2 along side Xavier and have Walker playing the 4 would let Reneau shoot more 3's and maybe open things up a little more for Ware.
Just a thought.

I don't know why people think a zone is some magic bullet. It worked vs Lville because they don't have shooters. Not the case w NB. I'm fine with trying it as a change of pace or to protect someone in foul trouble but bad man defenders are bad zone defenders. NB would've shredded our zone, plus it's not what our guys normally play, so then they're going to be playing a D they aren't experienced with. Not a recipe to help. Let's improve their effort and defense and our D will get better.

 

[FormerRevMatt]

I don't know why people think a zone is some magic bullet. It worked vs Lville because they don't have shooters. Not the case w NB. I'm fine with trying it as a change of pace or to protect someone in foul trouble but bad man defenders are bad zone defenders. NB would've shredded our zone, plus it's not what our guys normally play, so then they're going to be playing a D they aren't experienced with. Not a recipe to help. Let's improve their effort and defense and our D will get better.

It would be nice to have in IU's toolkit, though. That was always something that I didn't understand about RMK. Confuse the other team. Slow them down. Make them think. Change the flow of the game. Especially with the shot clock.

 

[MMM1992]

Dumb

Ah yes, the timely and predictable one word reply.

 

[Brockettman]

Something to be said about recruiting shooters . I look at last nights game , and there is this smallish Japanese guy wearing a head band . I’m thinking we should dominate this guy , and then he drops 28 on us . I then remembered something I have posted on here before . We need to recruit more basketball players , and not just recruit athletes. A basketball player May not be the quickest guy on D , but knows where to be to stop his man . He may not be able to jump out of the gym , but can block his man out and rebound , or hit the open shot when he has it . Now if you have a great athlete who is also a good basketball player you are going to win a lot of games , but if not give players who might not be great athletes , but know how to play the game .

 

[TR32]

I don't know why people think a zone is some magic bullet. It worked vs Lville because they don't have shooters. Not the case w NB. I'm fine with trying it as a change of pace or to protect someone in foul trouble but bad man defenders are bad zone defenders. NB would've shredded our zone, plus it's not what our guys normally play, so then they're going to be playing a D they aren't experienced with. Not a recipe to help. Let's improve their effort and defense and our D will get better.

I agree with your comments.

Further.
In cases where IU doesn't switch on ball screens, they have been lazy in positioning. Neither a hedge nor a switch and it results in (typically) Gallo or Cupps trying to fight over the screen and a drive way too far into the lane.
They need to call that screen out and stop that dribble penetration, not turn sideways, let them get inside 8 feet and then try to block anything they throw up. The offense has too many options when they get inside like that. It's killing IU.
And I agree with the comments on Mgbako. He struggles defensively, especially trying to recover/rotation on a shooter.

Offensively, IU really struggled in being aware of doubles in the paint. Whether bad passing by Johnson, Reneau, Galloway, or poor awareness of the double team (ie. Bigs catching and trying to dribble in the double team instead of kicking out), they simply didn't react well to what Nebraska did defensively, and that happened in both halves, which means Woodson didn't make good adjustments either.

Indiana started out with pretty good ball movement, but they went back to slow and methodically trying to force the ball inside, and it only ever worked on alley oops. They need to find offense in the perimeter passing or every coach in the conference will do what Nebraska just did and double IU in the paint.

 

[IUPaterade724]

Love the solutions. Do us a favor and sit down with Woody and staff to discuss ASAP as I’m certain he’s open to constructive criticism. And bring the the fellas a good cigar. Of course, if Dolson would have actually hired a college coach, then we wouldn’t need to offer suggestions 2.5 years into yet another failed coaching tenure.

The woody cigar hot take is brought to you by the same yokels complaining of tan suits.

 

[TR32]

In the last 4 games, Indiana has given up 12 made 3s per game. That is just way too many to have sustained success.

If Nebraska scores 86, that means IU didn't guard anyone. Obviously a lot of those points were from the perimeter and that means Indiana needs better defenders on the court. So that is the change. IU has to have perimeter defenders who can stop 3 point FGs.
Either better effort or change of playing time.

 

[Jssanto]

Agree. Gallow first off the bench, followed by Leal/Cupps/Sparks then Banks/Gunn.

I agree with Banks Gunn last. I have been disappointed they have not developed more. No idea why.

 

[demunn]

Outside of Ware, the team looked dead flat (if not concave). Possibly the lowest energy effort I've seen maybe ever.

