Seven Point Fix: Free Your Mind
-
This has been another ripping good read.
It distills to:
a) keep playing m2m with very rare junk zones, because it has gotten us 80% winning, 10 league titles, and a ring;
b) play some m2m with a lot more aggressives zones, because some teams that have won more rings have done tis;
c) no one is really saying go the Full Boeheim and zone all the time with some very rare m2m.
Folks are overlooking a real defensive innovation of this past season that may change the game.
It involves switching between two zones, or switching between zone and m2m during a single possession. Let’s call this “Morphing Defense” to avoid the confusion with switching m2m defense.I never saw any offense handle morphing defense well. Its tricky to defend this way, but to me it is the way to go on defense under the new rules. Here is why.
Under the new rules, offense is now more than ever a game of shoot the trey, drive the lane for high percentage 2 and a FT, or alley-oop for the 100% two.
Morphing defense nearly ends the alley-lop, because you cannot tell when they are going to morph on you wreck the timed play that requires offenders to know where the defenders are going to be to time the pass and the jump.
Morphing defense may be even harder on driving the lane, because the driver no longer knows when the lane he is looking at is going to morph out of existence.
The morphing defense also is problematic for trifectation, because it confuses curl screens and ball screens to get open looks for treys. And these are the two most popular ways other than kick outs to get open trey looks. Morphing defense also makes the kick out shooter at least uneasy whether the defensive recovery will be m2m or not.
I am so bullish on morphing defenses that I want to see morphing defenses used end to end. I want every defensive possession (note: I introduce the notion of a defensive possession here to convey the idea that we possess the MOFOs on defense, not just the ball on offense) to start in a 1-1-1-2 alignment before the ball is about to be inbounded. As the ball is inbounded sometimes maintains 1-1-1-2, sometimes morphs into 1-2-1-1, other times into 2-2-1, other times m2m. Once half court is reached it falls into a m2m that morphs into a zone, or vice versa. Some times it morphs 5 seconds,sometimes it morphs every 10 seconds, sometimes just once.
The goal is for the offense to have make one or two defensive reads in full court, then one or two defensive reads in half court. I am pretty convinced that no D1 offense can impose its offensive game on that much defensive morphing. The offense is outside its comfort zone the entire 40 minutes of play. The pressing does not need to be balls to the wall all of the time. Sometimes high pressure, sometimes not. The game is to disrupt with misrecognition and spike the TOs and the “discomfort” level.
Morphing defense is THE END of offensive players getting in zones. It is the end of OAD offenses ever winning the disruption stat unless they play morphing defense, too.
I’m happy with Self’s system as it is.
If I were UConn’s fans I would be happy with what Calhoun and Kevin Ollie Ball.
If I were a UK fan, I would be happy with CalBall.
If I were a Duke fan, I would be happy with ConsonantBall.
But all of these offenses are going to get wrecked by morphing defense.
The bizarre elegance of morphing defense is that even its breakdowns ensure recognition problems for every kind of offense being run.
The calculus of morphing defense goes something like this. They can’t effectively attack what they cannot read effectively. Defense always has the edge in morphing.
Frankly, I am amazed Self has not gone to this long before. His junk 3-2 is a very limited form of morphing defense itself.
I can usually come up with a counter for any defense, but morphing defense is an absolute bitch to counter.
There will be one.
But we could win a lot of games before it is figured out.
-
@HighEliteMajor HEM, I think your overall premise is very well put, and its definitely something deserving serious consideration by Self (we hope). Even if just from a variability standpoint, making Self’s teams more unpredictable, and harder to scout, harder to prepare for. I really like that your proposals would accomplish alot of that.
I DO think that we could spend maybe 20-30% of our time incorporating other defensive strategies…and maybe now with a core group of experienced players (who’ve tasted defeat), we may have a bit more practice time to incorporate more advanced tactics, and broaden our repertoire. And have the player-motivation to allow focused learning…
And we can differ in the severity of the “problem”, but your quote “if our personnel are so incompetent at m2m that to have a chance to win a national championship in a particular season…” touches on perhaps THE main problem in the season: defense. Would you consider it mutually exclusive for a ball club to be soo incompetent in an area, to be a ‘legit’ title contender in that same season? It seems to have a mutually exclusive feel to it…Also, we were pretty incompetent at our zone-busting offense. What a double fork in us, is what I say.
