ADVERTISEMENT

Woodson's Offense and Defense

FormerRevMatt

Freshman
Nov 16, 2017
487
818
93
Do any of the folks who have coached have any idea of what Woodson's offensive or defensive sets looked like when he was a head coach. I don't follow the NBA very closely anymore.

I've heard people talk about a 4 out 1 in set. Is it a 4-1 motion? I ask because outside of Lander (if he returns) and maybe Franklin (if he returns too), we don't really have many players who can break down their man off of the dribble, and we don't have gifted perimeter shooter (I'm being kind here).

So how would a 4-1 offense function with weak shooters?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mobilehoosier
Do any of the folks who have coached have any idea of what Woodson's offensive or defensive sets looked like when he was a head coach. I don't follow the NBA very closely anymore.

I've heard people talk about a 4 out 1 in set. Is it a 4-1 motion? I ask because outside of Lander (if he returns) and maybe Franklin (if he returns too), we don't really have many players who can break down their man off of the dribble, and we don't have gifted perimeter shooter (I'm being kind here).

So how would a 4-1 offense function with weak shooters?
His defense is called "defense". His offense is called "offense".

the rest is just details ..
 
  • Like
Reactions: outlawyer
My understanding is that the best offense is a good defense, and conversely the best defense is a good offense. So I hope that Coach Woodson develops both a good offense (defense) and a good defense (offense). That would be the best thing.
 
I hope we play some zone. Archie had “1” type of defense. I want to be more multiple.

I want our offense to be similar to Alabama. Spread out and drive and kick. Reversal.
 
and turn it over at a high rate. They play too fast.

Tweaker basketball ..

I'll be watching Bama close because I think Oats takes the analytics on the mid-range game to the extreme. On Torvik's shot selection section it shows Bama taking just 12.7% of shots from mid-range (farther two's) and 46.5% from 3.

By comparison, the 8 Sweet 16 winners on average shoot 30% midrange and 35% from 3

When people say they like the style Oats plays it's the fast paced 3-ball oriented offense, right? However this years offense was KenPom #29 and last years 16-15 squad was #37 on offense. It wasn't the offense that made this Bama team good as it was just a shade better than last years bad team. The defense though improved from #114 (Iowa level) to #3

Anyway, I think that completely eschewing the mid-range game ultimately makes you easier to defend once you run into really good teams in the tournament. That said it's only his second year and I really like when somebody goes extreme in philosophy, that way we can check out if it's really gonna work.

You're sharper than I am on this stuff. So, do you agree or do you like the style?
 
Do any of the folks who have coached have any idea of what Woodson's offensive or defensive sets looked like when he was a head coach. I don't follow the NBA very closely anymore.

I've heard people talk about a 4 out 1 in set. Is it a 4-1 motion? I ask because outside of Lander (if he returns) and maybe Franklin (if he returns too), we don't really have many players who can break down their man off of the dribble, and we don't have gifted perimeter shooter (I'm being kind here).

So how would a 4-1 offense function with weak shooters?
Heard he could use 4 out motion, iso or the standard stuff everyone else runs.(high pick and role). He also said it will be a pro style using versatile guys that can play 3 spots. I did hear him say they will use a switching defense. Who knows at this point and it will probably depend on personnel.
 
Do any of the folks who have coached have any idea of what Woodson's offensive or defensive sets looked like when he was a head coach. I don't follow the NBA very closely anymore.

I've heard people talk about a 4 out 1 in set. Is it a 4-1 motion? I ask because outside of Lander (if he returns) and maybe Franklin (if he returns too), we don't really have many players who can break down their man off of the dribble, and we don't have gifted perimeter shooter (I'm being kind here).

So how would a 4-1 offense function with weak shooters?

You nailed it when you said that the pro’s run sets. Basically every pro team runs similar sets. With a 24 second shot clock you don’t really have time for an offense to get a great shot through lots of motion. So they run a set that that will typically take 10 seconds or less and has maybe 3 options in it. If that breaks down or options aren’t open they automatically go into an iso or pick and roll play. When you hear the 4 out and 1 in, it is a spacing thing and most NBA teams run that now. It basically puts 4 guys on the perimeter and 1 inside. So yes you need 4 shooters. It doesn’t necessarily mean 3’s though. One of the biggest advantages of that type of spacing is that it makes penetration easier and if you help your recovery will be more difficult. All NBA teams and Coach Woodson is no different, adjust their offensive sets based on the people on the floor and will run 80% of the sets emphasizing their best scorers.

