Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
JwgreDeux

Georgia - Preview

53 posts in this topic

3 hours ago, auburnphan said:

I agree with that, but Bruce also has to deal with his showcause penalty past, even though I think he got hosed on it.  He is teaching them a lesson and the team and is clearly using this as a teaching moment.  As Cole said I think Brown's minutes were/are on decline regardless of getting caught with weed.

 

If we move Purifoy to the 3, which we should to become a better defensive and rebounding team Brown will end up coming off the bench. Which would improve our second unit as well. But we'll see I guess. I'm really hoping to see Wiley and Spencer play together

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




Agree, Wiley and Spencer has potential to completely change the dynamics of this team 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, cole256 said:

If we move Purifoy to the 3, which we should to become a better defensive and rebounding team Brown will end up coming off the bench. Which would improve our second unit as well. But we'll see I guess. I'm really hoping to see Wiley and Spencer play together

If we move DP to the 3 and MH to the 2, ad many have proposed every player in the floor will be learning a new position. This would be happening mid season as SEC play begins. 4 and 3 are not interchangeable, 2 and 3 are not interchangeable, and neither are 4 and 5. Asking Spencer, Purifoy, Heron and Wiley to all learn or relearn our schemes for their positions is ambitious. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cole256 said:

Don't know how you could measure that as far as the rebounding and shooting better, but I guess you can't argue with an opinion either. 

As far as when I said that about Wiley nobody agreed but now I see it's a common theme that many are saying. 

Nice write up btw

I can't think of disagreeing about him helping the team, I remember backing you up about how he could actually help us get out in transition better. 

My disagreement was that we couldn't shoot better without a strong post presence, not that having one would help us. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JwgreDeux said:

If we move DP to the 3 and MH to the 2, ad many have proposed every player in the floor will be learning a new position. This would be happening mid season as SEC play begins. 4 and 3 are not interchangeable, 2 and 3 are not interchangeable, and neither are 4 and 5. Asking Spencer, Purifoy, Heron and Wiley to all learn or relearn our schemes for their positions is ambitious. 

2 and 3 are pretty much interchangeable and so is 4 and 5. And it wouldn't be asking Wiley to learn anything new. And Purifoy wouldn't learn anything new either. What you would be doing is putting guys back in the roles they have played their entire lives. The person with the biggest transition would be Purifoy like I mentioned who already knows.

 

Everything has pros and cons but the reward is much greater and it's inevitable for next year anyway. As far as many been pushing....this is something I've been writing about since this summer, read the post and you can see the benefits from it

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, JwgreDeux said:

I can't think of disagreeing about him helping the team, I remember backing you up about how he could actually help us get out in transition better. 

My disagreement was that we couldn't shoot better without a strong post presence, not that having one would help us. 

You wrote a preview down playing him a bit. Then you wrote something another game saying the rebounding improvement wasn't him. As far as the shooting thing, once again that's your opinion but just saying they can shoot better....I mean ok but the only thing to back that up is last year shooting percentage when they had other people drawing doubles. This year they haven't. Like I've said our shooters are specialist. They can't create space. So their numbers are down. And here we are. They can't create space for good shots and their numbers are down

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking on guarding Georgia's PG. One of the things I've noticed about JH is his ability to flop and draw fouls at crucial times. He drew a couple of offensive fouls towards the end of the uconn game and you could tell it was getting in Purvis' head as they kept showing him the camera and the look on his face was classic.

i believe JH should do fine in matching up against most guards until size becomes an issue.

Based on not only how we look on paper but also on the gameplay so far this year, I would expect georgia to try and crash the inside. Teams with big guys that can score will do that til we stop them. I feel that with more experience Wiley will become more of a force down low. It doesn't seem like he's exerting himself the way you'd imagine someone his size would but I've got to guess that nearly 100% of that is due to his situation and age.