The other white elephant at the table in our discussion here about Self’s stubborness or flexibility…is that decent coaches, with BETTER ball clubs than Embiid-less KU also flamed out and got beat–Billy Donovan’s FL got beat and didnt even score 55pts (shots didnt fall?), . Didnt even make the Final Four. I find it almost unfair to blast Self for what he did with such a green team, when well-known coaches with more experienced, D-playing squads ALSO DID NOT MAKE THE FINAL 4. One could say that Calipari might be the most ‘practiced’ at getting the most out of freshmen, young talent…but that is only a partially oranges-oranges comparison, as his frosh are the most ready to play from Day 1 compared to anybody elses frosh. And one could counterpoint that Self’s 3 uberfrosh (Wiggy, Selden, Biid) were his best players. But then you could countercounterpoint that the fact Ellis and Tharpe, both returning players were not up to par on both ends of the court, is a sign of bad coaching, right?
Arizona doesnt make the Final 4 with a loaded squad that plays D. Michigan doesnt make it. Louisville doesnt make it. Does the fact that it was KY knocking them out bring up its own discussion? MichiganState, a tough veteran, upperclassmen team, with everybody healthy…doesnt make the Final 4. Syracuse…no.1 ranked for most of the season, doesnt make the Final 4. I’m still not sure how to stratify WSU’s perfect season with that S.o.Sched asterisk…They were a competent team…Villanova got beat, looking overmatched in their final game. Man, we looked overmatched against Stanford.
Finally, the point about the Stanford game and finding different ways to get teammates involved and Self’s limited capabiltiy team getting scouted accurately by Dawkins, who “looked at what other teams did to beat KU”–is what any opposing coach would do, right? Not just Dawkins. What if Self’s timeouts and playcalls were made within the framework of what he thought his kids could reliably execute (with their limited pkgs)…and Mason feeding the bigs, and Wiggins attacking were the gameplan. The point has been made that Mason could have had 6 more assists if paint buckets were made, right? Wiggins did NOT get favorable whistles, even getting 2pts taken off the scoreboard.
I just cannot put this team’s multiple-area incompetencies in any NC discussion. No, I think KU deserved to sit at home, as there was much better offense, defense, and toughness being displayed by almost every team that made the Elite8. The operating assumption is that Self did what he could within the Oct.-March timeframe with this squad. The statistical shortcomings tell the story. This team was NOT championship material, especially without Embiid.
Why did zone defenses bother kill this team, while the 2008 Champs devoured zone defenses? Touch that answer, and this discussion ends. Competence vs Incompetence, but same coach. What’s the difference between 2008 and 2013? Both had multiple MickeyDs and top50 guys. Was Self flexible or inflexible in 2008? Or was he the same in 2008? How was Self in 2012’s Champgame run? Flexible or inflexible or the same?
(All this a friendly point-counterpoint debate)
Now we could start an entirely different discussion about what some other coach would have done with these same 2013-14 Jayhawks…maybe the result would have played out differently, or not. Who knows?
-
What this thread shows, in a macro sense, is that no matter which coach LOSES a game, he will be under scrutiny. Rightly or wrongly only depends on your point of view and personal take on the big picture.
I think its safe to say almost all KU fans want an Elite8 or Final4 type run (more than just another Conf championship)…and honestly, being a top10 squad and a 1 or 2seed every single year it is reasonable to “hope” (not “expect”, there’s a difference in connotation) for an Elite8 or Final4 run with such a team.
Regarding defense, and the 2 losses we had despite scoring 83+ points…If we had better D to get those 2 more wins, we likely get a 1seed, and the whole path changes, doesnt it? And Self looks like a champ for getting a group of kiddies to a 1seed, while Calipari took his group of kiddies from preseason No.1 to out of the top 25.
I also think in these discussions we get too polarized, wanting to paint each other in the half-empty or half-full camps…Its not that easy. Maybe the majority is in the middle: People may like Self’s system and our W/L record and BigXII dominance, but are also uneasy about early exits in the Tourney.
-
@jaybate 1.0 I’ve read this 4 times. This reminds me of a Chinese fire drill. Mass chaos maybe.
-
Incompetent? Green, young, nervous, inexperienced, etc…would better describe a team that replaced 5 starters. Incompetent? So disrespectful. I am proud of this young group. Who knows how far they could have gone with a lucky bounce or two and Embiid in the lineup. All of the sudden, defense gets a lot better.
