I am admittedly not a basketball strategist. Highest level I coached was 8th grade. Having said this, there is a lot of our strategy that I simply don't understand. But I truely don't understand why we rarely follow our shots. Especially the 3pt shots. And we love to shoot the 3's. Yes, I guess it's great to almost always have 4 guys back on defense. However, wouldn't it be a pleasant change to occassionally get a long offensive rebound. Just sayin'
Mainly transition based….the benefits of crashing do not out way the negatives it would create. Say you crash 10 times…..how many offensive rebounds would you get vs how many times you are out of position allowing easy transition buckets.
Couldn't disagree more. Some of our guys should absolutely be crashing the O boards and following their shot but not the whole team. A couple players should be dropping back to stop fast breaks, but good offensive rebounding teams have so many advantages. So often when a player misses a shot, it bounces straight back - is he's following his shot, he gets that rebound.
The extent to which you crash the O boards also depends on the opponent. It's not always a great idea to go overboard on it.
If you saw the terrific Illinois-Northwestern game last night - Boo Buie's 29 pts wins it in OT while Domask missed a 12 footer in the lane to win it (but he had 22 points) - you saw an Illinois team that is very good at offensive rebounds (21 last night) and is ranked #10 in the country.
Our coaching staff seems to think rebounds are an after thought.
I am not saying don’t crash the boards at all….I am only talking about three point shots. Most misses on three point shots are far away from the rim allowing for transition opportunities.
The top offensive rebounding team in the Valley is Valpo. ISU blue and Drake are also bad offensive rebounding teams.
InSU is 2nd in rebounding margin, Drake is 3rd, Valpo is last in rebounding margin.
We are 6th.
Drake killed us on the boards. Only had 5 O. rbs but they shot 56% so there weren't many to be had. 😀
I am admittedly not a basketball strategist. Highest level I coached was 8th grade. Having said this, there is a lot of our strategy that I simply don't understand. But I truely don't understand why we rarely follow our shots. Especially the 3pt shots. And we love to shoot the 3's. Yes, I guess it's great to almost always have 4 guys back on defense. However, wouldn't it be a pleasant change to occassionally get a long offensive rebound. Just sayin'
Mainly transition based….the benefits of crashing do not out way the negatives it would create. Say you crash 10 times…..how many offensive rebounds would you get vs how many times you are out of position allowing easy transition buckets.
Couldn't disagree more. Some of our guys should absolutely be crashing the O boards and following their shot but not the whole team. A couple players should be dropping back to stop fast breaks, but good offensive rebounding teams have so many advantages. So often when a player misses a shot, it bounces straight back - is he's following his shot, he gets that rebound.
The extent to which you crash the O boards also depends on the opponent. It's not always a great idea to go overboard on it.
If you saw the terrific Illinois-Northwestern game last night - Boo Buie's 29 pts wins it in OT while Domask missed a 12 footer in the lane to win it (but he had 22 points) - you saw an Illinois team that is very good at offensive rebounds (21 last night) and is ranked #10 in the country.
Our coaching staff seems to think rebounds are an after thought.
I am not saying don’t crash the boards at all….I am only talking about three point shots. Most misses on three point shots are far away from the rim allowing for transition opportunities.
The top offensive rebounding team in the Valley is Valpo. ISU blue and Drake are also bad offensive rebounding teams.
InSU is 2nd in rebounding margin, Drake is 3rd, Valpo is last in rebounding margin.
We are 6th.
Drake killed us on the boards. Only had 5 O. rbs but they shot 56% so there weren't many to be had. 😀
[/quote
The topic at hand was crashing offensive boards on long shots. Then switched to other teams being better at offensive rebounding. I’ll say again…..no we don’t need to go all gung-ho on crashing long shots.
So Ebube is incapable of guarding smaller, quicker guys. Those smaller, quicker guys are the majority of MVC inside players, with the exceptions of Brodie and Dia.
So why was he recruited?
Isn't it also true that those guys have a hard time guarding Scottie? Guess that doesn't matter. I'm all for "defense first," mind you; I'm NOT OK with "defense only."
(I have no idea why that first paragraph is showing up as a quote!)
(Inflammatory political snark)
Apparently the coaching staff is limited to knowledge of man to man defense. Thus creating a matchup problem for our own players far too often. Unable to adapt, hence the record for the last five yearsSo Ebube is incapable of guarding smaller, quicker guys. Those smaller, quicker guys are the majority of MVC inside players, with the exceptions of Brodie and Dia.
So why was he recruited?
Isn't it also true that those guys have a hard time guarding Scottie? Guess that doesn't matter. I'm all for "defense first," mind you; I'm NOT OK with "defense only."
(I have no idea why that first paragraph is showing up as a quote!)
Apparently the coaching staff is limited to knowledge of man to man defense. Thus creating a matchup problem for our own players far too often. Unable to adapt, hence the record for the last five yearsSo Ebube is incapable of guarding smaller, quicker guys. Those smaller, quicker guys are the majority of MVC inside players, with the exceptions of Brodie and Dia.
So why was he recruited?
Isn't it also true that those guys have a hard time guarding Scottie? Guess that doesn't matter. I'm all for "defense first," mind you; I'm NOT OK with "defense only."
(I have no idea why that first paragraph is showing up as a quote!)
Our strength has been defense….And now that is a complaint.We lead the league in defensive points per game allowed. I get this is a message board and people have differences in opinions. But complaining that we don’t switch from man to a zone is kinda crazy.-
It is easy to sit back and 2nd guess after a game or the season about game decisions or personnel decisions and I get that but until we get the job of head coach i don't think we understand the complexity of game planning recruiting illness injuries and so on during the season every game every season is different and sometimes players for some reason just don't work out for whatever reason and sometimes when a team is struggling like the Dawgs did against Valpo a staff just throws out combinations hoping something wakes someone up or motivates the team to get more involved but as for me I am hopeful this team continues to improve and get more consistent and when that happens I believe they will be a tough out
Just throwing it out there. You can go zone on a make and man on a miss. It’s not absolute but allows the big guys to play. Drake and Indiana state defense was not a strength and we got shredded. It’s merely an idea cause yeah it is a message board and I’m drinking outside watching the game, not coaching etc…
Just throwing it out there. You can go zone on a make and man on a miss. It’s not absolute but allows the big guys to play. Drake and Indiana state defense was not a strength and we got shredded. It’s merely an idea cause yeah it is a message board and I’m drinking outside watching the game, not coaching etc…
Just a question….do you know what a zone is not good against? Maybe 3 point shooting. ISU blue is first in 3 point shooting. Throw it out there all you want but it isn’t a good take.
Bryan Mullins coach of the year!!
do you know what a matchup zone is? Or do you think I’m saying 3-2 jr high? I can point to countless collegiate games that a zone has shut down three point shooting. I’m not going to throw out references of prior coaches including for siu that I’ve learned from but yeah. I know dropping back in a he high 3-2 zone isn’t gonna work.Just throwing it out there. You can go zone on a make and man on a miss. It’s not absolute but allows the big guys to play. Drake and Indiana state defense was not a strength and we got shredded. It’s merely an idea cause yeah it is a message board and I’m drinking outside watching the game, not coaching etc…
Just a question….do you know what a zone is not good against? Maybe 3 point shooting. ISU blue is first in 3 point shooting. Throw it out there all you want but it isn’t a good take.
If you think a matchup zone doesn’t work fine. I don’t care. My old coach in the hall of fame disagrees. As do I. Quite frankly so does Mike Kryzieski or whatever cause he has a letter congratulating him too. Pretty easy to throw people on a court and say play man. A good team can change defenses and adapt and actually is knowledgeable. Funny you think a “zone” gives free range. Talk smack on it all you want. Doesn’t change the fact
Whatever. I can watch teams in Florida play man all day. Easy pick ens. Literally. Like I said just watch the end of the auburn game when they finally admitted they can’t play man. That’s why they lost. Against app st. I don’t expect some folks to have the knowledge and discipline to be able to change a defense and adapt throughout the course of a game. They are always on the losing side. Fact there is a shot clock makes it more reasonable
Once again I’m talking about setting up on makes or misses. Well aware of how it works. Looks like Scotty woulda had 20 against valpo but can’t get off the bench because “it stretches the defense”. Valpo. Now if you’ll excuse me I’m going on an overnight drunk to kill the shark that ate my friend.
Once again I’m talking about setting up on makes or misses. Well aware of how it works. Looks like Scotty woulda had 20 against valpo but can’t get off the bench because “it stretches the defense”. Valpo. Now if you’ll excuse me I’m going on an overnight drunk to kill the shark that ate my friend.
I’m just sitting here debating on should I correct this or not. Just throw that match up zone out there….don’t worry about it being one of the most difficult defenses to teach.
Whatever. I can watch teams in Florida play man all day. Easy pick ens. Literally. Like I said just watch the end of the auburn game when they finally admitted they can’t play man. That’s why they lost. Against app st. I don’t expect some folks to have the knowledge and discipline to be able to change a defense and adapt throughout the course of a game. They are always on the losing side. Fact there is a shot clock makes it more reasonable
Teams play zone….not arguing that. Has Bryan Mullins ever been involved on a team that has played zone? If you think in D1 basketball just say “Hey….today we are going to go match up zone.” Zone defenses are a philosophy. Most teams that play zone have recruited players for that zone concept. Are you talking about your jr high coach, high school coach or college coach? Might be a slight difference in coaching a zone concept at a lower level. There are some college coaches that prefer a zone….I’d say Mullins has done a pretty good job of running a man to man. If we can’t compete with the top of the valley with our man to man we need to be talking about something entirely different than what defense we should be running.