Being able to give different looks downlow, even if it's to only matchup defensively against a team that's killing us downlow, without as much fear of fatigue will also be huge. Not many teams will be able to put in a lineup that can outsize us or outrun us once our substitutions are made. (Especially with Spencer looking like he's worked his way back, Wiley coming on more and more, Laron still playing solid)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Charhair said:

Speaking on guarding Georgia's PG. One of the things I've noticed about JH is his ability to flop and draw fouls at crucial times. He drew a couple of offensive fouls towards the end of the uconn game and you could tell it was getting in Purvis' head as they kept showing him the camera and the look on his face was classic.

i believe JH should do fine in matching up against most guards until size becomes an issue.

Based on not only how we look on paper but also on the gameplay so far this year, I would expect georgia to try and crash the inside. Teams with big guys that can score will do that til we stop them. I feel that with more experience Wiley will become more of a force down low. It doesn't seem like he's exerting himself the way you'd imagine someone his size would but I've got to guess that nearly 100% of that is due to his situation and age.

Being able to give different looks downlow, even if it's to only matchup defensively against a team that's killing us downlow, without as much fear of fatigue will also be huge. Not many teams will be able to put in a lineup that can outsize us or outrun us once our substitutions are made. (Especially with Spencer looking like he's worked his way back, Wiley coming on more and more, Laron still playing solid)

That's a good point. JH has been smart using the size advantage in his favor some. 

Also this is where size will help at the guard position. Bigger guards can make up with their length in a zone, also most times in basketball when you see a team with an undersized guard you'll see they'll make up for it with another wing player. Probably most notably you can look at golden st. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, cole256 said:

2 and 3 are pretty much interchangeable and so is 4 and 5. And it wouldn't be asking Wiley to learn anything new. And Purifoy wouldn't learn anything new either. What you would be doing is putting guys back in the roles they have played their entire lives. The person with the biggest transition would be Purifoy like I mentioned who already knows.

 

Everything has pros and cons but the reward is much greater and it's inevitable for next year anyway. As far as many been pushing....this is something I've been writing about since this summer, read the post and you can see the benefits from it

Just curious, did you play college basketball or have some experience coaching at this level? It's a genuine question and not meant to be a slight at all. You just seem really confident that those position changes would be easy, and it just doesn't look that easy or simple from what I know about the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2 and 3 in BP's offense are virtually indistinguishable. The 4 and 5 being interchangeable is kind of a yes and a no. There are a lot of sets he has that the 4's and 5's both know but it would severely limit his playbook, if that makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, cole256 said:

2 and 3 are pretty much interchangeable and so is 4 and 5. And it wouldn't be asking Wiley to learn anything new. And Purifoy wouldn't learn anything new either. What you would be doing is putting guys back in the roles they have played their entire lives. The person with the biggest transition would be Purifoy like I mentioned who already knows.

 

Everything has pros and cons but the reward is much greater and it's inevitable for next year anyway. As far as many been pushing....this is something I've been writing about since this summer, read the post and you can see the benefits from it

I'm not sure where to start on this, they are similar on the offensive end but not at all on the defensive end. The big differences will be in the help defense assignments and the defensive rebounding assignments, both areas where we struggle. Adding size alone doesn't help these struggles, as many of our current struggles are missed assignments. A massive restructure like this will cause growing pains, and for a team with so many moving parts already, I think now is a bad time to do this. 

Wiley is learning new things. He has had like 5 practices to learn our schemes on O and D. My point was he doesn't know his job yet, and making the changes suggested would mean 4 of the 5 guys on the floor would still be learning the roles. Let's not forget that we don't have great chemistry at the spots they have been playing yet.

I don't disagree there are some pros to the changes, but I think the cons out weigh them right now. Just an opinion.  

12 hours ago, cole256 said:

You wrote a preview down playing him a bit. Then you wrote something another game saying the rebounding improvement wasn't him. As far as the shooting thing, once again that's your opinion but just saying they can shoot better....I mean ok but the only thing to back that up is last year shooting percentage when they had other people drawing doubles. This year they haven't. Like I've said our shooters are specialist. They can't create space. So their numbers are down. And here we are. They can't create space for good shots and their numbers are down

My preview down playing him was about his immediate impact, on day 1. Not his overall impact moving forward. As we have seen, we haven't suddenly become a dominate team. And yes, DP's 15 rebounds were about individual effort, not Wiley occupying multiple guys, as UConn wasn't putting a double box on Wiley. 

5 minutes ago, plainstiger94 said:

The 2 and 3 in BP's offense are virtually indistinguishable. The 4 and 5 being interchangeable is kind of a yes and a no. There are a lot of sets he has that the 4's and 5's both know but it would severely limit his playbook, if that makes sense.

Everyone likely knows every spot in a flex offense as it is about principles, so no matter where you end up on the floor you should know what to do, but the roles are different on set plays, in-bounds plays, offensive rebounding assignments, etc...and they are NOT interchangeable on the defensive end, 2 and 3 are the most similar, but they have different help assignments and rebounding assignments. Heron is our best rebounder, moving him to the 2 will take him out of more rebounding opportunities. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The betting line has now moved to AU -1.5 :cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JwgreDeux said:

Everyone likely knows every spot in a flex offense as it is about principles, so no matter where you end up on the floor you should know what to do, but the roles are different on set plays, in-bounds plays, offensive rebounding assignments, etc...and they are NOT interchangeable on the defensive end, 2 and 3 are the most similar, but they have different help assignments and rebounding assignments. Heron is our best rebounder, moving him to the 2 will take him out of more rebounding opportunities. 

Heron has already been assigned to guard the 2 on multiple occasions this year. And the rebounding responsibilities of the 2 and 3 on a Bruce Pearl team are literally exactly the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, cole256 said:

That's a good point. JH has been smart using the size advantage in his favor some. 

Also this is where size will help at the guard position. Bigger guards can make up with their length in a zone, also most times in basketball when you see a team with an undersized guard you'll see they'll make up for it with another wing player. Probably most notably you can look at golden st. 

True. With our roster looking back towards 100%, we may be able to give a lot more of those looks that make up for JHs size.

A Harper, Heron, Purifoy, Spencer, Wiley won't get pushed around by many teams. Of course I do know that isn't the kind of lineup Coach Pearl likes to run (especially with Spencer at the 4) but a couple of things I've noticed from posts on here and watching our games are that CBPs bread and butter is the zone trap but we have seen (at utk) he's not afraid to switch it up if talent is too heavily favored towards another style. we have definitely been pressing a lot less lately too. Whether that is a fatigue thing, Wiley not understanding yet and suspensions or what I have no idea but there is a chance that it has something to do with CBP leaning more toward a traditional 1-5 lineup and seeing what our guys can do without their ability to press. 

i don't know, to me that lineup seems to good to not give it more tries. whether it's a good or bad idea, I'm sure CBP is way ahead of me on that idea ha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, plainstiger94 said:

Heron has already been assigned to guard the 2 on multiple occasions this year. And the rebounding responsibilities of the 2 and 3 on a Bruce Pearl team are literally exactly the same.

Very few teams send more than 3 players to the glass when on offense. The 1 and the 2 generally have transition defense responsibilities that begin as a shoot goes up. So moving Heron to the 2 will take him out of offensive rebounding opportunities by assignment, much of the time. On defense, the rebounding also changes as Heron will no longer have a box out responsibility most of the time, as his man will not be crashing the glass as often. Depending on the opponent, and how similar their 2 and 3 man are, he also may be drawn farther from the primary rebounding areas. So while many parts of the position are similar and overlap, there are nuances to each spot. Not to mention that each will be guarding and being guarded by a different type of player that what they have seen to this point in their college career. 

My point is simply that our first year players (Smith, Purifoy, Heron, Harper, Johnson, and WIley) haven't fully learned their current spots, and certainly haven't developed chemistry there. Our veterans (sophomores Brown and Spencer) are coming back from suspension with a new player added into the fold. Moving one to a new position, with all the other disruptions going on, is asking a lot of a very young and inexperienced team.

I can understand why many view the change of positions an easy transition, but there's more to it than meets the eye.  I can also see the benefits to having Spencer at the 4 alongside Wiley, and I am sure we will see it at times, but am just pointing out that putting more size on the court doesn't instantly solve some of the issues we've been facing in the defense and rebounding areas. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, boomstick said:

Just curious, did you play college basketball or have some experience coaching at this level? It's a genuine question and not meant to be a slight at all. You just seem really confident that those position changes would be easy, and it just doesn't look that easy or simple from what I know about the game. 

Yes. I've played basketball my entire life. I've had a cousin play for nc state. Another play for Tennessee right now. I've played up to juco. Best friend played for Oregon and Wichita st and played in the final four. I was a crusher at Auburn. I've learned positions for Auburn's men and women team. I was offered a walk on position at Auburn. I was offered a position on coach Cianpi's coaching staff. I've been offered to be on a few high school coaching staffs. I've been offered to be on a prominent AAU team here in Alabama coaching staff.

Started playing against grown men when I was ten. Started sneaking in and playing against UNA players when I was 12. I've played against Jamal Crawford, and Terrance Ross. I've played against more Auburn players that I can count. I've played against more Auburn football players that I can count. 

Lived, slept, breathed basketball. NOTHING I say on here isn't something that I haven't personally experienced as well. 

Not saying any position changes aren't easy but from 2 to 3 isn't hard at all, and from 4 to 5 isn't hard at all

Edited by cole256
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, cole256 said:

Yes. I've played basketball my entire life. I've had a cousin play for nc state. Another play for Tennessee right now. I've played up to juco. Best friend played for Oregon and Wichita st and played in the final four. I was a crusher at Auburn. I've learned positions for Auburn's men and women team. I was offered a walk on position at Auburn. I was offered a position on coach Cianpi's coaching staff. I've been offered to be on a few high school coaching staffs. I've been offered to be on a prominent AAU team here in Alabama coaching staff.

Started playing against grown men when I was ten. Started sneaking in and playing against UNA players when I was 12. I've played against Jamal Crawford, and Terrance Ross. I've played against more Auburn players that I can count. I've played against more Auburn football players that I can count. 

Lived, slept, breathed basketball. NOTHING I say on here isn't something that I haven't personally experienced as well. 

Not saying any position changes aren't easy but from 2 to 3 isn't hard at all, and from 4 to 5 isn't hard at all

That's awesome. Now I know I'm not ridiculous in my thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JwgreDeux said:

I'm not sure where to start on this, they are similar on the offensive end but not at all on the defensive end. The big differences will be in the help defense assignments and the defensive rebounding assignments, both areas where we struggle. Adding size alone doesn't help these struggles, as many of our current struggles are missed assignments. A massive restructure like this will cause growing pains, and for a team with so many moving parts already, I think now is a bad time to do this. 

Wiley is learning new things. He has had like 5 practices to learn our schemes on O and D. My point was he doesn't know his job yet, and making the changes suggested would mean 4 of the 5 guys on the floor would still be learning the roles. Let's not forget that we don't have great chemistry at the spots they have been playing yet.

I don't disagree there are some pros to the changes, but I think the cons out weigh them right now. Just an opinion.  

My preview down playing him was about his immediate impact, on day 1. Not his overall impact moving forward. As we have seen, we haven't suddenly become a dominate team. And yes, DP's 15 rebounds were about individual effort, not Wiley occupying multiple guys, as UConn wasn't putting a double box on Wiley. 

Everyone likely knows every spot in a flex offense as it is about principles, so no matter where you end up on the floor you should know what to do, but the roles are different on set plays, in-bounds plays, offensive rebounding assignments, etc...and they are NOT interchangeable on the defensive end, 2 and 3 are the most similar, but they have different help assignments and rebounding assignments. Heron is our best rebounder, moving him to the 2 will take him out of more rebounding opportunities. 

Well for one you are approaching it wrong, I'm trying to tell YOU about this not vice versa so as far as where to start this, you should start by listening. 

Help defense isn't assignment based it's a philosophy. It's knowing what to do regardless of any position you play and that just translates to every position. Defense is more instinct and attitude than anything. Defense is the easiest thing to learn about basketball, it's nothing like defense with football. The only specific difference in spots and position if you were playing any type of match up zone and that would still pretty simple after a week or two. A good defensive player off ANY team would be a good defensive player on any other team. 

What differences do you think comes from a change from 2 to 3? The only difference is a 3 is liable to face bigger and stronger players and will need to be able to play post defense as well.