-
@KansasComet if you fall back on missed shots as the reason for a loss, you can do that every loss. We lost to UNI because we missed shots. VCU too. Bradley? Yep. Bucknell? Of course. The converse must thus be true. The only reason we beat Memphis was that we made shots.
Self has defined his defense by their field goal percentage defense before. That assumes that shots are contested. Contested shots are different than open shots. Against Stanford, is it even debatable that we had very few open looks? Why were we faced with a situation where we got so few open looks?
You focus on me saying “so incompetent.” This is the context – “However, if our personnel are so incompetent at man that to have a chance to win a national championship in a particular season, we have to go zone primarily, then we should.”
The point is to illustrate that if our man defense is so bad that we can’t win a title with it, shouldn’t we explore alternatives? Wasn’t that the case this season?
I admire your defense of Self and all things KU. And you’re right, if we make more shots, we probably win. I just think that it goes a bit deeper than that, that’s all.
-
" I think the issue with EJ’s 2013 Hawks were that they had Withey (220lbs) and Kevin Young (180lbs) in the paint. And frosh Ellis. NO BRUTE FACTOR"
This years UCONN didn’t have a brute factor… didn’t have near the interior players we had on that team.
I agree though… the big fighters in 2012 were TT and TRob. But then, when players like that leave, someone has to pick up the slack. And we’ll never have a more senior team than that one. Outside of BMac… everyone else graduated.
We should have been able to grind out victories. We shouldn’t have really needed a dominant force on offense. Defense should have won it for us that year. Kind of makes me question the old saying… “offense wins games, defense wins championships!”
-
@drgnslayr One thing that struck me about this team is that they weren’t very smart. I don’t know about academically smart, but they weren’t very basketball smart. They were athletic - gifted, in fact. But they seemed to vanish a lot on defense and when they weren’t running that bizarre shuffle on offense, they acted like they didn’t know where they were or what they were doing half the time. Much of that can be attributed to youth. I think Frankamp can help that situation greatly. Whether he’s a point guard or not, I don’t know, but when he’s in the game you can practically see the wheels turning. He seems to have very good court vision and he doesn’t throw the ball away.
-
That is exactly how it will appear and feel to an opposing offense, too, and this is why this paradigm shift will temporarily destroy the offensive dimension of basketball. A morphing defense causes far fewer minutes for an offense to recognize effectively how to attack effectively. This means that unless the opposing team plays the same morphing defense, your offense gets way more minutes of playing and scoring with effective recognition. This biases you to win. It is the unfair advantage everyone is always looking for.
“Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man.”–George Patton
Playing a zone every time down the floor is the stupidest form of basketball defense, because it is the purest “fixed fortification” in basketball. The offense knows exactly which player will be where on the floor each time down the floor.
There are two reasons the zone works so well. First, it keeps the bigs near the basket rim protecting ALL THE TIME; i.e., not time waisted guarding high posts. This lowers many opposing team’s shooting percentages and increases rebounding effectiveness. The second reason zone works so well for full zone teams is that that most coaches and players don’t practice, or play against it full time and so coaches have troubles communicating how to break zones and players have troubles mastering recognizing seams and range of motion and aren’t comfortable with all the double teaming that results with inappropriate action and penetration. All scorers say they have to get to a place where they are reacting and not thinking. A zone is a different look that makes scorers, especially unseasoned ones, think instead of react. The outside shooters usually quit thinking the quickest, and get back to reacting quickest, but even take a trip or two to adjust. For this reason, zones can be very effective early in a game and because games are unfolding complexities with time constraints, they are inordinately sensitively dependent on initial conditions. A 5-10 point lead early from frustrated recognition, rather than from just having a cold stretch, completely turns the dynamic of the rest of the unfolding game in the favor of the team that is zoning and getting the early lead. But over the course of a game a skilled coach and patient players inexorably get comfortable with the zone and inexorably find the place to attack it and the player to attack it with. The only time this does not happen is if you have such inferior talent that your three impact players hold no MUA, even after they get comfortable (frankly a rarity, if the coach is any good at positioning the impact players against the zone after the first time out). But in that case, where no MUA is held anywhere, unless you can disrupt even more defensively than the zone team, then you lose regardless of what you do defensively, or offensively. Boeheim likely gets most of his wins with early leads from troubled recognition and holds onto those leads with controlling the defensive glass and giving fewer second shots, while at the same time getting to the foul line more frequently than the opponent. That is the winning calculus of zone.
