Bucket-by-Bucket Breakdown of the Defense vs. OSU: Where (and who) went wrong

[tommy]

OK, I know I need to get a life. But I just finished going through the OSU game recording possession by possession and charted how OSU shredded our defense and the nature of each breakdown and each bucket in an attempt to determine, while I'm not caught up in the flow and excitement of a live game, who is and isn't getting it done on that end of the floor. If you're not interested in this level of detail, I don't blame you -- just move on! If you are, first I'm going to describe the possessions, at least as I saw them, then at the end try to group them so as to make some tentative conclusions about where the team needs work and who needs work in which areas.

Note these are only possessions which led to baskets or free throws by OSU, so in that sense it's an incomplete picture of the total defensive effort, and I stopped charting at the 4 minute timeout of the 2nd half, as the game had long been decided and it was deep, deep garbage time and therefore the whole exercise would've meant less and less. Some may differ with my judgments as to what happened on particular plays, what should have happened, etc.

But here goes with the first 36 minutes:


1st Half:

time: 1807 Seth goes under a Sullinger screen at the 3 point line. Easy 3 pointer for Craft. Category: perimeter defense/screen. Main culprit (I know, not a great word, but you know what I mean -- and I know on a lot of plays more than one defender contributed to the breakdown): Curry.

1747 live ball turnover leads to OSU runout and layup. Category: turnover: Culprit (defensively): none

1722 Seth screened up top, Craft gets into the lane, Mason blocked out from helping out. Layup. Category: help defense by bigs. Main culprit: Mason

1701 Austin missed layup, 4 guys, especially Seth, loaf getting back; easy transition layup. Category: transition. Main culprit: Curry

1613 2nd chance for OSU (loose ball off offensive board), ends up w/ Sullinger, muscled it in over Mason in the lane. Tough shot. Category: inside man-to-man. Culprit: Mason (though Sullinger's shot was tough)

1508 Dawkins caught on switch after excellent screen by Sullinger; Sullinger banks in easy 10 footer after easy entry pass. Category: lack of help. Culprit: none

1148 screen at 3 point line, Hairston switches too late, leaving Buford open for a 3 over Thornton. Category: perimeter defense/screen. Main culprit: Hairston

1039 Kelly overpowered in post by Sullinger after Kelly had to help when Mason beaten outside by Buford, who got into the lane and passed to Sullinger. Kelly couldn't get back into good defensive position and had no chance. Category: perimeter defense/off the dribble. Main culprit: Mason

932 Rivers beaten around screen, Buford receives pass, gets into the lane, fouled in the act. Category: perimeter defense/screen. Main culprit: Rivers

854 Sullinger backs Mason down in the post, challenges him, fouled in the act and hits both. Category: inside man-to-man. Culprit: Mason

828 Defense got scrambled, Sybert gets a tip in. Block out was missed - probably Ryan's. Category: failed block out. Culprit: Kelly

807 live ball turnover leads to Buford transition layup. Weak attempt by Curry to draw charge. Category: transition

740 Thomas drives from top of the circle, past Mason, into lane, hits tough runner. Category: perimeter defense/off the dribble. Main culprit: Mason

631 Sullinger drives from outside 3 point line into lane, shoots over Miles. Category: perimeter defense/off the dribble. Culprit: Miles

610 pick & roll leaves Kelly recovering onto Thomas at 3 point line, Thomas drives by, gets into lane easily, hits floater. Category: perimeter defense/screen. Culprit: Kelly. The game is getting away from us at this point.

540 High pick & roll for Craft; Curry caught by pick, Kelly doesn't step up, easy J. Category: perimeter defense/screen. Culprit: Kelly

429 Good perimeter defense by us but when Mason helped Ryan out on a drive, which caused an airball to be shot, it left Sullinger open for the easy tip in. Dawkins couldn't rotate over to box Sullinger out --not nearly big enough to handle that. Category: perimeter defense/off the dribble Culprit: Kelly

402 Dawkins loafs around a screen, easy J for Buford. Category: perimeter defense/screen. Culprit: Dawkins

256 Uncontested 3 in the halfcourt by Thomas. Nobody within 15' of him. Nobody ever saw him or picked him up the entire possession. Mason's man, I think. Category: perimeter one-on-one defense. Culprit: Mason

159 Duke in 1-2-2 zone, Thomas gets to FT line, finding seam behind Thornton, receives pass from Sullinger in the post, easy 6 footer in the lane over Miles, who was slow to get over. Category: zone principles and then slow help Culprit: Tyler and Miles

104 2nd chance. Miles beaten to hustle rebound, Thomas shoots over him. Category: failure to block out. Culprit: Miles

0000 Inbounds play, Rivers gets picked, no switch with Miles, uncontested 12' corner J for Thomas at the buzzer. Terrible. Category: perimeter defense/screen. Culprit: Rivers. He needed to fight through the screen rather than assume Miles would switch on this play, as if he had switched, Rivers would've been caught under the hoop with an OSU big - would've meant a layup right over him. Bad recognition by Austin.


Second Half:

1905 Pick & roll at the 3 point line, slow recovery by Seth on the switch. Thomas drains the 3. Category: perimeter defense/screen. Culprit: Curry

1729 (Kelly had already been pulled for the night by this point) Rivers' man beats him into the lane, Dawkins and Curry help, good ball movement by OSU, we can't recover quickly enough, ultimately Dawkins can't close out in time. Smith nails a 3. Category: perimeter one-on-one defense and then help/rotation. Culprit: Rivers and Dawkins

We are in full-fledged blowout mode at this point.

1624 Thomas offensive board/putback over Dawkins and Rivers. Just a bigger, stronger player. Category: failure to block out. Culprit: Rivers and Dawkins.

Dawkins is then pulled for the night.

1459 Pick & roll, Craft banks in the straight-on 3 after Curry backed way too far off him. No recovery from the screen. Category: perimeter defense/screen. Culprit: Curry

1250 Helter-skelter play, Craft gets into the lane, ball bounces off us right back to him, layup. Category: misc. Culprit: none

1152 Mason isolated on the wing vs Buford, who takes him 1 on 1 off the dribble. Weak help by Miles - didn't even put his hands up. Category: perimeter defense off the dribble and then help/rotation by bigs. Culprits: Mason and Miles

1052 Sullinger posts Miles, Miles is slow to get around him (and that tuchus of his), fouls him on the shot. Category: inside man-to-man. Culprit: Miles

1000 Miles loses Sullinger on a pick, Mason doesn't realize it. Layup. Category: Help defense by bigs. Culprit: Mason

812 Craft gets baseline screen, no switch by Mason, who doesn't see it coming and allows himself to be screened; late help in lane by Miles. Layup. Category: Help defense by bigs. Culprit: Mason and Miles

720 Good ball movement by OSU, we're scrambling to keep up, Rivers a bit lost, refs miss obvious foot out of bounds on baseline by OSU, good passing leads to Sullinger dunk. Category: help/rotation Culprit: none

636 More good ball movement by OSU as we scramble on the perimeter. Cause of the scramble was soft double down by Rivers. We scramble, they kick it out and reverse it, leads to 3 by Craft. Category: help/rotation. Culprit: Rivers

503 Again, double down leads to kick-out and scramble and Sullinger layup. Better double by Austin, but good kick-out pass by Sullinger. Good recovery by Hairston and by Rivers, but Craft just drove by what I assume to be an exhausted Rivers and made the easy pass to Sullinger. Category: help/rotation. Culprit: none



OK so by my count, the category breakdown looks like this:

Lack of help or slow help including "help by bigs" - 10 hoops
Perimeter defense/screens - 9 hoops
Perimeter defense off the dribble - 4
Failed block outs - 3
Perimeter one-on-one defense - 3
Inside man-to-man defense - 3
Transition - 2
Zone principles issues - 1
Turnover - 1
Miscellaneous - 1


These probably don't add up to the total # of actual OSU hoops due to some hoops being attributable to more than one issue, or the defensive issue led to free throws instead of a field goal, or I just messed up a little, but the number should be close.

Individuals:

Mason had 3 instances that I attributed to bad help D that led to hoops
he had 3 of perimeter off-the-dribble issues that led to hoops
2 inside man-to man
and 1 other perimeter 1-on-1
That's a total of 9 hoops that his defense appeared to me to be a significant factor in the Buckeyes getting that bucket. I know he played a lot of minutes, and OSU has the best big man in college basketball, but 9 still seems like a lot.

Miles:
slow help - 3
perimeter off the dribble - 1
failed blockout - 1
inside man-to-man - 1
total: 6. That's also a lot considering his minutes.

Rivers:
perimeter defense/screen issues - 2
perimeter one-on-one - 1
failed blockout - 1
help/rotation - 1
total:5

Curry:
perimeter defense/screen issues - 3
transition - 1
total: 4

Kelly:
perimeter defense/screen issues - 2
perimeter off the dribble - 1
failed blockout - 1
total: 4. A lot considering his minutes. I think this is why he was pulled, not his getting skunked on offense.

Dawkins:
slow help - 1
Perimeter defense/screen issues - 1
failed blockout - 1
total: 3

Hairston:
perimeter defense/screen - 1

Thornton:
zone principles - 1

Mike and Quinn: 0


So I don't know how much all of that is worth. Maybe not much. And I know my methods are open to criticism, and there were judgment calls made by me throughout. But nevertheless if my analysis is even close, it lays out the areas that we were weak defensively in in this game and who may need to work on what.

As a team, we had an awful time handling screens -- both the screened man fighting through, which was almost nonexistent, as well as anybody else stepping up to help the screened man, and our rotations were often poor when the ball began to swing as a result of the floor being opened up by a screen. Recovering from solid screens being set is difficult. Perhaps that's why we do so much screening of our own on offense, right? (see Knight, Bob) But we've simply got to improve in this area on the defensive end.

Seth has got to get better at handling perimeter screens, fighting through when appropriate, being ready to switch when necessary, and doing so quickly. Too many easy opportunities for the Buckeyes on screen plays involving Curry.

Mason, as great a rebounder and shot alterer as he can be, did not play well defensively in this game, in a number of areas, if these numbers are credited. Our perimeter guys have taken a lot of criticism on these boards for their defensive performance, and perhaps rightfully so, but the big guys weren't any better. Surprisingly, it wasn't Sullinger just overpowering him inside in this game. Mason got beaten repeatedly in one-on-one, off the dribble situations by guys as well, and that just killed us too.

Miles has to get quicker and more aggressive in jumping out to help his teammates defensively.

Austin has to make a more consistent defensive effort in all areas, though to be fair he played a ton of minutes and was most of the offense in this game, and he had to be dog tired.

Anyway, that's it for now. Hope some of you find this interesting and/or helpful in some way. Comments are of course welcome.

[licc85]

AWESOME analysis. Very eye opening. Thanks for taking the time to do this.

[MarkD83]

Very good analysis.

Several observations of your analysis. The most common lapses in defense that you mentioned were:

"Lack of help or slow help including "help by bigs" - 10 hoops
Perimeter defense/screens - 9 hoops"

These are not problems that existed in other games this year and can be handled by coaching. They are also lapses which are indicators of tired legs since everyone may be s atep slow (this is not an excuse just an observation).

It is a bit unfair to attribute these lapses to individual players since Duke does play team defense. If someone gets beat on a screen one player may not have helped enough but the other player may not have fought through the screen enough. Slow help by a big also means there was a player who was perhaps too easily beaten not giving a big enough time to help.

Finally, often times defensive lapses are just a team executing their offense very well. A shut-out by the Duke BBall team would be fun to watch, but some plays you just can't stop.

[House G]

How do you improve your defense when you are alarmingly unathletic? :confused:

[HCheek37]

How do you improve your defense when you are alarmingly unathletic? :confused:

Next time Dickie V comes to Cameron the students shouldn't let him into the stands to jump around because hes not "athletic enough" for that. I know that K is shaking his head somewhere that another ESPN "analyst" put forth this point.

[wilko]

How do you improve your defense when you are alarmingly unathletic? :confused:

If I were a player... I'd foul harder. Not a brawl, but I'd get my moneys worth on every one.
No touch stuff. If I were going to do the "Handcheck" that gets called so often, I'd make it more of a push to make it look like a possible walk.

[OldPhiKap]

Next time Dickie V comes to Cameron the students shouldn't let him into the stands to jump around because hes not "athletic enough" for that. I know that K is shaking his head somewhere that another ESPN "analyst" put forth this point.

It worked well for us last time, IIRC . . . .

[wilko]

Very interesting reading.
Not entirely sure what to make of it. Kelly has the makings (right now) of a DYNAMITE Euro player. He can dazzle against shorter/less skilled players... but he has yet to be truly Elite against the Elite.

I noticed some of the same stuff against our other opponents, only they would miss the shot. The opponent blowing shots makes the D look A LOT better. It would be interesting to see you similarly break down the KU or Michigan game looking at shot attempts vs made missed baskets to see if the Defensive trends were there all along, but hidden by poor shooting. Really esoteric.

Dawkins has always had occasional lapses in D. He will have to learn to play thru bumps and drive to the hoop more using the <knight> shot-fake </knight>

Seth was uncharacteristically jammed the entire game - I think OSU learned something from the end of the KU game. Take away his space to operate and he is much less effective (at least in that 1 game). Seth will need to get better at handling that. I'm not surprised Cook got some burn Particularly after TT had about a 3 min stretch where he thought he was JJ.

This is going to be a bumpy season. Mason and Austin were the GUYS that came to play THAT night, so I cant say anything bad about them. Miles and Kelly WTF? off nights, bad match-up? Too soon to know for sure.

One thing I DO know...
Duke will get better from this. Sometimes you have to feel the heat to know that the stove is hot. I think we will learn a lot about this team in the next couple of games. I was AT the RBC when State beat Duke. It just wasn't Dukes night. Nothing worked. After that loss we marched to the '10 title. So I am hopeful meaningful lessons will be learned after this loss as well and we can at least improve.

[Kedsy]

Kelly:
total: 4. A lot considering his minutes. I think this is why he was pulled, not his getting skunked on offense.

Great analysis. Although it's interesting you think Ryan was pulled for poor defense when his "blown D per minute" (4/15 = .267) was actually better than Mason's (9/31, taking last 4 mins out of the denominator = .290).


Mason and Austin were the GUYS that came to play THAT night, so I cant say anything bad about them.

It's interesting how our views can get skewed by scoring. Mason and Austin are the guys who came to score that night, certainly. But if tommy's stats are accurate, Mason led the team in blown defensive plays (by a large margin) as well as committing four turnovers (also leading the team).

Having said that, I don't think Mason or Austin played significantly worse on D than anybody else. FWIW, using tommy's numbers, here are the "blown D per minute" stats (not counting last 4 minutes) for everyone on the team against Ohio State (worst to best):



Miles .353
Mason .290
Ryan .267
Andre .158
Seth .154
Austin .151
Tyler .125
Josh .111
Mike .000
Quinn .000


Which is interesting, because this makes it appears the defensive breakdown was mostly due to our bigs' mistakes, when my eyes told me during the game that the bigs played pretty well on D and the breakdowns were mostly due to poor perimeter D. Not sure if my eyes were wrong, or if tommy's analysis puts more emphasis on bigs' mistakes, but either way it provides food for thought.

[gwlaw99]

Not sure you can entirely blame Mason for getting scored on my Sullinger. No one can stop him.

[Kedsy]

Not sure you can entirely blame Mason for getting scored on my Sullinger. No one can stop him.

Yeah, but look at the breakdown. Only two of Mason's nine "blown D" instances were Sullinger scoring on Mason.

[Kedsy]

According to CBSSports (http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/rapid-reports/post/16319794) (which I saw through airowe's twitter feed), Quinn may start for Andre next game, in part because our perimeter D struggled against Ohio State. It will be interesting to see if this is accurate, because I'd be very surprised if Quinn/Seth/Austin is a better defensive arrangement than Seth/Austin/Andre. We'd be potentially giving up size at all three positions.

[jv001]

According to CBSSports (http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/rapid-reports/post/16319794) (which I saw through airowe's twitter feed), Quinn may start for Andre next game, in part because our perimeter D struggled against Ohio State. It will be interesting to see if this is accurate, because I'd be very surprised if Quinn/Seth/Austin is a better defensive arrangement than Seth/Austin/Andre. We'd be potentially giving up size at all three positions.

Could be that Quinn into the starting five is just for the Colorado State game. Colorado State is not very big. Their leading rebounder(7.0rbg) is Pierce Hornung a 6'5" F. He's not a big scorer but is hitting 61.5% of his shots. Their leading scorer(17.3pg is Wes Eikmeier a 6'3" g. He's shooting 42.5% of his shots. The leading assist man(2.9apg) is Dorian Green a 6'2" G. He's shooting 41.2% of his shots. They have a senior guard, Kaipo Sabas that plays sparingly but is hitting 70.6% of his his shots with 61.5% of his 3s(just 9-14). They have a 7 footer that plays very little. We should be able to pound the ball into Mason, Miles and Ryan. I believe any shakeup in our rotation will be to get the kids attention. Like you I'm skeptical of the Quinn/Seth/Austin defensive arrangement. GoDuke!

[_Gary]

According to CBSSports (http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/rapid-reports/post/16319794) (which I saw through airowe's twitter feed), Quinn may start for Andre next game, in part because our perimeter D struggled against Ohio State. It will be interesting to see if this is accurate, because I'd be very surprised if Quinn/Seth/Austin is a better defensive arrangement than Seth/Austin/Andre. We'd be potentially giving up size at all three positions.

I don't know if this is legit either, and I'm not necessarily going to advocate for it. Having said that, at some point you have to ask yourself if being able to stay in front of your man is more important than a size advantage. I know when I'm playing I can deal with a guy that might have a couple of inches on me if I can get by him. But conversely, if a guy has quicks and can stay in front of me it matters very little if I have a couple of inches on him (I'm speaking as a perimeter player, not a low post player).

[COYS]

Great analysis. Although it's interesting you think Ryan was pulled for poor defense when his "blown D per minute" (4/15 = .267) was actually better than Mason's (9/31, taking last 4 mins out of the denominator = .290).



It's interesting how our views can get skewed by scoring. Mason and Austin are the guys who came to score that night, certainly. But if tommy's stats are accurate, Mason led the team in blown defensive plays (by a large margin) as well as committing four turnovers (also leading the team).