Now going from 4 to 3 could be challenging because playing in the post is tricky and gambling could get you killed. Body positioning is very important. And being disciplined on going for shots and fakes are important. Also because you're a clean up man. How good you are rebounding and shot blocking affects how aggressive EVERYBODY else could play. 

You have different match ups in man, but WHOEVER YOU PLAY THE REACTION IS THE SAME. When a ball is in the air you don't look for a particular face to box out, you position yourself and you make contact to whoever is around. Rebounding isn't hard, it's being tough and its effort. Then you have to have physical qualities as well. Athleticism and size or whatnot. 

As far as Wiley you're right, he's learning on the go but clearly it's better for the team that he does so and he's not burden with a position switch right now. He's playing what he's playing. 

There wouldn't be ANY difference in Herron moving. Line I said it would be hardest on Purifoy who already knows the system on both positions. We're not any good on defense anyway so what chemistry would we really be breaking? 

Theoretically Wiley being inserted to the team would offer up chemistry mishaps but we damn sure did it. 

Playing a zone defense just the same, depending on where you are and the spot you're at determines where you be on the floor but things like having good positioning, good eyes, and everybody talking and communicating is the same all over the floor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Charhair said:

Just so I didn't quote your last post but is our offense always flex outside of transition and iso?

i also liked your point about help defense. That's an attribute of good teams that goes unnoticed by most, kind of like an oline in defense. If it's not there you freak out but when it's working it's one of the most important parts of team. But why would that be bad in terms of moving the lineup around? Just that Spencer would be having to help on players to quick for him/don't fit his style of d? Or just the learning curve? (Same going for DP and anyone else). 

In the event we don't get a shot in transition or from our secondary break, our base offense is modeled around flex principles. In some games we use certain cuts and screens more due to the defense being played by the other team. We certainly have some iso offense and some set plays mixed in. 

Moving the lineup around and putting guys in new spots will cause them to have to think more, Spencer hasn't played the 4 in his entire time at Auburn, and hasn't had to guard much outside of the paint. Putting him on a 4 that steps out, or putting him in spots where he is asked to switch on to a 3 or a 2 off a ball screen is asking him to do things he hasn't had to do. He is athletic and mobile for a 5, but not if guarding a 3 on the perimeter in an iso off a switch. Spencer's experience in playing help defense to this point is to come off of his man and try and block a shot as they are coming to the basket. Helping from the 4 spot is different, as Wiley will be coming to block the shot and Spencer will be asked to slide down and catch Wiley's man, and to go after fewer blocks, that's against his nature. He can learn it, but you can't just put him at the 4 and expect him to play it as well as he does the 5 overnight. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, JwgreDeux said:

Very few teams send more than 3 players to the glass when on offense. The 1 and the 2 generally have transition defense responsibilities that begin as a shoot goes up. So moving Heron to the 2 will take him out of offensive rebounding opportunities by assignment, much of the time. On defense, the rebounding also changes as Heron will no longer have a box out responsibility most of the time, as his man will not be crashing the glass as often. Depending on the opponent, and how similar their 2 and 3 man are, he also may be drawn farther from the primary rebounding areas. So while many parts of the position are similar and overlap, there are nuances to each spot. Not to mention that each will be guarding and being guarded by a different type of player that what they have seen to this point in their college career. 

My point is simply that our first year players (Smith, Purifoy, Heron, Harper, Johnson, and WIley) haven't fully learned their current spots, and certainly haven't developed chemistry there. Our veterans (sophomores Brown and Spencer) are coming back from suspension with a new player added into the fold. Moving one to a new position, with all the other disruptions going on, is asking a lot of a very young and inexperienced team.

I can understand why many view the change of positions an easy transition, but there's more to it than meets the eye.  I can also see the benefits to having Spencer at the 4 alongside Wiley, and I am sure we will see it at times, but am just pointing out that putting more size on the court doesn't instantly solve some of the issues we've been facing in the defense and rebounding areas. 

Putting size out don't solve it but it instantly makes us better against it. You said DP's rebounding was effort, and that it was and he also paid a price for that too on the offensive end....But any way having size is the same concept as having big d linemen to free up the linebackers off blocks, having size free up guys and give them a better shot at winning match ups. 

