|
Post by WCHC Sports on Jan 5, 2018 12:52:09 GMT -5
I agree with all of these points, but this is what I am getting at. This is sort of a cyclical conversation and I am using it to hone in on the types of players "we" get versus the types of players "they" get. If opposing D1 schools have players that are quick enough, skilled enough, disciplined enough, etc., to play man-to-man defense, why is that not the case for HC?
RW's match up zone worked, but he is gone and so are those players. Is that the identify of HC to get lesser tier players that simply can't cut the mustard? I don't think our recruits are inherently biased to not having the skills (cue ihoop PL protest in 3...2...1...)
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Jan 5, 2018 13:00:51 GMT -5
I posted this already, but coaches play the offense and defense they believe will help them win. Obviously, CBC believes that the 1-3-1 and matchup are those defenses, as the PO is that offense. He has played these with Princeton and Northwestern recruits as well. He is not a man to man coach.
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on Jan 5, 2018 13:05:15 GMT -5
If a swordsman got into a pistol duel, how long should he keep swinging the thing until he's riddled with bullets?
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Jan 5, 2018 13:42:49 GMT -5
If a swordsman got into a pistol duel, how long should he keep swinging the thing until he's riddled with bullets? The obvious exception to the rule being James Coburn in the Magnificent Seven
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Jan 5, 2018 14:01:05 GMT -5
Willard's 2-3 match-up employed a lot of man-to-man principles. Each of the five defenders are always responsible for an individual offensive player, applying man-to-man defensive principles, the key difference is that -- obviously -- a defender is not guarding against the same offensive player for the entire defensive set.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Jan 5, 2018 14:06:06 GMT -5
The other difference was that on almost all low post entries, there would be a double team from one of the other 4 defenders, exactly which one would depend on the opponent. The other 3 defenders would rotate, again exactly to whom depended upon the opponent. A very complex defense that I have not seen any other coach, even Pitino, succeed at implementing to the degree Ralph did. for a reference, see Calhoun, Jim
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Jan 5, 2018 14:16:36 GMT -5
I agree with all of these points, but this is what I am getting at. This is sort of a cyclical conversation and I am using it to hone in on the types of players "we" get versus the types of players "they" get. If opposing D1 schools have players that are quick enough, skilled enough, disciplined enough, etc., to play man-to-man defense, why is that not the case for HC? RW's match up zone worked, but he is gone and so are those players. Is that the identify of HC to get lesser tier players that simply can't cut the mustard? I don't think our recruits are inherently biased to not having the skills (cue ihoop PL protest in 3...2...1...) It's not an athleticism as much as it's a coaching, scouting, and preparation issue. High-major teams can just roll out a M2M without that additional preparation and rely on their athleticism to take over. We are obviously never going to be able to have that level of athleticism, but could make up for it if the defense is taught correctly and the players are prepared. Never going to happen with the current staff.
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Jan 5, 2018 14:23:06 GMT -5
The other difference was that on almost all low post entries, there would be a double team from one of the other 4 defenders, exactly which one would depend on the opponent. The other 3 defenders would rotate, again exactly to whom depended upon the opponent. A very complex defense that I have not seen any other coach, even Pitino, succeed at implementing to the degree Ralph did. for a reference, see Calhoun, Jim RW's defense certainly had a level of complexity that would be difficult for someone to fully implement without experience in his defense, but the defense was also fueled by defensive and rebounding fundamentals that could be applied to any defense. Fundamentals and details are either (a) not being coached at HC today or (b) not being coached effectively enough to stick with the players. For just one example, it is pure insanity to see how many times we are both late on a perimeter closeout and then proceed to fly past a shot fake leaving the offensive player to do whatever he wants against an exposed defense. Another example, is a total lack of communication on the floor.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Jan 5, 2018 19:44:20 GMT -5
Very insightful: 6 for 10 from three point line tonight. Green light all season--no need to inquire again
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Jan 5, 2018 19:55:45 GMT -5
Nice work by the defense in staging that come-back in the second half. Getting a man to the free throw line with a chance to cut it to one point late in the half. Not to be.
This group is getting it together...the patience looks as though it will eventually bear fruit.
Now to get a win vs Loyola at home on Monday.
|
|
|
Post by Crosser on Jan 5, 2018 21:15:47 GMT -5
If a swordsman got into a pistol duel, how long should he keep swinging the thing until he's riddled with bullets? The obvious exception to the rule being James Coburn in the Magnificent Seven One of the greatest movie scenes in cinematic history!
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Jan 5, 2018 21:43:24 GMT -5
You mean this?
|
|
|
Post by Crosser on Jan 5, 2018 22:56:17 GMT -5
That's only the 2nd half of the scene. Gotta' have the whole scene!
|
|
|
Post by HC92 on Jan 6, 2018 17:37:43 GMT -5
True. The coaching ain’t exactly cutting edge out here in the sticks. Obviouisly (Sorry. Could not resist that fastball down the middle) Thought of you when the opposing coach in my 8th grader’s game broke out the box and one to open the second half this morning and stuck with it for the rest of the game.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Jan 6, 2018 17:43:57 GMT -5
Did it work ?
|
|
|
Post by HC92 on Jan 6, 2018 19:41:10 GMT -5
If the plan was to foul out the one defender, yes. If the plan was to win the game or stop the scorer, no.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Jan 6, 2018 19:43:32 GMT -5
What a genius offensive mind ! was your offspring the offensive player defended by the one ?
|
|
|
Post by HC92 on Jan 6, 2018 19:45:31 GMT -5
What a genius offensive mind ! You’ll love my new YouTube video entitled “How to Beat the Box and 1 in the Sticks”.
|
|
|
Post by HC92 on Jan 6, 2018 19:52:31 GMT -5
What a genius offensive mind ! was your offspring the offensive player defended by the one ? Yes, which is what made it an even worse strategy than usual.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Jan 6, 2018 19:53:39 GMT -5
What a genius offensive mind ! You’ll love my new YouTube video entitled “How to Beat the Box and 1 in the Sticks”. Can’t find it is it by fee to the coach only ?
|
|