We have zero threat outside the 4-5 and teams know it. Hoiberg knew exactly what he was doing. Packed it in and then pressured our 1-3 to death (Nebraska had 5x the energy all night). If our 1-3s don't give 110% effort, they are not talented enough to overcome and revert to "lazy dumb" play like last night.

Woody needs to find someone who is going to consistently step up and lead. We were not in the Kansas game if Gallo didn't show up like that. Start pulling these primadonnas off the floor for lazy dumb play.

Just like Franklin, Geronimo and Bates, if they don't deliver, they are going to transfer somewhere else anyway and produce the same product. Quit tolerating soft, uninspired play.

 

[TR32]

I agree with Banks Gunn last. I have been disappointed they have not developed more. No idea why.

Banks is out of position. He is a 4 trying to play the wing. Gunn just needs to settle down offensively.

Tamar Bates is shooting 55% from 3 this year for Missouri and averaging 10ppg. Losing guards to transfer doesn't help.

 

[Jssanto]

I’m glad for Bates he is doing better. Not sure why he did not have success here.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

Outside of Ware, the team looked dead flat (if not concave). Possibly the lowest energy effort I've seen maybe ever.

We have zero threat outside the 4-5 and teams know it. Hoiberg knew exactly what he was doing. Packed it in and then pressured our 1-3 to death (Nebraska had 5x the energy all night). If our 1-3s don't give 110% effort, they are not talented enough to overcome and revert to "lazy dumb" play like last night.

Woody needs to find someone who is going to consistently step up and lead. We were not in the Kansas game if Gallo didn't show up like that. Start pulling these primadonnas off the floor for lazy dumb play.

Just like Franklin, Geronimo and Bates, if they don't deliver, they are going to transfer somewhere else anyway and produce the same product. Quit tolerating soft, uninspired play.

Franklin made a mistake transferring. He had the ability and would have made a difference here. No comparison to Ger and Tamar.

 

[demunn]

Banks is out of position. He is a 4 trying to play the wing. Gunn just needs to settle down offensively.

Tamar Bates is shooting 55% from 3 this year for Missouri and averaging 10ppg. Losing guards to transfer doesn't help.

Bates was a super nice kid, can't imagine being a dad and sustaining what he does in the grind. Wish he would have stayed but he didn't deliver. I'm sure he wanted to be "the guy" and can't blame him for playing time. 10 ppg if good but he scored 4 against Kansas and 10 against IL -- it would help but we need better.

I see the same thing happening with Gunn. Takes confident looking shots and seems to sometimes shoot too early/often--stuck in the vicicious cycle of shoot and miss, then lose opportunity. I don't understand why following your shot is such a lost skill these days.

 

[Willdog7]

Mgbako doesn't have the skills or ability to play the 2. Plus he's been pretty much awful on defense. He's constantly out of position and cheating too far to the lane ... but getting a little better each game.

Maybe the answer is for the interior players (and X) to do a better job passing for open looks when doubled and the guards and wings have to get the defensive rotations down .. They have a hardest job in our defense as they have to rotate to the nail, and be abke rotate back to shooters.. that's a lot of ground to cover... and they're just not very good at it.

Last night the over penetration against a swarming defense in the lane killed us. Trey and X needed to do a much better job and get rid of it earlier .. one dribble one step too many.

Remember X was not full strength.

 

[iubru242]

To be honest, I'm not sure that MM is a college 3 right now. He certainly isn't a college 2. He has trouble guarding out on the floor and can't handle the ball well.

I agree he could not guard a 2 in a man to man defense, but his length at the top of a zone might make him more affective.

 

[shooter1977]

I’m glad for Bates he is doing better. Not sure why he did not have success here.

Bates struggled creating his own shot -- which you basically have to do under Woodson. IU does not create a lot of open looks through their sets.

So unless you're a NBA talent, or there is a TJD demanding an automatic double, guys are going to struggle shooting under Woodson. You see this on poorly coached high school teams as well, just down a level.

 

[kkott]

It would be nice to have in IU's toolkit, though. That was always something that I didn't understand about RMK. Confuse the other team. Slow them down. Make them think. Change the flow of the game. Especially with the shot clock.

Heard RMK say when he was doing games years later, that he'd wished he had used zones some, especially on inbounds plays. It is a tool, but I remain convinced that poor man defenders will be poor zone defenders, and even worse when it's a scheme they haven't played and aren't familiar with, and they'll miss even more blockouts, etc...

 

[Courtsensetwo]

Heard RMK say when he was doing games years later, that he'd wished he had used zones some, especially on inbounds plays. It is a tool, but I remain convinced that poor man defenders will be poor zone defenders, and even worse when it's a scheme they haven't played and aren't familiar with, and they'll miss even more blockouts, etc...

True true about poor defenders, but a zone will help support the weak spots. Neb was red hot from three even contested so I don't see a zone helping much in that game.

There will be several games coming up that a zone makes sense.

 

[Boilerpointe81]

Heard RMK say when he was doing games years later, that he'd wished he had used zones some, especially on inbounds plays. It is a tool, but I remain convinced that poor man defenders will be poor zone defenders, and even worse when it's a scheme they haven't played and aren't familiar with, and they'll miss even more blockouts, etc...

Agree. How much has IU been playing Zone this year?

 

[Bill4411]

Something to be said about recruiting shooters . I look at last nights game , and there is this smallish Japanese guy wearing a head band . I’m thinking we should dominate this guy , and then he drops 28 on us . I then remembered something I have posted on here before . We need to recruit more basketball players , and not just recruit athletes. A basketball player May not be the quickest guy on D , but knows where to be to stop his man . He may not be able to jump out of the gym , but can block his man out and rebound , or hit the open shot when he has it . Now if you have a great athlete who is also a good basketball player you are going to win a lot of games , but if not give players who might not be great athletes , but know how to play the game .

If Scott Skiles was in high school today, he probably would not even be a top 100 player. The talent evaluators make a lot of mistakes based upon athleticism. I'll always remember how great he was in the Indiana high school title game; he was a gamer.

 

[FormerRevMatt]

Well, it's an inexact science, right? And then there's athleticism and how a person actually plays.

There are guys who aren't super athletic and have to play angles and use every skill that they can to play defense and stay in front of their man. They're not super laterally quick on D.

But, I've seen those same guards who are great penetrators on offense. Why? They shouldn't have great lateral quickness on paper. They're crafty and they're one of those guys who are "quick with the ball." They're great ball handlers and they have such high basketball IQ that they see plays so quickly that they beat people to spots.

Skiles was one of those guys. And, to be honest, I think Skiles was a better athlete than he was given credit for too. He had that "little white guard" discrimination going on, where it's automatically thought that they're some kind of inferior athlete. It's completely discriminatory and wrong, don't get me wrong, but I think everyone has either explicitly or implicitly done it.

The reverse of that was the Delray Brooks thing. He looked like the worlds greatest athlete. Mr. Basketball. McD invite. I think I have more lateral quickness than he did. LOL

 

[kkott]

Agree. How much has IU been playing Zone this year?

barely at all. We played it vs Lville and it did help us come back, but they lacked shooters. We weren't aggressive with it on the perimeter and I think a good shooting team like NB was the other night would carve us up with it. But, it did work vs Lville and helped stop their penetration, so maybe it's worth trying if we continue to struggle on D, but I don't believe it will help much. I think every team should (and assume all do) work on a zone, just to use it for a change up or to protect someone in foul trouble, but we just have really bad defensive fundamentals especially on the perimeter, so I don't believe we're going to magically be competent in a zone... unless the other team just lacks shooters. But at some point, I suppose you have to try something.

 

[kkott]

If Scott Skiles was in high school today, he probably would not even be a top 100 player. The talent evaluators make a lot of mistakes based upon athleticism. I'll always remember how great he was in the Indiana high school title game; he was a gamer.

also great in that tournament game vs Kansas, a few years later. That HS title game was one of the best I've ever seen.

 

[IUNorth]

With regards to this team playing a zone defense...

In my opinion, it would depend greatly on what type of zone. This team would likely be epically terrible playing a 2-3 zone. Their gap defense is horrific. Part of that is due to the "nail" philosophies, and how long their closeouts end up being...but beyond that, helping in gaps and recovering is one of the central issues we have as a team. We're terrible at it, we can't effectively get back out to shooters, and we can't effectively find guys to box out and keep off the boards when the open shots get put up. All of those things would be further magnified if they played a 2-3 Zone, in all likelihood.

They might be able to play some sort if 1-2-2 or 3-2. And if practiced enough, they might have the length, depending on who's on the floor, to run an effective 1-3-1.