Also transition defense is whoever is closest to mid court when a shout goes up gets back. You could be guarding a point guard and if he had a size match up they could be using him to post you, when that shot goes up you're not the guy back trying to play transition....you're rebounding. Once again it's about where you at when the shot goes up, not you have this guy or you play this position so you always run back....that's not how it works

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, JwgreDeux said:

In the event we don't get a shot in transition or from our secondary break, our base offense is modeled around flex principles. In some games we use certain cuts and screens more due to the defense being played by the other team. We certainly have some iso offense and some set plays mixed in. 

Moving the lineup around and putting guys in new spots will cause them to have to think more, Spencer hasn't played the 4 in his entire time at Auburn, and hasn't had to guard much outside of the paint. Putting him on a 4 that steps out, or putting him in spots where he is asked to switch on to a 3 or a 2 off a ball screen is asking him to do things he hasn't had to do. He is athletic and mobile for a 5, but not if guarding a 3 on the perimeter in an iso off a switch. Spencer's experience in playing help defense to this point is to come off of his man and try and block a shot as they are coming to the basket. Helping from the 4 spot is different, as Wiley will be coming to block the shot and Spencer will be asked to slide down and catch Wiley's man, and to go after fewer blocks, that's against his nature. He can learn it, but you can't just put him at the 4 and expect him to play it as well as he does the 5 overnight. 

Spencer was recruited to play 4 literally everywhere he was offered. He is more athletic than most guys at the 4. Purifoy had NEVER not in high school or college played where he's at now, he doesn't really offer you anything defensively that Spencer can't do. And a four is more of a help side than a 5 usually. 

And we're speaking very very basic lingo here. This is talking about playing traditional players doing traditional things and playing traditional man. There are different things teams can do defensively such as match up zones to protect weaknesses of players. But Spencer wouldn't be a weakness actually. But I guess we'll see what ends up happening. Really the only way we don't do this is if we don't have the depth to do this. It wouldn't make sense any other way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, cole256 said:

Well for one you are approaching it wrong, I'm trying to tell YOU about this not vice versa so as far as where to start this, you should start by listening. 

Help defense isn't assignment based it's a philosophy. It's knowing what to do regardless of any position you play and that just translates to every position. Defense is more instinct and attitude than anything. Defense is the easiest thing to learn about basketball, it's nothing like defense with football. The only specific difference in spots and position if you were playing any type of match up zone and that would still pretty simple after a week or two. A good defensive player off ANY team would be a good defensive player on any other team. 

What differences do you think comes from a change from 2 to 3? The only difference is a 3 is liable to face bigger and stronger players and will need to be able to play post defense as well.

Now going from 4 to 3 could be challenging because playing in the post is tricky and gambling could get you killed. Body positioning is very important. And being disciplined on going for shots and fakes are important. Also because you're a clean up man. How good you are rebounding and shot blocking affects how aggressive EVERYBODY else could play. 

You have different match ups in man, but WHOEVER YOU PLAY THE REACTION IS THE SAME. When a ball is in the air you don't look for a particular face to box out, you position yourself and you make contact to whoever is around. Rebounding isn't hard, it's being tough and its effort. Then you have to have physical qualities as well. Athleticism and size or whatnot. 

As far as Wiley you're right, he's learning on the go but clearly it's better for the team that he does so and he's not burden with a position switch right now. He's playing what he's playing. 

There wouldn't be ANY difference in Herron moving. Line I said it would be hardest on Purifoy who already knows the system on both positions. We're not any good on defense anyway so what chemistry would we really be breaking? 

Theoretically Wiley being inserted to the team would offer up chemistry mishaps but we damn sure did it. 

Playing a zone defense just the same, depending on where you are and the spot you're at determines where you be on the floor but things like having good positioning, good eyes, and everybody talking and communicating is the same all over the floor

I hear many of the points you make, and enjoy the discussion. Wasn't being disrespectful, but as you can see by the length of our respective posts, we are covering a lot in this thread, and I was simply thing out loud as to what I would say first. 