Defensively most NBA teams now run man to man and switch pick and roll a lot. Coach Woodson as he said in his press conference likes to have players who can guard 3-4 positions so you can switch almost every pick and roll. That is tougher to get in college but if he can it makes playing defense much easier. Some teams mix in some zone but not many and I would be surprised to see it much if any.
 
You nailed it when you said that the pro’s run sets. Basically every pro team runs similar sets. With a 24 second shot clock you don’t really have time for an offense to get a great shot through lots of motion. So they run a set that that will typically take 10 seconds or less and has maybe 3 options in it. If that breaks down or options aren’t open they automatically go into an iso or pick and roll play. When you hear the 4 out and 1 in, it is a spacing thing and most NBA teams run that now. It basically puts 4 guys on the perimeter and 1 inside. So yes you need 4 shooters. It doesn’t necessarily mean 3’s though. One of the biggest advantages of that type of spacing is that it makes penetration easier and if you help your recovery will be more difficult. All NBA teams and Coach Woodson is no different, adjust their offensive sets based on the people on the floor and will run 80% of the sets emphasizing their best scorers.

Defensively most NBA teams now run man to man and switch pick and roll a lot. Coach Woodson as he said in his press conference likes to have players who can guard 3-4 positions so you can switch almost every pick and roll. That is tougher to get in college but if he can it makes playing defense much easier. Some teams mix in some zone but not many and I would be surprised to see it much if any.
I might add that he did say something about a switching defense. What he meant I’m not sure. I bet he will try to keep everything that is popular in the pros. He’s eluded to it.
 
It was a legitimate question to start this thread. Woodson runs motion on O. Isolation and pick and roll in half court but his focus is D and rebounding. (He did learn from Knight!) He created an NBA D concept to guard pick and roll that is used by some today. That's where he gets the innovation comments from. He also talked about switching from zone to man on D on the presser I think.
Posters above are correct about our guards not being able to break a person down. Not quick enough. Switching D takes quickness too. I'd suggest you Google some of his Nicks teams and watch a playoff game clip or two. You'll be able to tell. Key is getting players good enough to execute, which has been mentioned by many for years on this board. Hope that helps. Go Hoosiers!
 
It was a legitimate question to start this thread. Woodson runs motion on O. Isolation and pick and roll in half court but his focus is D and rebounding. (He did learn from Knight!) He created an NBA D concept to guard pick and roll that is used by some today. That's where he gets the innovation comments from. He also talked about switching from zone to man on D on the presser I think.
Posters above are correct about our guards not being able to break a person down. Not quick enough. Switching D takes quickness too. I'd suggest you Google some of his Nicks teams and watch a playoff game clip or two. You'll be able to tell. Key is getting players good enough to execute, which has been mentioned my many for years on this board. Hope that helps. Go Hoosiers!
Problem I see will be getting guys good enough and smart enough to do all those things. Only a few teams currently playing can. Gonzaga and Michigan could and do some of those things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mobilehoosier
I might add that he did say something about a switching defense. What he meant I’m not sure. I bet he will try to keep everything that is popular in the pros. He’s eluded to it.
I agree. I actually think we will be pretty good with that if everyone comes back. TJD can at least guard 4 spots, Race 3-4, Hunter 4, Franklin 3-4. My only concern is pg. Lots of bigs and even sf’s can take advantage and of our pgs down low. If they have to switch to a big it will have to trigger and automatic double team if they get posted. There are lots of pgs in the pros that have simmered issues though so I am sure Coach Woodson will have them ready.
 
I agree. I actually think we will be pretty good with that if everyone comes back. TJD can at least guard 4 spots, Race 3-4, Hunter 4, Franklin 3-4. My only concern is pg. Lots of bigs and even sf’s can take advantage and of our pgs down low. If they have to switch to a big it will have to trigger and automatic double team if they get posted. There are lots of pgs in the pros that have simmered issues though so I am sure Coach Woodson will have them ready.
Not sure about that. TJD can guard 3. Race 2-3, Hunter isn’t a great defender yet. Sky is the limit for Franklin. Franklin is exactly the type he wants. Quick 6-4 to 6-9 guys. OG is that type. He could legitimately guard 4 spots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mobilehoosier
I'll be watching Bama close because I think Oats takes the analytics on the mid-range game to the extreme. On Torvik's shot selection section it shows Bama taking just 12.7% of shots from mid-range (farther two's) and 46.5% from 3.

By comparison, the 8 Sweet 16 winners on average shoot 30% midrange and 35% from 3

When people say they like the style Oats plays it's the fast paced 3-ball oriented offense, right? However this years offense was KenPom #29 and last years 16-15 squad was #37 on offense. It wasn't the offense that made this Bama team good as it was just a shade better than last years bad team. The defense though improved from #114 (Iowa level) to #3

Anyway, I think that completely eschewing the mid-range game ultimately makes you easier to defend once you run into really good teams in the tournament. That said it's only his second year and I really like when somebody goes extreme in philosophy, that way we can check out if it's really gonna work.

You're sharper than I am on this stuff. So, do you agree or do you like the style?
He pays attention to the part of analytics he likes. He's ignoring his pace (too many TO) and tries to make up for that by creating TO which we both know is fools gold. He likes to overplay to create those TO, but they foul too much.

Creating TO's while fouling, playing at that pace and relying on 3's .. those are not things that can be done consistently. Some teams will take care of the ball, it's easier to slow teams down than speed them up and 3's don't always fall. Though they may work out in a 7 game series NBA format, in a one and done tourney, those are weaknesses.

Look at the shooting in games they lost, then the fouls and the TO's.

His system took them out of those games. In the last game 7 - 28 and 23 fouls ..

Hard pass ...
 
Not sure about that. TJD can guard 3. Race 2-3, Hunter isn’t a great defender yet. Sky is the limit for Franklin. Franklin is exactly the type he wants. Quick 6-4 to 6-9 guys. OG is that type. He could legitimately guard 4 spots.
Well I should say have the athleticism, speed and size to do so. Few of them could do it this year but the potential is there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Victorbmyboy
He pays attention to the part of analytics he likes. He's ignoring his pace (too many TO) and tries to make up for that by creating TO which we both know is fools gold. He likes to overplay to create those TO, but they foul too much.

Creating TO's while fouling, playing at that pace and relying on 3's .. those are not things that can be done consistently and though they may work out in a 7 game series format, in one and done tourneys those are weaknesses.

Look at the shooting in games they lost, then the fouls and the TO's.

His system took them out of those games. In the last game 7 - 28 and 23 fouls ..

Hard pass ...
Geronimo may fit that too. he can guard 3-4 spots.
Absolutely. Brain fart on him.
 
I'll be watching Bama close because I think Oats takes the analytics on the mid-range game to the extreme. On Torvik's shot selection section it shows Bama taking just 12.7% of shots from mid-range (farther two's) and 46.5% from 3.

By comparison, the 8 Sweet 16 winners on average shoot 30% midrange and 35% from 3

When people say they like the style Oats plays it's the fast paced 3-ball oriented offense, right? However this years offense was KenPom #29 and last years 16-15 squad was #37 on offense. It wasn't the offense that made this Bama team good as it was just a shade better than last years bad team. The defense though improved from #114 (Iowa level) to #3

Anyway, I think that completely eschewing the mid-range game ultimately makes you easier to defend once you run into really good teams in the tournament. That said it's only his second year and I really like when somebody goes extreme in philosophy, that way we can check out if it's really gonna work.

You're sharper than I am on this stuff. So, do you agree or do you like the style?
One other thing. they lose out on a lot of FT's doing what they do.

They are fun to watch when they hit threes ... dominating even.

But you just can't expect a team to do that (or the other things mentioned) 6 games in a row. Too gimmicky.
 
Do any of the folks who have coached have any idea of what Woodson's offensive or defensive sets looked like when he was a head coach. I don't follow the NBA very closely anymore.

I've heard people talk about a 4 out 1 in set. Is it a 4-1 motion? I ask because outside of Lander (if he returns) and maybe Franklin (if he returns too), we don't really have many players who can break down their man off of the dribble, and we don't have gifted perimeter shooter (I'm being kind here).

So how would a 4-1 offense function with weak shooters?
It's really hard to know. With the Knicks it was almost all isolation with Carmelo all the time. We don't have any player talented enough to try anything like that with. I think when he was with Atlanta the offense was more balanced (Joe Johnson era, maybe Steve Smith some) I think.

We really don't have shooters or much talent. I could see the best thing to do with this roster being a motion/Princeton style offense until we can recruit some shooters or try to develop them. I'd be OK with that, I like that style, but I think it may be out of necessity as opposed to what he'd do if the cupboard weren't so bare. Two guys in particular, Lander and Galloway, might thrive in that offense. We lose TJD though (I think we will probably) and we will be major F'd. Not really time to do anything about that and without shooters, small ball and pace and space are completely off the table. A Princeton type offense could help us remain respectable. I kind of seeing us looking a lot like Northwestern when they had whatchmcallit that ran a lot of backdoor cuts. Don't forget we have Matta on staff too, between the two of them, I think they'll be able to adjust to what kind of roster they're left with
 
One other thing. they lose out on a lot of FT's doing what they do.

