General20
Basketball Maven
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 1,774
- Like
- 12,035
Gotta make this quick because I have a busy day.
As far as the game itself. The SU zone is designed to force opponents to shoot low percentage shots. Namely 3 pointers from beyond the NBA arc, and mid range shots with centers flying at them. We held V Tech to nothing but those two types of shots, and to their credit they did a good job hitting a high percentage of them. The problem they had is that they wanted no part of us under the basket.
Boeheim's adjustment was to extend the guards up. Normally the guard on the side of the zone where the ball is will be extended, the second guard will cover around the free throw line and the center will be under the basket. Boeheim switched to both guards extended up to the 3 point line and the center cheating up towards the foul line. This would have made use vulnerable under the basket if V Tech had the ability to hurt us under there, but as it stood, it made almost all the mid range jumpers they were hitting in the first half turn into blocks or turnovers (Melo played great D), and all their three pointers extremely tough contested shots. V Tech just didnt seem to have an answer for this, their scoring went cold.
On the other side of things V Tech played some tough pressure man. When you see teams play tough pressure man think Joseph and Waiters, they are our best at beating defenders off the dribble. Joseph was huge all day. Waiters looked absolutely lost in the first half for some reason, and the long term implications of that scared me (if he couldn't play well against this team which was tailor made for him, what kind of season was he going to have?). But the coaches sat him down for a long time and were in his ear, explaining what was going on, and it seemed to work. Waiters came in the second half looking like a new man, and dominated.
Our defensive adjustments, and Waiters emergence, effectively ended the game. We dominated on both ends of the court once that took place.
A few other observations.
V Tech decided to crash the boards hard against us (because the zone is vulnerable to letting up offensive rebounds). That has gone out of vogue. The scouting report the last 3 years or so has been that we are too good in transition, and if you send too many guys to the basket to rebound you will get burned on the other side- so I was surprised to see this move. V Tech, to their credit was very aggressive on the boards and did a good job, but they also let up a lot of points in transition. In fact, in the first half we hardly scored at all in the half court (offensively we were stagnant). Almost all our points came in transition, which because of their strategy V Tech was vulnerable to.
Because transition was so important to us this game, rebounding (and rebounding in heavy traffic) became essential. That is why Fair and Joseph played almost the whole game. They both did tremendous jobs on the boards, which really won the game for us - or at minimum, kept us in striking distance until we figured things out and the rout was on.
The biggest negative in the game, to me, was Keita. He got absolutely bullied and pushed around under the basket. We were a whole different team with Melo in the game. On a side note, the game itself is still moving a little fast for him, but as he gets more and more playing time (and he will) its going to slow down. By the end of the year Melo will be a monster for us. Still, we need more out of Keita down low.
V Tech pressured us hard and rarely double teamed, they also crashed the boards hard. In short they were the worst type of team for Southerland to go up against. He's not going to beat his man off the dribble, and they weren't going to leave him much, so his shooting would have gone unused, and it was essential that we rebound, and he is not our best in that area, so he sat. Dont give up on him though. When team's play passive D (to try to keep Joseph and Waiters from going to the basket at will) and when they dont crash the boards (to keep us from burning them in transition), I still think Southerland will play, and play well.
Christmas made a bone-headed mistake on D early that resulted in a V Tech dunk, at the time I said "he's coming out and he's not coming back in" and that is exactly what happened. Freshman make freshman mistakes, and that is to be expected, but when we are losing and Joseph and Fair are playing the best on our team, it means Christmas is not going to play. He is going to play and he is going to improve, but he is also going to sit the bench until he figures a few things out, this SU team is too good to play through freshman mistakes.
One last note about depth. As I've said before. It looks great in those games where you would play ten guys anyway, but when things get tough, you need to find a five man line up that works and stick with it. Boeheim found that today. Waiters, Triche, Joseph, Fair, and Melo all played great. Nobody else played particularly good. I'm upset that Keita didn't play better. I wish Southerland could have played a little more, but I understand why he did not. The freshmen are simply freshmen. The only judgement I will make from this is that Triche and Waiters have looked like our best guard combination all year, and they did now against good competition.
This is not necessarily a knock against Jardine, I think it has more to do with styles. Triche is better on the ball, than he is at shooting guard. Waiters and Jardine's skills are too similar and dont complement each other all that well. I think you will see Triche and Waiters on the court when it matters all year long.
I'm very happy about this game. In the second half we showed we had 5 good players who can rebound, defend, score in transition, and most importantly score in half court sets. THAT is what it takes to win a championship. While I dont think we are championship material just yet, some steps were taken to get us there, some cohesion was formed, and our freshmen learned a valuable lesson about what it takes to compete in division 1. I expect things to improve from here.
As far as the game itself. The SU zone is designed to force opponents to shoot low percentage shots. Namely 3 pointers from beyond the NBA arc, and mid range shots with centers flying at them. We held V Tech to nothing but those two types of shots, and to their credit they did a good job hitting a high percentage of them. The problem they had is that they wanted no part of us under the basket.
Boeheim's adjustment was to extend the guards up. Normally the guard on the side of the zone where the ball is will be extended, the second guard will cover around the free throw line and the center will be under the basket. Boeheim switched to both guards extended up to the 3 point line and the center cheating up towards the foul line. This would have made use vulnerable under the basket if V Tech had the ability to hurt us under there, but as it stood, it made almost all the mid range jumpers they were hitting in the first half turn into blocks or turnovers (Melo played great D), and all their three pointers extremely tough contested shots. V Tech just didnt seem to have an answer for this, their scoring went cold.
On the other side of things V Tech played some tough pressure man. When you see teams play tough pressure man think Joseph and Waiters, they are our best at beating defenders off the dribble. Joseph was huge all day. Waiters looked absolutely lost in the first half for some reason, and the long term implications of that scared me (if he couldn't play well against this team which was tailor made for him, what kind of season was he going to have?). But the coaches sat him down for a long time and were in his ear, explaining what was going on, and it seemed to work. Waiters came in the second half looking like a new man, and dominated.
Our defensive adjustments, and Waiters emergence, effectively ended the game. We dominated on both ends of the court once that took place.
A few other observations.
V Tech decided to crash the boards hard against us (because the zone is vulnerable to letting up offensive rebounds). That has gone out of vogue. The scouting report the last 3 years or so has been that we are too good in transition, and if you send too many guys to the basket to rebound you will get burned on the other side- so I was surprised to see this move. V Tech, to their credit was very aggressive on the boards and did a good job, but they also let up a lot of points in transition. In fact, in the first half we hardly scored at all in the half court (offensively we were stagnant). Almost all our points came in transition, which because of their strategy V Tech was vulnerable to.
Because transition was so important to us this game, rebounding (and rebounding in heavy traffic) became essential. That is why Fair and Joseph played almost the whole game. They both did tremendous jobs on the boards, which really won the game for us - or at minimum, kept us in striking distance until we figured things out and the rout was on.
The biggest negative in the game, to me, was Keita. He got absolutely bullied and pushed around under the basket. We were a whole different team with Melo in the game. On a side note, the game itself is still moving a little fast for him, but as he gets more and more playing time (and he will) its going to slow down. By the end of the year Melo will be a monster for us. Still, we need more out of Keita down low.
V Tech pressured us hard and rarely double teamed, they also crashed the boards hard. In short they were the worst type of team for Southerland to go up against. He's not going to beat his man off the dribble, and they weren't going to leave him much, so his shooting would have gone unused, and it was essential that we rebound, and he is not our best in that area, so he sat. Dont give up on him though. When team's play passive D (to try to keep Joseph and Waiters from going to the basket at will) and when they dont crash the boards (to keep us from burning them in transition), I still think Southerland will play, and play well.
Christmas made a bone-headed mistake on D early that resulted in a V Tech dunk, at the time I said "he's coming out and he's not coming back in" and that is exactly what happened. Freshman make freshman mistakes, and that is to be expected, but when we are losing and Joseph and Fair are playing the best on our team, it means Christmas is not going to play. He is going to play and he is going to improve, but he is also going to sit the bench until he figures a few things out, this SU team is too good to play through freshman mistakes.
One last note about depth. As I've said before. It looks great in those games where you would play ten guys anyway, but when things get tough, you need to find a five man line up that works and stick with it. Boeheim found that today. Waiters, Triche, Joseph, Fair, and Melo all played great. Nobody else played particularly good. I'm upset that Keita didn't play better. I wish Southerland could have played a little more, but I understand why he did not. The freshmen are simply freshmen. The only judgement I will make from this is that Triche and Waiters have looked like our best guard combination all year, and they did now against good competition.
This is not necessarily a knock against Jardine, I think it has more to do with styles. Triche is better on the ball, than he is at shooting guard. Waiters and Jardine's skills are too similar and dont complement each other all that well. I think you will see Triche and Waiters on the court when it matters all year long.
I'm very happy about this game. In the second half we showed we had 5 good players who can rebound, defend, score in transition, and most importantly score in half court sets. THAT is what it takes to win a championship. While I dont think we are championship material just yet, some steps were taken to get us there, some cohesion was formed, and our freshmen learned a valuable lesson about what it takes to compete in division 1. I expect things to improve from here.