But if you have two 40% trifectates, 3 impact men (two with MUA), a guy who can either score or feed from the high post at the FT line, an explosive, disruptive m2m that hedges and helps away on scoring opps, and two bigs that can glass vacc big time, then you beat the zone 9 times out of ten, no matter how good they are at playing it, because over the course of the game, your hedging, helping m2m is creating fewer and fewer open looks, as it learn the opponents preferred offensive actions, while your offense’s recognition problems are melting away and your team is getting more and more open looks.
However, playing a non-switching m2m every time down the floor is the second stupidest form of basketball defense, because the offense knows exactly which man will be on which man and so knows exactly who holds the greatest MUA and so knows who to stretch to get open, and who to screen to get open, and against whom and where to drive the ball to get a bucket and a free throw.
But the reality is that good coaches don’t coach m2m without variable help; i.e., without hedging and switching, and changing who guards who from time to time without switching.
The obvious reason great coaches play m2m is m2m is that it is easier to turn an m2m into a mobile fortification than it is a zone. Good m2m defense constantly mixes up help, i.e., who hedges and who switches, based on MUAs. About all you can do with a zone is intermittently trap at the same locations with the same combinations of guys.
Early in a season Self forces players to learn how to fight over screens; i.e., he holds hedging and switching to a minimum. Next he introduces hedging. Next he introduces switching. Some times he will reverse the order based on which players need to learn what, or based on some particularly tough early opponent. But by an large he brings in the defense in pieces just as he does the offense. By March, the the defense, if the players are good natural defenders that buy into defense first, KU guards everywhere on the floor well, and ramps intensity of defensive pressure up and down to keep the opponent off balance, while conserving as much of the energy budget for offense as possible. Remember, everyone in a zone has to move side to side whenever the ball moves. In m2m, at least 2 guys are moving very little with each pass. So, while m2 is very taking to play at a high level of pressure, at average levels of pressure more frequenty played at, a lot of energy is being conserved in m2m that is being wasted in zone. Zone requires a constant expenditure of an even level of energy. m2m requires short bursts of hard guarding and then lots down times. It is these downtimes that favor the explosive highly athletic player and allow him to do spectacular things. And as the game wears on, you see m2m teams continuing to make explosive plays, whereas zone teams, if they have been being subjected to steady ball movement forcing all of them to move constantly, make fewer and fewer explosive plays on defense.
Having laid out the strengths and weaknesses of zone and m2m, I will summarize that both have weaknesses to attack and the great underlying strength of both is when they are making recognition difficult for offenses.
Repeated for emphasis: DEFENSES ARE MOST EFFECTIVE NOT WHEN THE OPPONENT IS LOOKING FOR THE WEAKNESS IN WHAT HE RECOGNIZES, BUT WHEN THE OPPONENT IS TRYING TO RECOGNIZE WHAT HE IS ATTACKING.
A corollary is: OFFENSES NEVER SCORE WHILE THEY ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY ARE ATTACKING.
Henry Iba, Dean Smith and Larry Brown ‘recognized’ the problem created by teams switching from zone to m2m and back again on succeeding possessions, or even during possessions, and tried to partially solve the problem by developing the hi-lo offense, that was elaborated into the Carolina Passing offense. It was/is an single offense that is run against both zone and m2m.
But the Iba/Smith/Brown solution is only a partial solution to the problem. It keeps teams from having to learn to offenses and decided which one to run after a switch; that far it is an effective solution.
But it does not solve the player’s recognition problem of having to recognize the defensive set in order to choose the different options (“actions”) within the single offense that are best to attack, and those options vary in the high low/Carolina passing offense. Against Stanford it took three quarters of the game for our bigs to recognize the zone and get a post man to the free throw line every time down the floor and pass to him, so that he can face basket and choose the right action: shoot, drive, feed low post, or fake drive and kick out. And different zones require the ball to go elsewhere than the high post.
So: recognition of defense is still the Achilles heel of ALL offenses, even when the same offensive sets are used, the optimal actions within them require correct recognition to select them.
THE REASON TO MOVE TO MORPHING DEFENSES IS THAT THE NEW RULES ENCOURAGE OFFENSES TO PURSUE SCORING AT THE FOUL LINE.