But pretty much ALL styles of defense hinge on your ability to 1)guard the ball 2)help and rotate effectively Playing zones can mask and help certain areas, but if you're fundamentally bad at either/both of those things in man to man, your zones aren't gonna be great either.

 

[kkott]

ALL styles of defense hinge on your ability to 1)guard the ball 2)help and rotate effectively Playing zones can mask and help certain areas, but if you're fundamentally bad at either/both of those things in man to man, your zones aren't gonna be great either.

This. Not to mention trying to switch to a different scheme mid stream after months of being primarily taught something different, would only confuse them. It was great vs Lville and is worth keeping in the arsenal if they've been practicing it, but we're bad at defensive fundamentals so rolling out an entirely new scheme isn't gonna help. it helped vs Lville but even then I kept thinking, they're going to bury us if they can hit 3s.

 

[IUNorth]

This. Not to mention trying to switch to a different scheme mid stream after months of being primarily taught something different, would only confuse them. It was great vs Lville and is worth keeping in the arsenal if they've been practicing it, but we're bad at defensive fundamentals so rolling out an entirely new scheme isn't gonna help. it helped vs Lville but even then I kept thinking, they're going to bury us if they can hit 3s.

I missed the 2nd half of that game...was it a 2-3 that we played?

The only thing I could think of where it might be "easier" is zone defenses often require less thought. So if any of our guys are getting stuck in no man's land (they are) in our man to man defenses, because they're thinking too much...a zone defense can, at times, help with that. I've seen kids that are much more disruptive and active in 1-3-1 type trapping zones than they are in man to man, as an example. And often times its because they have "paralysis by analysis" going on with all the various mental things needed to be effective in man to man. Whereas in the zone its much more focused on guarding an area...being aggressive with a specific trap, always in the same area, etc...

Eventually though, teams that suck at guarding the ball and that aren't good reading, reacting, and rotating...they won't be good at any style defense.

 

[frikkenfrakken]

This. Not to mention trying to switch to a different scheme mid stream after months of being primarily taught something different, would only confuse them. It was great vs Lville and is worth keeping in the arsenal if they've been practicing it, but we're bad at defensive fundamentals so rolling out an entirely new scheme isn't gonna help. it helped vs Lville but even then I kept thinking, they're going to bury us if they can hit 3s.

This is where I am with it. Mgbako can't help and recover in a man scheme, how is he going to suddenly going to get good at it playing a zone?

 

[iubru242]

This is where I am with it. Mgbako can't help and recover in a man scheme, how is he going to suddenly going to get good at it playing a zone?

He may not be good, but he clearly is not very good in man to man, playing and area at the top of a zone may be easier for him and his length would help with 3 point shooters.

 

[ams66]

It would be nice to have in IU's toolkit, though. That was always something that I didn't understand about RMK. Confuse the other team. Slow them down. Make them think. Change the flow of the game. Especially with the shot clock.

I seem to recall that RMK would use zone situationally, but agree it was very rare.

I don't think very many people would be complaining about the tradition of man defense if we started getting good wins playing zone.

 

[jopajackson]

Love the solutions. Do us a favor and sit down with Woody and staff to discuss ASAP as I’m certain he’s open to constructive criticism. And bring the the fellas a good cigar. Of course, if Dolson would have actually hired a college coach, then we wouldn’t need to offer suggestions 2.5 years into yet another failed coaching tenure.

Archie Miller would beg to differ.

 

[kkott]

I missed the 2nd half of that game...was it a 2-3 that we played?

The only thing I could think of where it might be "easier" is zone defenses often require less thought. So if any of our guys are getting stuck in no man's land (they are) in our man to man defenses, because they're thinking too much...a zone defense can, at times, help with that. I've seen kids that are much more disruptive and active in 1-3-1 type trapping zones than they are in man to man, as an example. And often times its because they have "paralysis by analysis" going on with all the various mental things needed to be effective in man to man. Whereas in the zone its much more focused on guarding an area...being aggressive with a specific trap, always in the same area, etc...

Eventually though, teams that suck at guarding the ball and that aren't good reading, reacting, and rotating...they won't be good at any style defense.

Yes, 2-3. Lville had a guard that was driving and killing us, and it stopped that. Then, they had absolutely no outside shooters, so they couldn't shoot over it. It wasn't like we looked like world beaters and I thought looked pretty passive, and as you would guess, unsteady, but they had no ability to beat it and it stopped what was hurting us, which was that guard driving. Had we played it the other night against NB, they'd have killed us (even worse!), imo.