Posted by: dsimone985 in BLOGS on Feb 08, 2010
This was supposed to be an entry to the "What would you do" thread but I went way over the character limit so its now a blog.
I'm not going to come on here and claim to know everything about basketball b/c I dont. I have coached a lot of basketball at different level's but nothing close to college. My dad has coached basketball for over 20 years and has a remarkable record at his level and I have learned a lot from him but again he isnt some basketball savant either.
This is a very hard question to answer for me b/c I havent seen a single practice or read a scouting report. Its easy for me to say something like "we should play a 2-3 zone" when I dont know that maybe its been practiced and isnt effective so they decide to stay in man. There are so many things I dont know that would be vital toward me giving my opinion on this topic and it just makes it hard for anyone who wants to comment.
That said, I will take the Syracuse game for example b/c its still fresh in our minds.
IMO the game plan and until the 12 minute mark the execution was just about as perfect as possible. SU is avg. 85/game, is shooting 53% from the field and all 5 starters avg 50% or better from the field. Those stats are just stupid, no other way to describe them. UC had no chance to even be in this game if they tried to run with SU. They slowed it down and played the possession game. In the first half SU played their traditional 2-3 zone with Trice (6'4") and Rautins (6'4") up top. This is much different than last year when they had Flynn (5'10") up top with Devendorf. The move to put Lance up top was a very good one. He can see over the zone which is something DV or Cash couldnt and he is a good passer. We played the short corner game well and Thomas did a real nice job of flashing to the high post and turning strong, he needs to get stronger with the ball but thats not the point of this. There were things we could have done better but being down 2 at half was a good sign. It was apparent the players knew what they were doing and were following the scouting report/game plan. Even though UC was in the game at multiple times in the first half fans booed as they milked the shot clock. I dont want violations but sometimes thats going to happen when you play the game like that. Sometimes the defense actually has a great possession and doesnt let you get a clean look or a look at all. I would much rather have a dead ball turnover then to force a pass that starts a fast break and leads to an easy bucket.
I will skip ahead to the 12:20 mark as that's where it all went to hell.
I noticed in the second half SU played more of a 3-2 or what you would call a 3-2 match up and I think this threw or guys. They would open in the standard 2-3 and as we should we gave them an odd look (lance with DV on one wing and someone else on the other) Once lance passed to the wing the baseline man (usually Joseph or Wes if he was in) would come out and guard the ball allowing the 2 guys up top to guard Lance and give help to the middle knowing we couldnt throw a cross court pass. When we reversed the ball they would just rotate and do the same thing on the other side. This is a case where I would have done something different. I would have gone with a even set up top, someone at the high post and two guys on the baseline going from the block to the short corner (15 ft) depending on where the ball goes. We did this some but not enough IMO. When a team goes 3-2 you have to get it in the high post b/c it forces one of the baseline defenders to come out and guard the ball, if they dont it should leave a shot from 15 ft. if they come out and guard you there are the two baseline players and one should be open. I would have tried Lance at that high post spot b/c he can make that shot, he can rebound, and he can pass. You need a smart player in that position who knows to look for his shot and then look opposite. Thomas played that spot and was just too slow with his decision making. You are not going to get wide open shots against a zone that has guys 6'4" to 6'9". I think we passed up too many of what I would call good looks, not wide open ones but ones we need to take and hit in order to beat a team like SU.
We then ran bad offense, couldnt shoot, and took our bad offense to the defensive end and stopped guarding. Its doesnt seem like it should be that simple but it really is.
This is the first game where I really didnt understand the sub patterns. We arent going to beat many teams and especially SU if LS, DV, RB, and YG are on the bench at the same time. I also didnt get how yancy could sit from that 12 min mark all the way down to 4 min. left. That said I understand whey he is playing everyone. Guys arent getting it done so you either just keep the same guys out there and hope they start hitting or you play other guys and see if you can catch something. Personally I would be playing everyone but not every game like we are now. Its a tough thing to do b/c its a game to game problem we are having that we have no idea where the points are going to come from, the inconsistency is causing him to play everyone, trying to find the best lineup to win.
As far as what I would do differently.
1. Get better shooters - sounds silly but its the truth. DV, Cash, and Larry went 2-12 from 3, when your not a very good shooting team your 3 'best" shooters cant do that. We take too many 3's but to me its only b/c we dont have good shooters. They arent jacking 3's like some teams do, they went 10-20 against UofL but thats the exception not the rule.
2. Change our recruiting philosophy - We need more guys who come in with at least one defined skill set. I'm talking about someone who can rebound for 40 min, someone who can knock down shots, someone who can run a team. I dont want to go to the extreme of ND where all our guys are skill players and not very good athletes cause it hurts the defense but we need more guys with built in skills when they arrive on campus. DD is a great athlete, what does he do well basketball wise? DW, silly athletically, but again, from a basketball standpoint what does he bring to the table? We have a bunch of guys who are athletes and do some nice things but not consistently enough. Player development is very important but isnt it easier to develop a kid if you dont have to teach him how to shoot or how to rebound with passion.
3. Play Cash, Park, and DD a lot more - those 3 and SK are the future of our back court as of right now and we need to find out what we got. I have a pretty damn good idea of what I'm gonna get from DV, RB, and LD and its not all that great. I dont want to totally bail on this season but I would be looking to next year and beyond.
4. Mix it up some - play some 1-3-1 with DW up top, play some 2-3/3-2. On offense we run a very NBA like pick and roll offense, thats great if you have shooters, we dont. I would play more motion and try to take advantage of guys like LS, CW, and DD driving abilities.
5. Win more games - at this point thats the only answer. All the stuff I have said might help do that but results are all that matters. Its no secret I like Mick, I think he's a good coach playing in a very tough league at a school that isnt used to being average and has fans who dont know how to react to not being 25-7. That said, UC needs to win more games, they have to find a way to win the Gonzaga, X, and SJU games. He's past the point of rebuilding and thats why I think it would be a terrible idea to get rid of him. The first 2-3 years were very bad but I'm not sure anyone could have done all that better. He has about half a roster or maybe a little more than half of guys who should be playing in the BE under normal circumstances. Look at the 07 class, Bishop picked UC over Rutgers, SH, Marquette, and Providence. Not Nova, Pitt, UCONN, and SU. I dont know who "officially" offered LD and that may be b/c of his injury but he had Miami, SMU, Boston College, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Arizona State and Texas A&M interested. Not exactly the elite of college basketball. We want to compete with and win the BE, we first have to get top level players. Mick had to take gambles on Hernol Hall, Adam H, and Jason Henry that established BE teams didnt and dont have to do. I think there is a decent sized gap b/t the 06-07 classes and the 08-09 classes. It takes years to build relationships with kids now and Mick is finally working on an even playing field in that respect. Wins help with recruiting no doubt but Coach K is a great coach b/c he has great players.
If you want Mick gone, thats fine, I dont agree, but you can have that opinion. If you do, who is going to replace him? This is just my take but I cant see any BCS level HC that we would want leaving for the UC job. I also wouldnt really be interested in someone who has never been a HC. This is the best league in America, I dont want some first timer trying to beat WVU. That leaves a list of guys that include Chris Mooney (Richmond), Cliff Ellis (Coastal Carolina), Blaine Taylor (ODU), Tony Barbee (UTEP), Fran McCaffery (Siena), and Ben Jacobson (N. Iowa). I like a few of those guys but are any of them that much better than Mick? Are any of them worth the money? Do you think any of them are such better recruiters than Mick that it would be foolish not to fire him and replace him with coach X? Fans ran Herb Sendek out of NCST, now they might be looking to replace coach Lowe. Steve Alford couldnt win enough at Iowa, he left on his own for New Mexico. NMU is 21-3 and 15th in the country, Iowa is 8-16 and 2nd to last in the Big 10.
This was very long and encompassed a lot of different thoughts. There are things I dont like and things I would change but as a program we are heading in the right direction. I know its tough to come out when your not winning as much as you think UC should but thats the best way we can help return UC to the top and pretty much the only way. The last thing I will say is be careful what you wish for, who's to say Mick isnt looking to leave on his own. Maybe he wants to get rid of us, then where we would we go?