This may be semantics, but help defense is assignment based, knowing if you are help side and where your assignment is to help, but I'll agree that being a good help defense is a philosophy, but so is rebounding, which also has assignments. To your point about instincts. Spencer's instinct is to block shots. Putting him along side Wiley, who also blocks shots and asking Spencer not to go for the block, but to slide down to cover the man Wiley left is against who he is.

The change for Heron is he will be guarded by quicker defenders, and that will make his penetration game more difficult. He has be very effective penetrating to this point, and it may make him more of a jump shooter, which may not be a bad thing as he does shoot the ball well. But a change none the less.

While things aren't great on defense to think we couldn't be worse would be a mistake.  

We did survive the challenge of adding Wiley, one last second win over Mercer, and an overtime win vs UConn. We have had so many self inflicted challenges to this point, why make another one with a sudden change of positions? Getting WIley on the floor was obviously worth the risk, the position shakeup, to me doesn't present the same obvious benefits. Maybe, CBP has been planning for this moment all summer and everyone is cross trained for this very situation. We know he was planning on Wiley coming in, but not on the suspensions. It will be interesting to see what he does as Spencer and Brown work their way back. Playing Waddell as the back up 4 is not a viable long term solution, that is for sure. My hat's off to him for filling in and providing unquestioned effort, but he doesn't have the talent to hold that spot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JwgreDeux said:

I hear many of the points you make, and enjoy the discussion. Wasn't being disrespectful, but as you can see by the length of our respective posts, we are covering a lot in this thread, and I was simply thing out loud as to what I would say first. 

This may be semantics, but help defense is assignment based, knowing if you are help side and where your assignment is to help, but I'll agree that being a good help defense is a philosophy, but so is rebounding, which also has assignments. To your point about instincts. Spencer's instinct is to block shots. Putting him along side Wiley, who also blocks shots and asking Spencer not to go for the block, but to slide down to cover the man Wiley left is against who he is.

The change for Heron is he will be guarded by quicker defenders, and that will make his penetration game more difficult. He has be very effective penetrating to this point, and it may make him more of a jump shooter, which may not be a bad thing as he does shoot the ball well. But a change none the less.

While things aren't great on defense to think we couldn't be worse would be a mistake.  

We did survive the challenge of adding Wiley, one last second win over Mercer, and an overtime win vs UConn. We have had so many self inflicted challenges to this point, why make another one with a sudden change of positions? Getting WIley on the floor was obviously worth the risk, the position shakeup, to me doesn't present the same obvious benefits. Maybe, CBP has been planning for this moment all summer and everyone is cross trained for this very situation. We know he was planning on Wiley coming in, but not on the suspensions. It will be interesting to see what he does as Spencer and Brown work their way back. Playing Waddell as the back up 4 is not a viable long term solution, that is for sure. My hat's off to him for filling in and providing unquestioned effort, but he doesn't have the talent to hold that spot. 

I mean it's assignment to a point but it really depends on what side of the floor a guy attacks from more than anything, also if the guy you're guarding is a threat to score or not. So those particular variables can change in an instant so being help side is more about communication and instinct more than anything, but you are right there are structures to it. It's not everybody running with their head cut off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, cole256 said:

Putting size out don't solve it but it instantly makes us better against it. You said DP's rebounding was effort, and that it was and he also paid a price for that too on the offensive end....But any way having size is the same concept as having big d linemen to free up the linebackers off blocks, having size free up guys and give them a better shot at winning match ups. 

Also transition defense is whoever is closest to mid court when a shout goes up gets back. You could be guarding a point guard and if he had a size match up they could be using him to post you, when that shot goes up you're not the guy back trying to play transition....you're rebounding. Once again it's about where you at when the shot goes up, not you have this guy or you play this position so you always run back....that's not how it works

Size is good, I agree. 

Generally speaking your statement on transition defense I agree with as well, but Harper is never going to the offensive glass, unless a long rebound bounces right to him. Whoever is playing 2 is not going to stay in and rebound either unless he is literally caught under the basket, otherwise he too will get out of there to get back on defense. You act as if every position on the floor is interchangeable in rebounding and transition defense assignments, and the simply are not. I am confident you know what you are talking about and have played the game based on some of your insights, but they way you describe certain things I think will mislead the more casual basketball fans on here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0