Dawg fans wanted simplification of our offense and that's exactly what we got. Up to Tuesday the season had been a steady progression from high post ball screens philosophy to one emphasizing dribble hand off schemes. We ran aspects of Zoom with more off-ball actions that were initiated by getting the ball out of our PG's hands early by having short passes made to an approaching post player or wing who turns to face the basket to look for open teammates.
We learned however against the Gamecocks that sometimes the lack of a designed set play can be more efficient than a poorly executed, designed action. We essentially spread the court Tuesday and allowed each of our versatile players to take turns going one on one out of isolations. For the first 3 quarters of the game, this allowed us to reduce our turnovers because there were fewer opportunities for double teams and complicated exchanges in a crowded lane.
The game plan was apparently to spread the court and pound the ball inside. This proved effective until the Gamecocks changed the dynamics in the final 4 minutes by applying full court pressure to double the ball and take us out of half-court isolation play. What was proved by CMW was that a team playing better D will win a slow tempo game against roughly similarly talented roster -- even if few organized sets and actions are run. Especially if the winning team has at least 2 players on the court who can score effectively out of isolations.
Reviews of the game tape confirmed what I had seen court side at the Steg. I estimate that we had roughly 70 possessions. Some of those involved transition attacks and early fouls or were put back opportunities at the rim where there would have been few opportunities to initiate a pattern play. But the only designated, called plays appeared to be 6 times we either ran zoom actions or incorporated off-ball wing screens components of zoom that would have led to open opportunities had the ballhandler chosen to pass to the open wing. Twice the guard ballhandler chose to drive the lane instead which did not lead to a bucket.
We opened each half with a zoom action and closed the half with a beautiful zoom play. That was not a coincidence and suggests that zoom dribble hand offs (DHOs) have become our primary designated action. But otherwise there was no attempt to stay with any actions that involved 3 players and the only two man actions such as ball-screens occurred only late in the shot clock. The few ball screens observed seemed to be more reflexively done out of habit rather than as designated plays.
THE GOOD:
1. We play hellacious D. We rotate well and provide help. We protect the rim, take opponents out of what they want to do and we minimize breakdowns that lead to easy open shots.
2. We recognize mismatches and are beginning to use our posts efficiently when they receive the ball above the FT line to search for the second post player who has positioned himself low in the lane and is sealing off his defender so that a lob type pass will create a dunk.
3. We are effectively slashing to the rim out of the isolation spreads and taking advantage of spaces and creases created by the 4-out positioning.
4. We have improved the angles and shortened our entry passes into the post.
5. Our isolations put to good use the sound fundamentals taught by CMW, such as footwork, creating separation (ex: jump hooks) and seal offs and recognition of benefit of attacking the basket.
6. Our O rebounding has been our superpower this year as we rank 12th nationally. But it has declined slightly recently. Is this a significant trend and if so what is cause? O boards will be a key indicator of how game is going today.
THE BAD:
1. Any O that does not employ screens must create space through quick passing and movement of players across the court. We rarely have patience to reverse the ball to cause the D to reset. We have improved our cuts and movements in recent games but we seldom create opportunities by running the baseline or having players do slot cuts down the lane. Too few baskets come off assists.
2. We should avoid so many long skip passes across the court to stationary wing teammates as good defenders with hands in the passing lanes will cause far more turnovers than USC. Bama excels at disrupting passing lanes and causing deflections.
3. We had no philosophy or designed actions to score against the zone used midway through the 2nd half. We will see more zone if we don't adjust. Zoom actions and DHOS work vs. zone and ball reversal is essential. Our posts possess the passing ability to receive the ball at the FT line, attract defenders and then find teammates cutting down the baseline.
4. We polished our inside game by entering the ball to the low post but we didn't create any outside game by kicking back out to open wings for catch and release.
THE UGLY:
1. Our inability to handle the full court pressure press is a disaster. Bama and other elite up tempo teams will feast on us if we don't change tactics and figure out how to avoid our flurries of late turnovers.
****
Coaches amplify the efficiency of their players in the half-court when competing against an opponent's more talented, older and more mature roster by creating more space through better ball movement and by involving at least 2 players in off ball screening actions early in the shot clock. And by using the versatility of a deep roster to maintain pressure by switching on all screens to avoid mismatches.
Simplification of an O by going isolation would leave us vulnerable to an elite opponent like Bama, UF, a healthy AU or TAM. Going without designated schemes is not a good plan today. Fans should see us build on the DHO usage from recent games and expand beyond the 6 or so zoom actions we saw Tuesday with more scoring out of transition and more zoom action.
A close game today that avoids late melt-downs against the press similar to the Tenn and Fla games will go a long way to establishing that we are truly building a program capable of winning more than one game in both the SEC tourney and the NCAA tourney.
We've progressed enough to beat middling teams with our D. Can we create enough O to beat an equally talented or more talented roster?
We learned however against the Gamecocks that sometimes the lack of a designed set play can be more efficient than a poorly executed, designed action. We essentially spread the court Tuesday and allowed each of our versatile players to take turns going one on one out of isolations. For the first 3 quarters of the game, this allowed us to reduce our turnovers because there were fewer opportunities for double teams and complicated exchanges in a crowded lane.
The game plan was apparently to spread the court and pound the ball inside. This proved effective until the Gamecocks changed the dynamics in the final 4 minutes by applying full court pressure to double the ball and take us out of half-court isolation play. What was proved by CMW was that a team playing better D will win a slow tempo game against roughly similarly talented roster -- even if few organized sets and actions are run. Especially if the winning team has at least 2 players on the court who can score effectively out of isolations.
Reviews of the game tape confirmed what I had seen court side at the Steg. I estimate that we had roughly 70 possessions. Some of those involved transition attacks and early fouls or were put back opportunities at the rim where there would have been few opportunities to initiate a pattern play. But the only designated, called plays appeared to be 6 times we either ran zoom actions or incorporated off-ball wing screens components of zoom that would have led to open opportunities had the ballhandler chosen to pass to the open wing. Twice the guard ballhandler chose to drive the lane instead which did not lead to a bucket.
We opened each half with a zoom action and closed the half with a beautiful zoom play. That was not a coincidence and suggests that zoom dribble hand offs (DHOs) have become our primary designated action. But otherwise there was no attempt to stay with any actions that involved 3 players and the only two man actions such as ball-screens occurred only late in the shot clock. The few ball screens observed seemed to be more reflexively done out of habit rather than as designated plays.
THE GOOD:
1. We play hellacious D. We rotate well and provide help. We protect the rim, take opponents out of what they want to do and we minimize breakdowns that lead to easy open shots.
2. We recognize mismatches and are beginning to use our posts efficiently when they receive the ball above the FT line to search for the second post player who has positioned himself low in the lane and is sealing off his defender so that a lob type pass will create a dunk.
3. We are effectively slashing to the rim out of the isolation spreads and taking advantage of spaces and creases created by the 4-out positioning.
4. We have improved the angles and shortened our entry passes into the post.
5. Our isolations put to good use the sound fundamentals taught by CMW, such as footwork, creating separation (ex: jump hooks) and seal offs and recognition of benefit of attacking the basket.
6. Our O rebounding has been our superpower this year as we rank 12th nationally. But it has declined slightly recently. Is this a significant trend and if so what is cause? O boards will be a key indicator of how game is going today.
THE BAD:
1. Any O that does not employ screens must create space through quick passing and movement of players across the court. We rarely have patience to reverse the ball to cause the D to reset. We have improved our cuts and movements in recent games but we seldom create opportunities by running the baseline or having players do slot cuts down the lane. Too few baskets come off assists.
2. We should avoid so many long skip passes across the court to stationary wing teammates as good defenders with hands in the passing lanes will cause far more turnovers than USC. Bama excels at disrupting passing lanes and causing deflections.
3. We had no philosophy or designed actions to score against the zone used midway through the 2nd half. We will see more zone if we don't adjust. Zoom actions and DHOS work vs. zone and ball reversal is essential. Our posts possess the passing ability to receive the ball at the FT line, attract defenders and then find teammates cutting down the baseline.
4. We polished our inside game by entering the ball to the low post but we didn't create any outside game by kicking back out to open wings for catch and release.
THE UGLY:
1. Our inability to handle the full court pressure press is a disaster. Bama and other elite up tempo teams will feast on us if we don't change tactics and figure out how to avoid our flurries of late turnovers.
****
Coaches amplify the efficiency of their players in the half-court when competing against an opponent's more talented, older and more mature roster by creating more space through better ball movement and by involving at least 2 players in off ball screening actions early in the shot clock. And by using the versatility of a deep roster to maintain pressure by switching on all screens to avoid mismatches.
Simplification of an O by going isolation would leave us vulnerable to an elite opponent like Bama, UF, a healthy AU or TAM. Going without designated schemes is not a good plan today. Fans should see us build on the DHO usage from recent games and expand beyond the 6 or so zoom actions we saw Tuesday with more scoring out of transition and more zoom action.
A close game today that avoids late melt-downs against the press similar to the Tenn and Fla games will go a long way to establishing that we are truly building a program capable of winning more than one game in both the SEC tourney and the NCAA tourney.
We've progressed enough to beat middling teams with our D. Can we create enough O to beat an equally talented or more talented roster?
Last edited:
