MBB: Notre Dame 93, Duke 89 Post Game Thread

[throatybeard]

It really is. It also sums up the ethos well: keep the ball out of the middle at all costs and force long jumpers.

That video was super cool, thanks; I almost never watch anything when I could have read some print instead, and I watched that whole thing.

You've convinced me. Shoot Krzyzewski an email. Among other considerations, we've usually got the personnel to do this.

[CDu]

I don't think it's a bad idea to incorporate some pack line principles, but one issue with the pack line is that it requires a high degree of coordination and communication by all five defenders. That's typically lacking with younger players. UVA consistently has one of the best defenses because Bennett drills it relentlessly and only plays guys who play the defense well. That may be difficult to do with all the turnover in the program.

I actually like the idea of exploring No Middle (which Texas Tech and Baylor play) as an option, which focuses on playing aggressive man to man that forces the offensive player to the baseline and sideline. The help defense packs into the paint, so that the middle is never a viable option for the driver off a pick and roll. I also think No Middle fits K's sensibilities better, since it still involves pressuring the ball handler and playing passing lanes (just in ways that better account for the prevalence of pick and roll play). This isn't surprising since Chris Beard is also a Bob Knight disciple. Here's a video explanation of the mechanics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KH0...ture=emb_title

Worth noting that the No Middle has the same issues as, well, really ANY defense in that it requires great coordination. It heavily relies on the help defense to protect against dribble penetration. I am pretty sure that's a staple of Coach K's defensive philosophy too, but our guys just aren't good at those secondary rotations. It doesn't matter what defensive philosophy you choose, if the rotations aren't there, the defense isn't going to work.

To wit: with the exception of the Miami game, since we switched back to man-to-man we've had our bigs sagging off on the high ball screens, which is in line with the No Middle concept. We did this against Ga Tech, Clemson, and Notre Dame. It worked for us against Tech and Clemson. It wasn't successful against Notre Dame, in part because Hurt and Johnson really struggled (and Williams is just overmatched in terms of quickness right now) and in part because Notre Dame is a really well-coached and talented offense and knows how to get good shots against almost any defense. Against Miami, for some reason we switched things up and pressured high with our bigs, and got roasted. Then switched to the 3-2 zone instead of back to drop coverage. Against UNC, they don't run a ton of high ball screens so it's sort of moot.

Ultimately, the key with all of these defenses is that the guys off the ball have to be really engaged at all times. It's also important that on-ball defense is good too. Not coincidentally, those Texas Tech, UVa, and Baylor teams succeed largely because they have veteran rosters playing those defenses.

[AtlDuke72]

Apologies in advance, but how do you pretend to know DBR posting history from Duke tournament exits several years ago? You are a relative newcomer, and I suppose you might have dug through the years and years of archives in your free time to do your research. It just seems a bit unlikely.

And yes, this board does cling more tightly to facts and statistics rather than "gut feeling" or "eye test." We're crazy like that.

We're also more than a bit defensive when someone calls us out at a whole. If you are inclined to critique the entire DBR forum, perhaps it's not a good fit for you and your negativity.

Can we vote somebody off the island ?

[DukeHoo]

Worth noting that the No Middle has the same issues as, well, really ANY defense in that it requires great coordination. It heavily relies on the help defense to protect against dribble penetration. I am pretty sure that's a staple of Coach K's defensive philosophy too, but our guys just aren't good at those secondary rotations. It doesn't matter what defensive philosophy you choose, if the rotations aren't there, the defense isn't going to work.

To wit: with the exception of the Miami game, since we switched back to man-to-man we've had our bigs sagging off on the high ball screens, which is in line with the No Middle concept. We did this against Ga Tech, Clemson, and Notre Dame. It worked for us against Tech and Clemson. It wasn't successful against Notre Dame, in part because Hurt and Johnson really struggled (and Williams is just overmatched in terms of quickness right now) and in part because Notre Dame is a really well-coached and talented offense and knows how to get good shots against almost any defense. Against Miami, for some reason we switched things up and pressured high with our bigs, and got roasted. Then switched to the 3-2 zone instead of back to drop coverage. Against UNC, they don't run a ton of high ball screens so it's sort of moot.

Ultimately, the key with all of these defenses is that the guys off the ball have to be really engaged at all times. It's also important that on-ball defense is good too. Not coincidentally, those Texas Tech, UVa, and Baylor teams succeed largely because they have veteran rosters playing those defenses.

These all great points as well, and I do think the current roster's ability to execute any defensive gameplan is an important consideration. I proposed looking into No Middle principles because we do have a tendency to overextend our defense at times (which can be a problem since the changes allowing for more freedom of movement), and I don't think that it would hurt to look at defenses primed at stopping high ball screens and dribble penetration. When teaching the players, we have to start from somewhere and I think that No Middle gives us a good foundation to build on. I also think No Middle would be easier for a younger roster to execute than something like the packline.

That being said, you are correct that a major problem with this team is that the current players don't play basic defense well. They don't rotate well, they don't get around screens well, and they don't stay engaged off ball (which is why we are where we are). I do think that having some basic team defense principles would help though, in that players would have some hard and fast rules to follow while they learn to play defense better.

[throatybeard]

I move that we adopt No Middle and then recruit a kid named Middlebrooks. Coach him up to work defense irrespective of offensive ability, no matter the cost.

No Middle Middlebrooks will immediately give Brickey, Davis and Wojciechowski a run for throatybeard's favorite player of all time. I'll get a custom jersey sewn before he passes freshman writing.