They are fun to watch when they hit threes ... dominating even.

But you just can't expect a team to do that (or the other things mentioned) 6 games in a row. Too gimmicky.
Good stuff! I've been meaning to ask you for a while, but keep forgetting regarding a thought that I had about Crean. Analytics to someone who really doesn't understand them can be a dangerous thing. I was thinking about the 2012 and 13 teams and how they played pretty straight up. They could stroke the 3, but they didn't rely on it at all.

His later teams played more similar to the Oats style in a lot of ways. I've been thinking that maybe Crean got too cute with analytics without understanding the give and take of the choices he made. I haven't paid attention to what he's doing at Georgia. Anyway it just struck me one day that I didn't really hate the way the 2012 and 13 teams played
 
Good stuff! I've been meaning to ask you for a while, but keep forgetting regarding a thought that I had about Crean. Analytics to someone who really doesn't understand them can be a dangerous thing. I was thinking about the 2012 and 13 teams and how they played pretty straight up. They could stroke the 3, but they didn't rely on it at all.

His later teams played more similar to the Oats style in a lot of ways. I've been thinking that maybe Crean got too cute with analytics without understanding the give and take of the choices he made. I haven't paid attention to what he's doing at Georgia. Anyway it just struck me one day that I didn't really hate the way the 2012 and 13 teams played
I don't think Crean actually uses them. He once stated he uses plus/minus to gauge opponents weakness. Which is ugh really dumb and as far as I know impossible.

I think he just follows the current sparkly trend, searching for his magic wand +5 of coaching aptitude, and since analytics is driving the trends appears as a analytics coach. On his second day of the Georgia job he was talking about running a 3/4 press ... without even assessing the team. Sparkly gimmick.
 
I don't think Crean actually uses them. He once stated he uses plus/minus to gauge opponents weakness. Which is ugh really dumb and as far as I know impossible.

I think he just follows the current sparkly trend, searching for his magic wand +5 of coaching aptitude, and since analytics is driving the trends appears as a analytics coach. On his second day of the Georgia job he was talking about running a 3/4 press ... without even assessing the team. Sparkly gimmick.
Lol... I never heard about the +/- to gauge opponents weaknesses! That's almost too stupid to be believed. Even Goodman probably rolled his eyes at that gem. Crean is the Michael Scott of coaching :)
 
Good stuff! I've been meaning to ask you for a while, but keep forgetting regarding a thought that I had about Crean. Analytics to someone who really doesn't understand them can be a dangerous thing. I was thinking about the 2012 and 13 teams and how they played pretty straight up. They could stroke the 3, but they didn't rely on it at all.

His later teams played more similar to the Oats style in a lot of ways. I've been thinking that maybe Crean got too cute with analytics without understanding the give and take of the choices he made. I haven't paid attention to what he's doing at Georgia. Anyway it just struck me one day that I didn't really hate the way the 2012 and 13 teams played
Example of a coach using and not using analytics well. Illinois brought in a numbers guy and he convinced Underwood that overplaying on defense was costing him games, Underwood listened and changed his defense.

He listened... then ......

In the last game they were trying to pound the ball into Kofi instead of letting Ayo create. The post up play, not just the shot but the whole of the play from set up, to pass, to catch, then the shot, is the least effective play in basketball. Drive kick corner 3 being the most effective.

While Krut was used as a roller and on baseline iso, ie analytics based and effective, Kofi was back to the basket on post ups .... and they lost.

I hate what numbers have done to the game, there's less diversity, but if you don't use the information, and others do. You lose.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Paterfamilias
Example of a coach using and not using analytics well. Illinois brought in a numbers guy and he convinced Underwood that overplaying on defense was costing him games, Underwood listened and changed his defense.

He listened... then ......

In the last game they were trying to pound the ball into Kofi instead of letting Ayo create. The post up play, not just the shot but the whole of the play from set up, to pass, to catch, then the shot, is the least effective play in basketball.

While Krut was used as a roller and on baseline iso, ie analytics based and effective, Kofi was back to the basket on post ups .... and they lost.

I hate what numbers have done to the game, there's less diversity, but if you don't use the information, and others do. You lose.
I was just reading a really good article a few days ago that had the court broke into about 15 or 16 sectors, and broke down the effectiveness of all types of plays. I got the jist, but would have had to really dig in to understand it all. Anyway it talked about exactly what you just described.