The old advantage of m2m–variable help–is diminished to practically no advantage at all by the new rules. Self and other coaches solved the problem by going to non-disruption defense, low pressure defense to keep the other team off the foul line, while using superior impact players to force KU onto the foul line more. The best teams this past season were the ones that created the biggest positive margin in fouling; i.e., in keeping the opponent off the line and in getting one’s own team onto the line. Low pressure, non-disruption defense accomplished that by minimizing fouling, and by leaving the most gas in the tank at the other end for impact plays that drew high percentage buckets and a FT.
Alas, the good coaches figured out the defensive solution to that scheme was pretty simple. Rough the high profile OADs that can’t afford to get injured up big time and don’t foul the rest of their players. It was a beautiful solution. There was zero chance that Wiggins was willing to get injured, once it became clear that in the Madness, a Stanford guy was willing to put him down hard every time he played for a high percentage bucket with a FT. The unspoken rule of the new game today is: OADs cannot afford to finish all the time. The injury risk is too high. And if your best guy can afford to take an injury more than the opposing team’s best OAD can afford to take an injury, then all you have to do is prove to him early that your are going to make him pay on the way, at the rim, and after, then the coach that wants to keep recruiting OADs and the OAD have no choice but leave the OAD out on the perimeter as a decoy most of the game.
So why is morphing defense the answer to OADs that can’t finish against teams with best players that can afford to finish?
Because morphing defense sharply ramps up the other team’s TOs and keeps the other team out of its comfort zone to a point that one can afford to park the OAD on the perimeter to avoid injury and only use him in situations where he can create a little space and shoot without getting injured.
Offense for OAD teams is entirely about how to score without risking injury to the OADs. Its a very different kind of offensive game. It is much more like what the NBA plays. The great athletes of the NBA could score on each other at will, but don’t because of the unwritten rules about who will and won’t be permitted at the rim. Superstars get the most lenient treatment, but even they are at risk of getting hammered, if they abuse the privilege. This is why all the great perimeter scorers in the NBA eventually have to learn to be great at the create a space game that slayr has attributed definitively to Kobe Bryant.
In D1, the OADs get almost as much of a sweet whistle as the NBA superstars do. But there is one big difference. The early rounds of the NCAA tournament are loaded with teams that don’t have to give a damn about hammering an OAD. These teams have one and only one shot and they are not playing to be treated according to a ‘code’ next season the way the NBA players have to do even in the playoffs. If you are an NBA pro and take Lebron down to win a best of seven series, you have to come back and face the music for the rest of your that you want to be as long as possible. And you know that if you take Lebron down at the rim, you are basically a walking deadman for the reset of your career. The payback will come. So: the NBA has a code. The superstar gets to dazzle the audience from time to time at the iron, but not all the time. The non starts get to go to iron sometimes, but not all the time. Bottom line, in the NBA, you have to learn how to create “safe” space, and score; that is what is permitted on a regular basis without pay back. That is how men play the game professionally. If you can beat me creating space, then hard guarding maybe, but no ending your career. It is a code that butters everyone’s bread for the long haul.
But in D1?
You’ve got to watch out for the merchandize, even if you don’t abuse your ability to get to the hole, because there are a bunch of guys that are not so much One and Done (OAD), as One and Gone (OAG). This one tourney appearance was their gig. Afterwards, its out to the real world, not the NBA.
In today’s game, defense, after a brief move to the back burner, should come quickly back to the front burner as morphing defense.
Its the surest way to win by having your OAD and having to underuse him too.
-
Sorry… I was talking about our 2013 team that was packed with seniors!
Funny you mention they (this year’s team) were not the smartest with basketball IQ. And outside of running the shuffle on offense, looked lost. I kind of remember the 2013 team doing that on offense and getting stuck. When we were unable to engage BMac, we seemed lost.
Personally… I’d like to see us use some of the things the Mayor uses at ISU on offense. But then, you have to have players that really hunger for a one-on-one offensive attack. Fred is extremely good at creating rapid forming iso’s. If you watch tape of his offense you will see an area of the court (on offense) that is empty, and then a slasher comes off a back screen or merely sets good position to take an interior pass and then they finish with a one-on-one near the basket. Really every player on their team could finish near the hole in a one-on-one situation. I think Fred carefully recruits players that are explosive and capable in these situations. It pays off.
ISU can do anything in that offensive set. Fred can draw up anything to work, there is total flexibility. And they have the potential to dribble-drive, too. His offense is a closer mimic to a true NBA set.
It would be nice to see us incorporate some of his tweaks on offense. We need a more open structure so we have more to counter teams that put up stiff defense.
The problem we have is we are too structured and too rigid. Our offense works great for most of the year, and we put up good numbers, so we get too confident running the same set from November thru March. But the teams that advance in March are those teams that can bend and flex to meet the moment. The teams that advance come out and execute a specific plan to beat a specific team. This is where we get nailed. In recent years it is a known entity that to beat KU you do it on the perimeter by putting high guard pressure on our 1 and 2s. Teams do that because we don’t recruit true PGs… we recruit combo guards.
We will always be susceptible to an upset loss from a team that has quality, athletic guards who know how to apply pressure using x-axis basketball. If we had played UCONN this past year they would have kicked our arse.
Like I’ve said a million times now… until we get high-level guard play from our 1 and 2 (especially at point), we won’t be bringing home any trophies in April.
-
@jaybate 1.0
"“Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man.”–George Patton
Playing a zone every time down the floor is the stupidest form of basketball defense, because it is the purest “fixed fortification” in basketball. The offense knows exactly which player will be where on the floor each time down the floor. "
Love the Patton reference! Very interesting post, JB!
I never really thought about it before, but it makes sense for opposing teams to play rough ball with potential OADs… especially the players that tend to try to avoid contact in the first place.
Your point on ‘fixed fortifications’ is completely valid. The key to operating an effective M2M is to bring high pressure in certain situations. So suddenly a guard gets pinched into a double-team and the rest of the defense monitors where that free guard goes and hedges over to flex into a kind of zone defense. This is true NBA-style M2M. The defense is not going to stop every play or come close. The defense looks for X-amount of situations in a game that can turn their way and create TOs or bad shots against the shot clock. By creating X-amount of those situations in a game, they consider their defense successful or not. It is known that on some nights a hot offense will override everything. So it is all about creating X-amount of situations that are potential defensive win possessions. And if they meet those numbers and still get beat by a hot shooting team, they get beat knowing they still played good defense. This is crucial in the league. To not change something that isn’t broke and to know how they are beat because all teams in the NBA have hot nights where they are unstoppable.
Some of those X-amount of situations involve keeping certain players from scoring from their sweet spot and situation on the floor. The NBA is all about statistics and forcing players to create offense in their less effective manner.
Think about all that… and then think about college basketball… and how unsophisticated it is. And how it doesn’t really take a sophisticated plan to win games, even in March. Any NBA team would shellac the very best D1 teams… not just because they have the most talent… but because they know how to execute a sophisticated strategy.
Sometimes I think we just expect too much from college players. These are kids and they are still playing kids basketball. The NBA is man’s league. No Boys Allowed.
And this gets into the concept of Self being successful in the NBA. He hasn’t shown the level of sophistication needed in execution in college to make it in the NBA. Doesn’t mean he is incapable… but D1 just can’t produce that level of sophistication. That is why all these D1 coaches are a total crap shoot at the next level. And that is why there are big time surprises on who makes it and who doesn’t. Perhaps Ollie is a better candidate than Self as a pro coach. First… he knows the league better having been in the league for 15 years as a player. Self never made it in the league. It’s a different game. Might as well be soccer for Self… maybe even better because he would approach soccer with a completely open mind. Much of what Self does in D1 wouldn’t work in the league.
-
@drgnslayr oh - I’m sorry. Actually, I got up at 4:00 am this morning and have been crazy busy at work (for a change). I really need to read more thoroughly before I comment.
-
It actually worked out well with your comment… it tied elements of this year’s team with the year before! We still had those moments of running stagnant offense and weaves that lead to a knot instead of scoring fabric.
-
@HighEliteMajor No need to spin it. You described their play using the words “so incompetent”. I described your comments as “so disrespectful”. No confusion. I am not falling back on missed shots. You said no one could make an argument for Coach Self? I disagree.
-
@KansasComet - I do understand your point of view. This was a horribly bad defensive team. I wish I could dress it up.
And I wish I could convince you that it is a coach’s job to strategize and scheme to put guys in positions to succeed, and that strategy and scheming leads directly to outcomes. Most of the time, all teams have highly skilled players. Coaches can make the difference.
You say – “Does it do anyone any good to complain about lack of a zone defense in late April? I doubt it. By now Coach Self has moved on to next year’s team like he should.”
I’m sorry, I suppose. I kind of thought this stuff, the debate, the discussion, the interaction, was enjoyable for most here (including you). @konkeyDong and a couple others had asked me to post what I would do specifically. That’s what I did.
And respectfully, coach Self should not move on. Coach Self should lose sleep at night analyzing why his teams have lost in March, and then take corrective action to fix it, whatever that is.
I suggest that there is no evidence that Self has changed anything substantive in the last five seasons. It’s system, system, system. That system has been good for 10 Big 12 titles and much, much success. Great credit is due. That system has largely failed in the NCAA tournament given the roster talent, in my opinion. Scrutiny is thus justified.
Holy crap … look at the basketball IQ in this room. I read the posts above of @ralster, @drgnslayr, @jaybate, @icthawkfan316, @crimsonorblue22, @Jayhawk12, @nuleafjhawk, @truehawk93, @VailHawk, and yourself – it makes me think. It increases my basketball IQ. It challenges the way I watch games.
So I’ll probably engage this stuff until tip-off next season.
-
@HighEliteMajor Coach Self has lost in March the same way that Coach K, Coach Donovan (4 straight Elite 8’s, zero titles), Coach Izzo, Coach Calipari, Coach Williams, and numerous top level coaches have lost. The other team had more points at the end of the game. It is a game of will, skill, and luck. Coach Self fields an excellent team each and every year. As I have said before, the tournament format is flawed and not designed to determine the best team in Division I Basketball. It is a business designed to generate interest and revenue. It’s big box office. Winning the NCAA Tournament feels great, losing it in this particular format is understandable.
In the past 10 years in your opinion, if it were a 32 team tournament, how many championships would Kansas have?
I do understand your frustration. I respect you right to have your opinion. I learn a lot from reading your thoughts and I am glad you take the time to express your opinions/concerns in this forum. I think you hold on to the losses too long. They hurt, they all hurt. We have a lot look forward to. I think Coach Self is back to recruiting aggressive players. Players that will kick your heart out!
-
@HighEliteMajor I enjoy the debate. I might not always agree, but sometimes I do. Sometimes I disagree, but after looking at a different perspective I change my mind. Other times we just agree to disagree. It’s what makes this board fun; it’s challenging. It’s a group of fans who follow the team passionately. Passionately enough to take time out of their lives to share their opinions and to read others’. Many often re-watch games to help them better understand what they are seeing or why things happen the way they do.
And I don’t see anything wrong with describing our M2M defense as incompetent. They couldn’t defend to the level we expect. This wasn’t the first green team Self has had. He’s replaced all 5 starters 3 times in his tenure, yet this group was by far the worst defensive team he’s fielded. They couldn’t competently execute their defensive assignments.
-
To refer to 18 - 22 year olds as incompetent is not cool with me. These are young student athletes trying the best that they can. If I were a young man on this team, and a fan referred to me and/or my teammates as incompetent, which is pretty much an insult to their effort and intelligence, I would tell the fan that they were the incompetent one. Must be easy to sit back from the armchair and criticize this group of young men? I wonder what the players think of us?
-
@KansasComet Seriously, what is your problem here? Do you feel the need to twist my words because you don’t like what you read? I didn’t call any kid incompetent, did I? Read what I wrote. You can create whatever narrative you want. I said, once again, “However, if our personnel are so incompetent at man that to have a chance to win a national championship in a particular season, we have to go zone primarily, then we should.”
I can’t help you if you refuse comprehend that.
You said above, that I didn’t address, the following: "Is it right to say “I don’t want Wiggins”, and then say “forget everything bad I said about Wiggins”, only to flip again when the end result is not realized? That’s not cool. "
I don’t follow - I’ve been pretty consistent. I don’t like presumed OADs. Generally, I don’t want them here. I like Wiggins personally, he’s a great kid, and I was very impressed with him. I have written about both topics. I think you can dislike the concept of presumed OADs, but like the person. Is that hard to understand? Not only that, but I have defended Wiggins’ performance against Stanford. I have no idea where you’re coming from.
Again, I’m looking for a defense of coach Self’s strategy and scheme against Stanford. You apparently aren’t interested in offering that defense. I would love to hear it. Your response is basically that we missed shots, yet you ignore what Self said about our “shots” and what Wiggins said about having guys in his face the entire time.
I do respect your opinion but I don’t understand your fixation here.
-
@HighEliteMajor Are you referring to my last post? That is not addressed to anyone? You appear to be upset by something? You said right before Wiggins made his decision to attend KU, that you did not want him. Please don’t twist it now. You said it, own it. I don’t have a problem, I have an opinion. Refusal to comprehend is laughable. I know exactly what I read, and I have the right to form my opinions and express them. I do not feel the need to twist your words. I feel the need to speak my mind. You know exactly where I am coming from. I don’t understand the tone you appear to have taken? You mad bro?
-
@HighEliteMajor I imagine it was in response (although not directed at) me, given I had last posted on it. Whatever. This is the type of thing that annoyed me on kusports…the cheerleading crowd. If you don’t have your pom poms out, if you criticize the team in the least, then you’re less of a fan. Or you’re not a good human being. Or whatever the implication is here. Nothing here has been over the line. I think that is apparent from the lack of outrage by the vast majority, save one.
For the record, you can be incompetent at something without lacking effort & intelligence. For example, I’m fairly certain I’d make an incompetent shuttle pilot. This group, for whatever reason, was incompetent at adequately and consistently playing M2M defense. Doesn’t mean that they weren’t trying. Doesn’t mean they’re stupid. From the literal definition of the word - incompetent: lacking necessary ability or skills; inadequate to or unsuitable for a particular purpose; lacking the qualities needed for effective action. There is nothing in there that insults effort or intelligence. But those definitions pretty much describe our defense to a “T”.
-
@icthawkfan316 Not directed at you. My opinion.
-
I’ve read all the post on this thread and just want to let everyone know I’m staying out of it.
-
Mee too.
-
@HighEliteMajor Personally this is a very interesting thread…and in all fairness to HEM, I have also called our youthful/frosh/inexperienced '13-14 team “incompetent” at defensive execution (see my above posts)…Please no one consider that a slam on our young’uns–as they’re performances are being compared to Self’s other past teams (same coach)…so my critique of this year’s team are purely contextual. They arent getting it done as the system requires.
@HighEliteMajor…and perhaps take this comment as me playing devil’s advocate: Didnt we lose to UNI and VCU because of not playing D (like we did all year) and also, make no mistake, but trusted-senior-greenlight-shooters (Sherron, UNI…Reed, VCU) had absolutely dismal trey shooting? I mean, god love em both, but they shot us out of the gym. It happens. I’m over the anger of it–chiefly because I saw that almost all those 3 attempts were passes to an “open look 3”. Tyshawn penetrated and dutifully kicked it out for our signature 3att. Same way Duke does it. Or we ball-reversal passed it to the open-look shooter. Self wants that shot.
Just think: Sherron+Reed = 1 for 13 threes, and that’s 2 SEASONS ended. 2 years worth of hopes. Fans left wanting more. But these arent NBA kids. Heck, neither one of those beloved both players is in the NBA. Even Ray Allen has off-shooting nights, right? You know, maybe some people want to think that Brady or Reed were our versions of JJRedick…but that isnt true. Redick still in the NBA, and a cold-off-bench deadeye marksman. He was that way at Duke, led the ACC, and is earning millions with the same skill in the NBA. Our guys had an off-night, and it felled us, right there on tape.
And dont forget turnovers: Self preaches/teaches/fidgets/gets-red-faced/quick-hook over this very issue: We turned it over vs. UNI, worse vs. VCU (Markieff alone with 6 t.o.s). And we turned it over late vs. Michigan (EJ), we didnt make shots (EJ 1 FT, BMac point blank layup), and the other team made shots (Trey Burke).
Teams lose games because they either:
-
Turn it over too much. (23 t.o.'s vs. FL, really?..Markieff with 6 himself vs. VCU?)
-
Shoot dismally. (Ask Collison about '03Syracuse…or Memphis about '08)
-
Cant play D. (Against a 6ft, no hops Farokmanesh?)
-
Combination of the above.
Man, didnt Bill Self figure all this out YEARS ago? He harps on turnovers, zone execution, etc…He espouses high%looks to enhance the shooting. Kick out open-look 3s are considered the highest % 3att, and Duke uses that integrally, in a system-way as well. And Bill Self Defense needs no further discussion…as it affects all of this same stuff for the opponent–in our favor.
But if we dont do these main things, we are ripe to get beat. By almost anybody, including a melting pot hodge podge team like UNI. And seriously, why would we lose to some killerB team? Guarantee the answer lies in Reasons 1-4.
-