Having said that, I don't think Mason or Austin played significantly worse on D than anybody else. FWIW, using tommy's numbers, here are the "blown D per minute" stats (not counting last 4 minutes) for everyone on the team against Ohio State (worst to best):



Miles .353
Mason .290
Ryan .267
Andre .158
Seth .154
Austin .151
Tyler .125
Josh .111
Mike .000
Quinn .000


Which is interesting, because this makes it appears the defensive breakdown was mostly due to our bigs' mistakes, when my eyes told me during the game that the bigs played pretty well on D and the breakdowns were mostly due to poor perimeter D. Not sure if my eyes were wrong, or if tommy's analysis puts more emphasis on bigs' mistakes, but either way it provides food for thought.

First, major props to Tommy for the info. Great, great, great stuff. Too painful for me to bother watching that game again!

Anyway, I wonder how many of the poor rotations came after our guards doing a poor job with screens. The 2010 team was great at rotations, etc., but part of how good Zoubs and Lance were at avoiding screens was how tough Nolan and Jon were on the perimeter. Nolan's long arms and wiry strength made him hard to screen and hard to get around. Jon was almost at Battier levels when it came to positioning on defense and Kyle was criminally underrated as a defender on the perimeter, despite his supposed lack of elite lateral speed. Even when one of those guys was beaten by a screen or dribble penetration, the offensive player usually had to take a slightly more roundabout way into the lane, giving our bigs more time to see what is coming. I feel like against Ohio St., Kansas, and others, our perimeter has been shredded so easily that the offensive player needs only to drive straight into the lane with little to no resistance, giving the bigs less time.

Note that this is not an attempt to defend our post rotations. Mason and Miles are clearly still learning in this regard and they indeed may be a step slow. However, it does seem that the sheer number of opportunities they had to blow a rotation is evidence that our perimeter was letting way too many Buckeyes into the paint.

[crimsondevil]

Very good analysis...

...It is a bit unfair to attribute these lapses to individual players since Duke does play team defense. If someone gets beat on a screen one player may not have helped enough but the other player may not have fought through the screen enough. Slow help by a big also means there was a player who was perhaps too easily beaten not giving a big enough time to help.

Finally, often times defensive lapses are just a team executing their offense very well. A shut-out by the Duke BBall team would be fun to watch, but some plays you just can't stop.

I'll second these comments. This is the sort of analysis that coaches do, I imagine. One thing, though, is that the absolute numbers of breakdowns could give a little bit of a skewed picture. Charting the misses (ideally even each time any player had the ball) would add to it. If, in a theoretical world, Sullinger beat Mason inside 9 times, that would look bad in the analysis. But if OSU had passed it down low to Sullinger every time and Mason forced him into bad shots such that Sullinger went 9 for 30 and had the ball stripped a few times, that would be a good defensive effort, not a bad one. Not that I'm suggesting the OP has to spend that many more hours charting... :)

[toooskies]

I'd like to note that it's easy to blame a big for a lot of plays near the hoop. But it's not a zone defense, and a defensive rotation in a man-to-man defense isn't supposed to be a 100% successful defensive strategy. Did OSU do a good job of getting our big men into places where it's hard to make a defensive rotation? Were they purposely scheming to break down our interior D?

In other words, I'd have to watch the game again and go through your breakdown to believe you; when I watched the game I didn't think the bigs were playing worse D than everyone else. Instead, I thought we did a terrible job rebounding.

[JMarley50]

Great analysis. Although it's interesting you think Ryan was pulled for poor defense when his "blown D per minute" (4/15 = .267) was actually better than Mason's (9/31, taking last 4 mins out of the denominator = .290).



It's interesting how our views can get skewed by scoring. Mason and Austin are the guys who came to score that night, certainly. But if tommy's stats are accurate, Mason led the team in blown defensive plays (by a large margin) as well as committing four turnovers (also leading the team).

Having said that, I don't think Mason or Austin played significantly worse on D than anybody else. FWIW, using tommy's numbers, here are the "blown D per minute" stats (not counting last 4 minutes) for everyone on the team against Ohio State (worst to best):



Miles .353
Mason .290
Ryan .267
Andre .158
Seth .154
Austin .151
Tyler .125
Josh .111
Mike .000
Quinn .000


Which is interesting, because this makes it appears the defensive breakdown was mostly due to our bigs' mistakes, when my eyes told me during the game that the bigs played pretty well on D and the breakdowns were mostly due to poor perimeter D. Not sure if my eyes were wrong, or if tommy's analysis puts more emphasis on bigs' mistakes, but either way it provides food for thought.

This is a great analysis, I would like to see this after every game. It would really show defensive trends. I agree with you I thought the bigs played pretty good D, but these numbers show different. I wonder if these numbers can be misleading though. For example, if the bigs were instructed not to stray very far from Sullinger, there would be some plays that look like blown help assignments. When in reality they were doing what they were instructed to do. I'm not saying this is necessarily the case, just possible.

[Kedsy]

Having said that, at some point you have to ask yourself if being able to stay in front of your man is more important than a size advantage.

I agree with this, but so far I haven't seen any evidence that Quinn (or Seth or Austin, or Tyler for that matter) can stay in front of his man any more than Andre can. Combine that with the size disadvantage and it would appear as if a Quinn/Seth/Austin would be at a defensive disadvantage.

[gam7]

Awesome work tommy. One comment that I'm sure you thought about when going through the game: just because OSU scored or got to the free throw line doesn't mean there was a culprit or breakdown of the defense. You can play great defense and the other team scores anyway. Also, sometimes defensive decisions often are made with the intention of decreasing the likelihood that the other team will score. For example, on the first score of the game, I suspect Curry did exactly as he was instructed to do by going under the Sully screen even if it meant that Craft would have an opportunity to take a 3. Over time, allowing Craft to get a look may have been the smart play even if he hit the shot that time. In sum, you can't take away everything, so you live with certain defensive "lapses" that give the other team a relatively low likelihood of success.

[Kedsy]

I wonder if these numbers can be misleading though. For example, if the bigs were instructed not to stray very far from Sullinger, there would be some plays that look like blown help assignments. When in reality they were doing what they were instructed to do. I'm not saying this is necessarily the case, just possible.

I wonder the same thing. If the perimeter guy can't get through a screen and then the interior defender is slow to help, who should get "credited" with the blown D? You'd think the big guy, but it wouldn't have happened if the perimeter guy had successfully fought through the screen. In the same situation, if the interior defender steps up in time but the ball is dumped off for a layup, who gets tagged then? Let's say the perimeter guy switched onto the screener properly, so he did what he was supposed to do, and the big did what he was supposed to do, too. So in that case, is it the 2nd big who didn't rotate over quickly enough?

As fans, most of what we can see is one-on-one D and opportunistic steals or blocks. It's a lot harder to notice solid help defense and good rotations and switches. Our team defense is pretty complicated, so it may not be so easy to assign "blame."

Still, great analysis by tommy.

[airowe]

I agree with this, but so far I haven't seen any evidence that Quinn (or Seth or Austin, or Tyler for that matter) can stay in front of his man any more than Andre can. Combine that with the size disadvantage and it would appear as if a Quinn/Seth/Austin would be at a defensive disadvantage.

Honestly, it can't be much worse. What we may lose in height on D we will more than make up for by

1) Forcing a small forward to guard Austin. Good luck with that.
2) Allowing Seth to play off the ball. It's his more natural position and he's shooting the hell out of the ball.
3) Putting Quinn in the Point Guard spot will put a distributor in that lead guard role. He's better than anyone on our team this.

I'm not saying this will happen, but if it does the pros outweigh the cons.

[Kedsy]

Forcing a small forward to guard Austin. Good luck with that.

Why would they be forced to do that? They could put the small forward on Seth. Make it a lot tougher for him to shoot and he won't blow by too many people. Possibly make him disappear the way people think Andre disappear. (And possibly not, if Seth moves more without the ball than Andre does.)

And I disagree that the defense can't get much worse. Also, while I agree Quinn is the best distributor among our guards, if we assume Austin's usage rate stays where it is (meaning the ball is in his hands a LOT), I'm not convinced Quinn/Austin/Seth is any better than Seth/Austin/Andre on offense, either. If Austin learns to kick out to the shooters, then Andre would be better to have out there than Quinn. If Austin doesn't learn, then I don't think it matters either way. If Austin defers to Quinn and starts playing more off the ball, then it could be a better offensive configuration, but I think that's the least likely alternative.

To me, the possible offensive pros of the Quinn/Seth/Austin backcourt would be outweighed by the defensive cons. But obviously that's just my opinion.

[Wander]

Honestly, it can't be much worse. What we may lose in height on D we will more than make up for by

1) Forcing a small forward to guard Austin. Good luck with that.
2) Allowing Seth to play off the ball. It's his more natural position and he's shooting the hell out of the ball.
3) Putting Quinn in the Point Guard spot will put a distributor in that lead guard role. He's better than anyone on our team this.

I'm not saying this will happen, but if it does the pros outweigh the cons.

This sounds good in a vacuum, but in context I'm not sure your benefits are that strong. Austin is already repeatedly beating his man off the dribble. Seth is already scoring well. We have other issues that are IMO more important to address. And while the defense isn't up to Duke standards right now, I think it most certainly can get worse.

[_Gary]

Honestly, it can't be much worse. What we may lose in height on D we will more than make up for by

1) Forcing a small forward to guard Austin. Good luck with that.
2) Allowing Seth to play off the ball. It's his more natural position and he's shooting the hell out of the ball.
3) Putting Quinn in the Point Guard spot will put a distributor in that lead guard role. He's better than anyone on our team this.

I'm not saying this will happen, but if it does the pros outweigh the cons.

I absolutely agree with the 2nd and 3rd point as very big pros. One can go both ways with Austin possibly having to guard a bigger SF. But even there it's probably a pro more so than a con.

The sample size is small, and Lord knows I really do love Andre, but I think from the little I've seen that Quinn can stay in front of his man better than Andre can. And of course the rotation would be different because we'd be talking about QC staying in front of a PG and AD staying in front of a SF or SG, but overall I think we'd be better off defensively. I'm still not trying to say I advocate this potential move, but I'm not going to be up in arms about it should we see it happen in the next game or two either.

[JMarley50]

This sounds good in a vacuum, but in context I'm not sure your benefits are that strong. Austin is already repeatedly beating his man off the dribble. Seth is already scoring well. We have other issues that are IMO more important to address. And while the defense isn't up to Duke standards right now, I think it most certainly can get worse.


The good thing is, this is the perfect stretch of games to experiment. The Quinn/Seth/Austin lineup will do a couple things. I think it makes us more uptempo, and gives us a guard that knows how to distribute. If you get Austin out and running on the primary break he's going to be hard to stop from getting to the rim. Andre doesn't give us that threat. He gets out on the break and looks to spot up. If they do manage to head Austin off (it will probably take two) I'm sure Seth will do a really good job of trailing to the opposite wing and should get some good looks. Mason is fast enough to get out and run with them, then you'd have Ryan trailing to the top of the key.

Defensively I think we would be ok against most teams. It would allow more 3/4 and full court pressure. The only problem is when we are going against someone with a bigger 3 like Prince Harry. I think Austin would be at a major disadvantage there. He just doesn't have the strength yet.

[airowe]

Why would they be forced to do that? They could put the small forward on Seth. Make it a lot tougher for him to shoot and he won't blow by too many people. Possibly make him disappear the way people think Andre disappear. (And possibly not, if Seth moves more without the ball than Andre does.)

And I disagree that the defense can't get much worse. Also, while I agree Quinn is the best distributor among our guards, if we assume Austin's usage rate stays where it is (meaning the ball is in his hands a LOT), I'm not convinced Quinn/Austin/Seth is any better than Seth/Austin/Andre on offense, either. If Austin learns to kick out to the shooters, then Andre would be better to have out there than Quinn. If Austin doesn't learn, then I don't think it matters either way. If Austin defers to Quinn and starts playing more off the ball, then it could be a better offensive configuration, but I think that's the least likely alternative.

To me, the possible offensive pros of the Quinn/Seth/Austin backcourt would be outweighed by the defensive cons. But obviously that's just my opinion.

You put most small forwards on Seth and he will shot fake them right out of their Jordans. http://hoopspeak.com/coaches/2011/12/seth-currys-shot-fake-attack/

Seth, Andre nor Austin have done a good job of staying in front of their men. I don't see the detriment in replacing Seth with Quinn, Austin with Seth, and Andre with Austin and adjusting the defensive rotations to allow for more help on the perimeter (see packline defense: http://coachingbetterbball.blogspot.com/2009/07/breaking-down-dick-bennetts-packline.html).

[Devilsfan]

Just maybe we're forgetting just how good a team Thad has assembled. Don't lose sight of how much easier he has it when it comes to potential recruits being able to qualify as so called "student "athletes".

[dcar1985]

You put most small forwards on Seth and he will shot fake them right out of their Jordans. http://hoopspeak.com/coaches/2011/12/seth-currys-shot-fake-attack/

Seth, Andre nor Austin have done a good job of staying in front of their men. I don't see the detriment in replacing Seth with Quinn, Austin with Seth, and Andre with Austin and adjusting the defensive rotations to allow for more help on the perimeter (see packline defense: http://coachingbetterbball.blogspot.com/2009/07/breaking-down-dick-bennetts-packline.html).

That's as good as a blow by IMO....

[UrinalCake]

If we're making a change to the starting lineup for defensive purposes then why wouldn't Tyler start instead of Cook?

Great analysis of the defense, and I too would love to see one that encompasses all possessions. It might appear that Mason made the most mistakes, but maybe he made three times as many "good" defensive plays as anyone else and that's not showing up. Also, once we got down big our guards had to gamble a little more and try to create some turnovers, so that could skew things too.

My overall takeaway from this is that we need to fight through screens and hedge harder, or switch if it's another guard setting the screen. We should be able to switch a lot since our guards are fairly interchangeable. Once our guards get beat, either by a screen or a one-one-one blow-by, then everything breaks down. Average teams might still not make anything happen but good teams like OSU will find a way to score.

[Lennies]

I'm not sure that OSU could shoot that well again in an empty gym.

[CDu]

If we're making a change to the starting lineup for defensive purposes then why wouldn't Tyler start instead of Cook?

I suspect that the CBS guy's editorialization of a potential change rather than an actual reason. I'd guess that if Cook got the start over Dawkins it would be for a different look rather than for defensive purposes. I agree that the defensive substitution would be Thornton.

The team is clearly a work in progress on both ends. That much should have been expected from the beginning considering how many players are in new roles at the D-1 collegiate level.

[House G]

If we're making a change to the starting lineup for defensive purposes then why wouldn't Tyler start instead of Cook?


i wondered the same thing.

[_Gary]

Okay, I know Tyler hit the big 3s in Maui, and I also know Quinn hit all air on at least one 3 in Ohio the other night, but based on everything I've seen there's no question Quinn has a better outside shot than Tyler. Seems like a no-brainer to me on the offensive end. When Tyler is out there (other than the miracle in Maui) he just isn't an offensive threat at all. I think with Quinn you have a guy that merits the defense paying at least a little bit of attention to.

Just my two cents.

[Duvall]

Okay, I know Tyler hit the big 3s in Maui, and I also know Quinn hit all air on at least one 3 in Ohio the other night, but based on everything I've seen there's no question Quinn has a better outside shot than Tyler. Seems like a no-brainer to me on the offensive end. When Tyler is out there (other than the miracle in Maui) he just isn't an offensive threat at all. I think with Quinn you have a guy that merits the defense paying at least a little bit of attention to.

Just my two cents.

If Duke were worried about the offensive end, and outside shooting in particular, they wouldn't be making a change in the starting lineup.

[_Gary]

If Duke were worried about the offensive end, and outside shooting in particular, they wouldn't be making a change in the starting lineup.

Of course. I'm not arguing otherwise. But if you can insert a guy for defensive purposes who also happens to be at least somewhat of a threat on the offensive end then it's all the better, isn't it?

[Duvall]

Of course. I'm not arguing otherwise. But if you can insert a guy for defensive purposes who also happens to be at least somewhat of a threat on the offensive end then it's all the better, isn't it?

Sure, unless the guy are inserting is a worse defender than the guy he's replacing.

[_Gary]

Sure, unless the guy are inserting is a worse defender than the guy he's replacing.

Right. And that's the probably what the coaching staff is tinkering with right now. :D

[tommy]

Very interesting reading.
I noticed some of the same stuff against our other opponents, only they would miss the shot. The opponent blowing shots makes the D look A LOT better. It would be interesting to see you similarly break down the KU or Michigan game looking at shot attempts vs made missed baskets to see if the Defensive trends were there all along, but hidden by poor shooting. Really esoteric.

Yeah, I may try to do that if I can find the time. You're right - even for the OSU game, as you and other responders to my OP suggest, it would be helpful to look at ALL defensive possessions, not just those that resulted in an OSU basket, and do the same kind of analysis. That way, we would be able to see defensive lapses that did not result in baskets, but were nonetheless defensive lapses, as well as positive defensive actions. I'll see if I can get that done, but no promises!



Great analysis. Although it's interesting you think Ryan was pulled for poor defense when his "blown D per minute" (4/15 = .267) was actually better than Mason's (9/31, taking last 4 mins out of the denominator = .290).

It's interesting how our views can get skewed by scoring. Mason and Austin are the guys who came to score that night, certainly. But if tommy's stats are accurate, Mason led the team in blown defensive plays (by a large margin) as well as committing four turnovers (also leading the team).

Having said that, I don't think Mason or Austin played significantly worse on D than anybody else. FWIW, using tommy's numbers, here are the "blown D per minute" stats (not counting last 4 minutes) for everyone on the team against Ohio State (worst to best):



Miles .353
Mason .290
Ryan .267
Andre .158
Seth .154
Austin .151
Tyler .125
Josh .111
Mike .000
Quinn .000


Which is interesting, because this makes it appears the defensive breakdown was mostly due to our bigs' mistakes, when my eyes told me during the game that the bigs played pretty well on D and the breakdowns were mostly due to poor perimeter D. Not sure if my eyes were wrong, or if tommy's analysis puts more emphasis on bigs' mistakes, but either way it provides food for thought.

Thanks Kedsy. Love the way you synthesized the info and analyzed it on a per-minute basis. I should've done that -- I thought about it, but was just too tired last night!

You're so right that our overall opinions tend to get skewed by scoring. That's why I engaged in this exercise -- to try to determine what was actually going on defensively, without it being affected by what was going on at the offensive end or by the score and overall flow of the game, the crowd, etc.

Another point I should've made is that when you look at the "data," (and I know this is only one game, but if you were to generalize from it) if you're an opposing coach or scout, you'd have to say that one part of your game plan against Duke should be to draw our bigs out from under the hoop, and then put it on the floor and drive by them. Mason, Miles, and Ryan all had trouble with that. Opponents would probably want to exploit that more until either our bigs start to move their feet better, or our other guys learn to help better.

Also, in terms of my analysis skewing towards the bigs' mistakes, I don't know but I tried to make sure I wasn't doing that. I really looked at each play, sometimes many times, and tried to make the best assessment I could as to who, if more than one guy was involved in a defensive play, who was really the one who either missed an assignment, which guy really didn't appear to give the effort he needed to, which guy was really the one caught out of position, etc. Maybe I failed sometimes. But I did try to assess it fairly.



I'll second these comments. This is the sort of analysis that coaches do, I imagine. One thing, though, is that the absolute numbers of breakdowns could give a little bit of a skewed picture. Charting the misses (ideally even each time any player had the ball) would add to it. If, in a theoretical world, Sullinger beat Mason inside 9 times, that would look bad in the analysis. But if OSU had passed it down low to Sullinger every time and Mason forced him into bad shots such that Sullinger went 9 for 30 and had the ball stripped a few times, that would be a good defensive effort, not a bad one. Not that I'm suggesting the OP has to spend that many more hours charting... :)

Again, I agree that including the missed shots would give us a more complete picture. Obviously. Just a matter of me having time to do it.



I'd have to watch the game again and go through your breakdown to believe you; when I watched the game I didn't think the bigs were playing worse D than everyone else. Instead, I thought we did a terrible job rebounding.

What I did was go through the whole game with remote in hand and rewinded and replayed (sometimes many times) each defensive play. It's not just "watching the game again." When you take the time to go back on each play again and again, pausing where necessary, moving it forward and back, forward and back, it's amazing what you see. You can really see what caused a breakdown, who was a step slow, who helped well on a play, who didn't help, who rotated properly and who didn't, who didn't hustle, who didn't fight through, who didn't hedge quite enough, who had his head turned and therefore missed something important going on, and so on. It really allows you to understand what happened to a much different extent than simply watching the game as we all do when the game is first on, you don't know the outcome, you're excited, etc.

By the way, as to your point about the rebounding: based on my review of the game, in detail, I disagree. There were actually very few second chance opportunities that Ohio State enjoyed. One reason is that their first shot went in so often. But we did a pretty good job on the defensive boards.



Awesome work tommy. One comment that I'm sure you thought about when going through the game: just because OSU scored or got to the free throw line doesn't mean there was a culprit or breakdown of the defense. You can play great defense and the other team scores anyway.

Very true. Which is why, in my summary, sometimes for "culprit" I indicated "none." These other guys are good -- very, very good. Sometimes they're going to make plays and score and it's nobody's fault. Of course!



Great analysis of the defense, and I too would love to see one that encompasses all possessions. It might appear that Mason made the most mistakes, but maybe he made three times as many "good" defensive plays as anyone else and that's not showing up. Also, once we got down big our guards had to gamble a little more and try to create some turnovers, so that could skew things too.

"Upon further review" I actually saw very little gambling, at least little gambling in the passing lanes and that sort of thing, from our guards. Maybe that was due to fatigue, but even that wouldn't explain Cook and Thornton not playing the lanes more.


My overall takeaway from this is that we need to fight through screens and hedge harder, or switch if it's another guard setting the screen. We should be able to switch a lot since our guards are fairly interchangeable. Once our guards get beat, either by a screen or a one-one-one blow-by, then everything breaks down. Average teams might still not make anything happen but good teams like OSU will find a way to score.

Agree with you that we have a lot of work to do to combat screens and screen/roll plays. What I saw though wasn't their guards setting screens for each other, necessitating our guards to switch with each other. It was their big men (especially Sullinger) setting the screens, and our having difficulty with switches between a guard and a big. Those are inherently difficult, especially with a screener as skilled and as big as Sullinger, but still, we didn't handle them well.



I'd also say that, as poor a night as we had defensively, a close review of the game really does disclose what an excellent game Ohio State played. They took very, very few poor shots. They missed very, very few opportunities around the basket (contrary to our missing a number of close shots on our end). They are a very, very good screening team, and they pass the ball extremely well. Obviously not all of our opponents are going to be this skilled and have this good of a night against us. But still, playing a team of this caliber, playing its best, really does provide us a ton of learning opportunities, and should provide us motivation to improve in several important areas, both as a team and as individual players. I know we'll take advantage of those opportunities moving forward.

[jafarr1]

A lot of work there. Interesting stuff. I do spot a flaw or two in the scoring, which may have already been mentioned by somebody else (I didn't have time to read the whole thread).

Mason gets picked on a bit, because a primary goal of any defense is to make the other team take tough shots, and in that respect Mason did a better job than pretty much anyone else on Duke's side. Even some of the descriptions mention the difficulty of the shots made on Mason. Those kinds of mistakes (if they even are mistakes) are far less egregious than giving up open looks and/or letting a guard past you and into the lane (which forces Mason into a tough spot and also affects his perception). To get a truer picture, one would either need to ignore the tough shots or somehow discount how much you count for each breakdown.

Also, on some plays, I would expect points to be ascribed to multiple players. It's not fair for the help defense to be expected to pitch a shutout when none of Duke's guards seemed to keep their players in front of them on the perimeter. Help defense is one thing, and bailing out the guards all night is another.

[hustleplays]

I agree with this, but so far I haven't seen any evidence that Quinn (or Seth or Austin, or Tyler for that matter) can stay in front of his man any more than Andre can. Combine that with the size disadvantage and it would appear as if a Quinn/Seth/Austin would be at a defensive disadvantage.

Perhaps the reason that Quinn is starting [if he is] is because of our need to develop a true, top-tier PG. Defense by every individual on the floor is essential, I realize that. Having a superior floor leader on offense is a force-multiplier, the smart muscle behind the fist.

[UrinalCake]

What I saw though wasn't their guards setting screens for each other, necessitating our guards to switch with each other. It was their big men (especially Sullinger) setting the screens, and our having difficulty with switches between a guard and a big. Those are inherently difficult, especially with a screener as skilled and as big as Sullinger, but still, we didn't handle them well.

Zoubek was the master of the hedge. When his man would set a screen for the guy with the ball, Z would step out and slow the guard down just enough that he couldn't drive, yet at the same time he'd know exactly when to get back to his man to not leave him open. Mason tries to do this but looks to me to be a little more lackadaisical, he just sort of sticks his arm out. With his athleticism he should be able to step out and disrupt the guard; I'm sure it will be a point of emphasis in practice

[Kedsy]

Perhaps the reason that Quinn is starting [if he is] is because of our need to develop a true, top-tier PG. Defense by every individual on the floor is essential, I realize that. Having a superior floor leader on offense is a force-multiplier, the smart muscle behind the fist.

Perhaps. Except other than possibly the Ohio State game, I haven't noticed our offense having too much trouble. Even including Ohio State, according to Pomeroy we have the 6th best adjusted offensive efficiency in the country. So if our offense is that good, I wouldn't think the "need to develop a true, top-tier PG" would take precedence over defense (which according to Pomeroy is as bad as we've been in the past 10 years).

In this case, I think Seth is a superior enough floor leader (especially compared to a freshman) that I think we should be focusing on D.

[Newton_14]

Zoubek was the master of the hedge. When his man would set a screen for the guy with the ball, Z would step out and slow the guard down just enough that he couldn't drive, yet at the same time he'd know exactly when to get back to his man to not leave him open. Mason tries to do this but looks to me to be a little more lackadaisical, he just sort of sticks his arm out. With his athleticism he should be able to step out and disrupt the guard; I'm sure it will be a point of emphasis in practice

Hedging is tricky. Especially the way Duke's defense plays it. When one big hedges out top, he obviously abandons his man, especially if the hedge is at the top of the key. When that happens, the 2nd big rotates over to cover the hedging big's man, which is critical if the screener quickly rolls to the basket and gets the ball. Several times last year this happened and the screener got the ball on the "roll" and scored. Some people screamed bloody murder that the hedging big "did not recover quickly enough and screwed up". In actuality, the helping big in that scenario was late in his help rotation, and the basket was on him, not the hedging big.

Also, and this is impressive when the helping big executes it perfectly, depending on where the screen and hedge happens, at times in Duke's scheme, the helping big actually covers both his offensive big, AND the hedging big's man. Hard to do, but impressive when done correctly, and not a major sin (because of degree of difficulty) when the helping big fails. Lance Thomas was an absolute master in the scenario of covering both at the same time until the hedging big recovered. That Ryan, Mason, or Miles are not as good at that as Lance does not make them weak defenders, it's just that Lance was incredible at it.

Our 3 main bigs have become good at their rotations in this very difficult scheme that K deploys. There is room for improvement for sure, but I would not declare them bad at it. Just not as good as Lance was. As you noted, once Zoubs finally got healthy feet and in shape, he became really good at it considering his overall lack of quickness.

[Bob Green]

Zoubek was the master of the hedge. When his man would set a screen for the guy with the ball, Z would step out and slow the guard down just enough that he couldn't drive, yet at the same time he'd know exactly when to get back to his man to not leave him open.

Wow! I've either entered the Twilight Zone or some serious revisionism is going on here. If I had the time and inclination to conduct a search (okay the inclination as I obviously have the time), I could find dozens of threads with dozens of posts where countless DBR posters proselytize against the evil tactic of Zoubek hedging because he always gets beat or commits a foul. "Why is 7'2" Zoubek crowding a guard 20' from the basket?" screams the DBR masses.

[COYS]

Wow! I've either entered the Twilight Zone or some serious revisionism is going on here. If I had the time and inclination to conduct a search (okay the inclination as I obviously have the time), I could find dozens of threads with dozens of posts where countless DBR posters proselytize against the evil tactic of Zoubek hedging because he always gets beat or commits a foul. "Why is 7'2" Zoubek crowding a guard 20' from the basket?" screams the DBR masses.

Ha! I was going to write the same thing. I actually think the fact that Zoubek and Thomas became masters of the hedge shows that this team can improve. It took Zoubek three and a half seasons before he got it down.

I also agree with Newton that the weakside big's positioning with regard to the screener makes a difference, as well. A perfect hedge is no good if the screener is wide open with no one around him.

[JMarley50]

Zoubek was the master of the hedge. When his man would set a screen for the guy with the ball, Z would step out and slow the guard down just enough that he couldn't drive, yet at the same time he'd know exactly when to get back to his man to not leave him open. Mason tries to do this but looks to me to be a little more lackadaisical, he just sort of sticks his arm out. With his athleticism he should be able to step out and disrupt the guard; I'm sure it will be a point of emphasis in practice

This is actually one of the areas I think Mason has shown significant improvement in compared to the last two seasons. Its still not great, but its better IMO. I think some of it is due to him thinking less and playing more by feel.

Like you mentioned the purpose of the hedge is to show yourself just enough to make the guard with the ball hesitate. You don't really have to leave your man to do that. I always tried to keep my hand on my guy's hip when he went to set a pick. I could still step out far enough to cause the guard to slow up, and if my man tried to slip the screen I would know because I would lose contact. If the guard lobbed it over the top I knew there was backside help. If he threw a bounce pass I was still somewhat in the passing lane and had a chance to get a hand on it. This is what Zoubs learned, and by making himself as wide as possible (which is pretty wide) he could essentially defend two guys just long enough for his teammate to recover. He wasn't a great athlete but his senior year he learned to do all of the little things that make a big difference.

In the past both Mason and Miles would pretty much run out at the guard with the ball and often times even jump out past him. They were usually in bad defensive posture as well (standing up straight) so the guard with the ball could easily get around. Because they were jumping out so hard their momentum carried them away from the basket, and when their guy rolled they had a really hard time recovering. So in essence instead of guarding two men temporarily they would take themselves out of the picture entirely and guard nobody. Miles still does this...

If I'm not mistaken Mason stole a pass in this exact scenario against OSU. Sullinger rolled and the guard tried to lob it over the top, Mason released and got it. I could be wrong though. Can anyone confirm?