Totally agree with that last sentence. Thing is a lot of times they throw the baby out with the bath water. In football, running up the middle is very inefficient, but teams that win championships do it well. If you throw it out of the playbook just because it's least efficient, you make it so much easier on the defense to defend your most efficient plays... thereby making them inefficient.

Tyger Campbell stepped up and knocked in a wide open 16 footer the other day and I could see Rob taking it on to the rim, trying to draw contact and badly missing. The philosophy of getting close and drawing fouls or kicking out is great, but college basketball players should be skilled enough and smart enough to take an easy look when presented.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T.M.P.
Do any of the folks who have coached have any idea of what Woodson's offensive or defensive sets looked like when he was a head coach. I don't follow the NBA very closely anymore.

I've heard people talk about a 4 out 1 in set. Is it a 4-1 motion? I ask because outside of Lander (if he returns) and maybe Franklin (if he returns too), we don't really have many players who can break down their man off of the dribble, and we don't have gifted perimeter shooter (I'm being kind here).

So how would a 4-1 offense function with weak shooters?
He spoke first about defense in his press conference. He talked about getting the ball inside with a high value on 3 point shooting.

He also said he wanted to put his players in a position to be successful. I took that as tailoring his offense to the personnel. He said shooters would be expected to shoot. If you can't shoot well then you find other ways to help the team. The last part sounded like RMK.
 
He spoke first about defense in his press conference. He talked about getting the ball inside with a high value on 3 point shooting.

He also said he wanted to put his players in a position to be successful. I took that as tailoring his offense to the personnel. He said shooters would be expected to shoot. If you can't shoot well then you find other ways to help the team. The last part sounded like RMK.
Offense
Expect guys who are athletic and can play multiple positions. Probably less traditional, more modern lineups with 2 wings and a stretch 4 most of the time. Lots of iso and floor spacing and of course pick and roll/pops. He has forgotten more sets than half the coaches in the B10 have ever learned
TJD will be encouraged to take the face up 12-15 footer regularly. I think Woody sees himself as a bit of a maverick with his philosophy and will adapt well to the strengths of his teams.

Defense
Expect lots of switching, probably everything big to big and on the ball. Doubt we see much zone, but he’s definitely not too arrogant to try it. He was lead assistant with Larry Brown when the Pistons were suffocating opponents while winning the NBA Title. Had a reputation of being an excellent defensive mind as a result, which lead to him getting the Hawks job.

The coaching pedigree is there. No one will make the right call every play or every game or on every recruit. He seems more than competent and certainly qualified for the offensive and defensive game plans. Pretty sure the NBA is elite, from the scouting all the way to drawing up plays to stop LeBron James.

It’s only about getting the right players now. The only way to win big is with the proper talent.
 
There is a chance he might be gone. I guess his mother said he was too far away.
He's reached young Man status... He'll make the decision on this one...(in my opinion)...

Personally, I'd love to see him back... He's the closest to AJ Moye we've seen here in years...
 
He's reached young Man status... He'll make the decision on this one...(in my opinion)...

Personally, I'd love to see him back... He's the closest to AJ Moye we've seen here in years...
I love what I saw from him this year. A true freshman at 6’6” asked to guard the 4 and 5 regularly and did amazingly well. He has NBA athleticism, just needs to develop his skills!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 76-1
Do any of the folks who have coached have any idea of what Woodson's offensive or defensive sets looked like when he was a head coach. I don't follow the NBA very closely anymore.

I've heard people talk about a 4 out 1 in set. Is it a 4-1 motion? I ask because outside of Lander (if he returns) and maybe Franklin (if he returns too), we don't really have many players who can break down their man off of the dribble, and we don't have gifted perimeter shooter (I'm being kind here).

So how would a 4-1 offense function with weak shooters?
Hopefully he takes the same approach as RMK. I heard an RMK interview years ago and it went like this.
Interviewer: “What did you work on in practice?”
RMK: “Offense and defense”.
Interviewer: “What particular things on offense?”
RMK: “Scoring baskets”
Interviewer: “What particular things on defense?”
RMK: “Preventing baskets”
 
I hope we play some zone. Archie had “1” type of defense. I want to be more multiple.

I want our offense to be similar to Alabama. Spread out and drive and kick. Reversal.
Zone at IU? HERESY!!

Actually yeah, not that I'm a big fan of zone, but it's about time we add a wrinkle or two to the defensive schemes. If a team has bigs but shaky shooters, or if TJD/Race are in a little foul trouble, then sure, throw a matchup 2/3 or 3/2 at them and see what happens. Couldn't be any worse than Archie's pack line results.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT