Ben Ball Notes: Howland To Try Out Zone?
by Nestor on Nov 30, 2009 5:10 AM PST
30 comments
I stayed away from all traditional media outlets until this am. So just seeing this in the LAT's game report:
[W]ith UCLA suffering a third loss in four days at the Anaheim Convention Center, Coach Ben Howland uttered words that some people around Westwood never thought they would hear.
"We may have to play some zone," said the coach who built his program on scrappy, man-to-man defense. "We're definitely going to have to play softer and pack it in because we're getting beat."
Frank Burlison provided a little more context on Howland's thinking on why is he thinking about the zone:
"You're going to have a hard time in every game if you can't stay in front of the basketball (off the dribble, man to man)," he said. "Maybe we'll go to some zone or, at least play softer (man to man) and pack it in and be more help-conscious."
When was the last time he has had these kinds of concerns about defense, which has been the foundation of the program during his six-plus years at the school?
"We've been pretty good the last five or six years," he said. "It's been a while - a long while, I should say."
Honestly, I am still not sure how I feel about. Is he really going to do this? If so is he going to make an earnest attempt to play zone or will he make a half-hearted one by giving it a shot for few mins and then going back to man to man (if it's not working right away)? Does this mean we will see a a little more of JMM on the court?
Speaking of seeing action on the court, it sounds like TH is getting close to his return:
Freshman forward Tyler Honeycutt said he should be able to return to the Bruins for the Dec. 6 game against top-ranked Kansas after sitting out the first six games with a stress reaction in his right tibia. We'll see if that's the case since he still hasn't practiced at full speed. Honeycutt will help, but he's not a savior offensively.
The problems with the Bruins are missing too many good looks, a lack of consistency at the free throw line, lack of a proven go-to post player and erratic effort, which often results in inconsistent defense.
Right now, I am shudderomg to think how we can get by experimenting with something totally new to all of our systems against a team like Kansas. MR offered up the following thoughts on this upcoming week:
"Practice," Roll said, when asked what the Bruins can do to get better. "This whole week (in practice) we're going to have to listen to coach, get back to the fundamentals and get back to 100 percent effort every day."
Right now, I have no idea what to expect in our game and it's an unsettling feeling I haven't experienced around UCLA basketball in years.
GO BRUINS.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
0 recs |
30 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I would be more encouraged
if he was going to open up the offense. Our defense is hurting, that’s true, but all the big losses in recent years, we lost because we couldn’t score when we really needed it.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
"Open up the offense"
I’m so sick of this phrase. It doesn’t mean anything. If you mean get out and push the ball or just run simpler sets or run isolation, then say so, so people can debate the merits of changing up our offensive looks, but “open up the offense” is just a catchall for “we should score more”. I will say right now that there is no system in existence that will be successful the way we bricked wide open shots yesterday.
And I know this sounds like I'm singling you out
But I’m not…well I am in that you used the phrase, but you’re hardly alone. I’ve just reached my breaking point with it.
I used the phrase deliberately.
I could have called for a ‘run and gun’ or the Princeton “back door” even Wooden’s ‘high post’. My point is simply as you stated, we need to score more. I don’t care how we do it, so long as we don’t come down at the end of games and pass the ball around looking like we have no clue and just hope somebody will knock down the bucket, like we saw against Portland. Give me anything along the lines of a systemic offense that produces good looks at the basket.
Personally, I’m all for the run & gun since it is predicated on good strong defense which Howland loves. You can have your cake and eat it.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
Now we're getting somewhere
You mention that you want a systemic offense that produces good looks at the basket. Well you just described Howland’s version of the motion offense. Yesterday’s game actually produced a lot of good looks for our team. As I said in the beginning, there is no offense that can compensate for not making open shots (and FT’s as N added). Whether we will continue to get those types of open looks against better competition is up for debate, but we probably won’t because we have neither the timing, court vision, or strength to set effective screens. So what does that leave us with?
I’m going to assume that by “run n gun” you mean pushing the tempo on both made and missed baskets. Yesterday, we actually did start pushing tempo (by necessity) and were still pretty dreadful. We made a few more shots, but did you see the overall results? The problem with running, and especially with a team that already wants to push the pace, is that we’re caught more and more often in transition defense, which ideally for CBH, would be weaker than his halfcourt defense. As a result, the gap widened.
The Princeton offense would have been an option had we started with it in the beginning of the season. As it is we can only hope to borrow some of the sets from it, preferably the ones that rely less on timing, which is almost none of them. That offense requires a familiarity between the players as well as a lot of playmakers. I’ve seen no evidence that we have close to enough passers to get this done. Not right now anyway.
Maybe when Honeycutt comes back and if he shows a knack for both ball handling as well as passing, the high post could be an option run through him. As it is though, DG would rather jack up shots from midrange and after that we’re just plain out of options. At least one positive in running the high post would be we wouldn’t be as hard pressed to create dribble penetration for ourselves.
I know it’s tempting to put the onus on CBH and say to him, just find a way to “get it done”. I think it’s only fair that we at least attempt to put ourselves in his shoes though. Yeah, it’s his responsibility, he’s the head coach. But we should at least be perfectly clear about the pros and cons of changing things up so we can be prepared to accept the credit/blame if our ideas succeed/fail. I’m already nervous about this zone defense idea because we’ve been giving up so many perimeter shots. There’s also the issue of trying to change too much too soon. These kids have enough to learn already without having the rug pulled out from under them and starting from scratch.
I don't see an offense
sure that’s easy to say now that we are struggling, but even during our Final Four losses, it seemed that in big games our guys got stuck, and just passed the ball around looking for somebody willing to take the shot. I saw it again during the loss to Portland. I don’t see the cutting, setting screens or overall synchronized movement to create the shot.
I agree it’s too late to make drastic changes to our offense, but it was something that could have begun in the off season.
I chose the Run and Gun and Princeton offenses because they seem to cater to that which Howland loves: Defense. The Run and Gun is predicated on good defense creating steals and turnovers which lead to fast breaks. The Princeton on the other hand is designed to milk the shot clock and force the opposition to play defense for long periods of time. That also is a Howland staple.
As for the immediate effective changes, I don’t know that anything is going to make a night and day difference right now. These cats are young and inexperienced at this level and it shows. Much like football, we are just going to have to take our lumps until we progress enough to start handing out lumps of our own.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
Well the Run and Gun isn't an offense
It’s a philosophy. What do you do when your push stalls because your opponent got back on D or because you had to take the ball out of your own basket? Now if you’re calling for a philosophy change paired with an offensive scheme change to the Princeton offense, then that makes more sense, but honestly don’t see how that’s any better than what we have now. We have always looked for early offense in the CBH era off of misses, especially when we had KLove. The Princeton offense, while solving the problem I posted below about not getting enough cutting to the basket, also negates what should be one of our strengths: our depth in the frontcourt, because we need to have more space in the middle for those cuts to work. I still haven’t seen any signs that most of our bigs have the requisite passing ability to make it work either.
I’m not saying what we have is the best system, and I’ve detailed my problems with it below, but I’m also not liking the alternatives I’m seeing, especially based on our personnel. I still maintain that this is the wrong place to look. It’s the other end of the floor right now that is ugly to me. The dribble penetration we’ve given up is simply horrifying. I have to be able to trust that these guys will eventually be able to knock down wide open jumpers. I can’t be so sure we won’t be sieve-like on the perimeter all season long though, and that depresses me more than anything.
My high school ran the run and gun (and won championships)
So I am tempted to disagree. However, I will concede that the coaches could have had installed a half court offense for those moments when there is no fast break as you described.
Honestly, all I really care about is that we have something in place that involves movement of players to create mismatches and/or openings for better looks than those we have taken.
And, I think we’re in agreement on your final point. We can’t be this bad on defense or offense. If we can’t be a really good all around team, we should at least be really good at one thing. To begin with, I would like to see us get back to good hard nosed rebounding.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
You and me both
All I know is that CBH’s job is not one I want right now. I’d have his hairstyle by conference play.
Practice time is not infinite
Having countless offenses (or defenses, for that matter) is no way to succeed. It would be impossible to learn to play them all well. The best thing is to have one system that’s versatile enough to fit various teams and talent levels in a particular year — and run it as well as possible.
I believe Howland has that system. We’ve played faster, and slower, as circumstances dictate. The half-court offense has numerous options every time down. The transition “run n gun” can only happen when you cause turnovers, and thus usually goes with a full-court press (see Tarkanian, even Pitino). It also requires high levels of team speed.
The biggest flaw in our offense in the past has been the amount of energy we expend on defense, both at game time and practice time. And yes, we don’t have a great system for attacking the zone, but you don’t need one — good shooting and post passing are enough.
IMO
If people want to see the Bruins score more, then the onus is on the players to execute the plays better than they’ve shown. Too many times over Howland’s tenure the team’s offense bogs down because players are standing around too much and not moving without the ball. This year’s team has been worse because even when they get an open look, they miss it and no one seems to be fighting for offensive rebounds. Not to mention since there’s a considerable lack of bulk, the screens being set have been pretty soft.
if we're trying something new, it may as well be against Kansas
The way we’re playing so far, KU will completely demolish us. Losing by less than 30 would be a moral victory, in my eyes, even playing in Pauley. What we’re doing isn’t working. A tweak can’t make things worse at this point.
formerly AZBruin
Even if the squad were playing good defense
I think you have to be able to play a zone because we have so little depth at guard, and it can help keep your players out of foul trouble.
I think a zone does fit this personal much better, based on our length and relatively slow foot work, but even beyond that, its a smart thing to have in the bag, because what happens if Lee and Roll both get 3 fouls in a game early in the second half?
"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"
by silverlakebruin on Nov 30, 2009 10:43 AM PST reply actions
He played some zone in his first year
What does that tell you about how that should make us feel?
Personally, I believe in sacrificing the present for the future. This might help us through a few games, but it will not help us become a great defensive team down the road.
I'm a little mixed on this as well
We’ve seen how ferocious the man to man D can be when everyone is locked in and playing as a team and I’d like to do whatever it takes to get there faster. At the same time, that’s clearly not cutting it in the here and now. I suppose one thing it could do is give us another option in big games if we become proficient at both, but who knows. I guess the big takeaway is that CBH is starting to become more flexible.
Agree, but in a twisted way it could help our offense
I’m torn on the zone issue as well. From a personnel standpoint, it makes a lot of sense. However, is it worth going to a zone to end up 20-15 instead of 17-18, I really don’t know.
Something that I have always wondered about is the effect of CBH not coaching a zone defense has on our ability to attack a zone on offense. When you learn a defense, you learn what all the weakpoints and strong points are of it. As a defender, you know this so you know what to protect. But when you get the ball back on offense, you also know what areas are the weak links in the zone. I cant believe that CBH hasn’t taught his players how to attack a zone before, but I think having the players themselves learn how the zone defense works (something I’m sure they have already experienced at some level of ball) may help them better attack an opponent’s zone.
There's probably a lot to what you said
Intuitively, it just has to be easier to learn by example. If we end up being pretty good at zone defense, then I’m sure it will pay dividends for our zone offense. I understand where CBH is coming from: a well taught man to man is better than a well taught zone. Our question is whether a crappy man to man is better than a crappy zone.
Theoretically
you shouldn’t have to make too many adjustments like this late into your tenure, as you should be recruiting players who can play your style of basketball. However, if due to injuries, early graduation, or bad evaluation, you need to change it up to win, that’s what you have to do. Its not fair to the fans or the players to make them a run a system you don’t believe gives them the best chance of winning, even if it isn’t your prefered system.
This being said, I would be shocked to see Howland play more than 10-15 minutes of zone a game, which means the majority of the time should still be in man to man, which will allow his guys to continue to grow in that defense. I don’t think anybody is asking for or expecting 40 minutes of zone, so I don’t think it will hurt the man to man development very much, if at all.
"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"
by silverlakebruin on Nov 30, 2009 4:22 PM PST up reply actions
Lavin is thanking God that the KU game is not on WWL
and that he doesn’t have to offer commentary on it. He wouldn’t be able to tell UCLA whether UCLA was playing zone or man. :-)
He would just filibuster with a Gene Keady(sp?) story
like he always does when he doesn’t know whats going on.
"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"
by silverlakebruin on Nov 30, 2009 5:02 PM PST up reply actions
Either way, this will be stopgap gum
The best we can hope for is that enables an upset or two. It will mean nothing in the long term about our program or Howland, as his year one use of it proves.
I don't feel we have any choice.
Without DG, we’re quite a bit weaker in the middle. And if JA can’t pressure the point, it makes a man defense nearly impossible to execute. And with JA getting burned by mid-major point guards, we have to find another solution on defense.
Go Bruins!
Seems to me that Bobo would be a perfect fit in the middle of a zone
I always figured he lacked minutes due to his defensive liabilities in a man to man scheme.
motion offense...
i don’t know much about basketball schemes. but i’ve noticed cbh’s offense, at least at ucla, has been composed of a lot swinging the ball around the perimeter and dribbling around behind the 3 point line. burning the shot clock and taking a rushed shot. i’m talking about aimless activity. collison did this a lot but bailed us out because he could shoot and finish off the dribble. our guards don’t feed the post and don’t seem to look there. i understand cbh is not responsible for missing open looks and missing fts, but if cbh took his players to task for this kind of chickenheaded plays the same way he responds to bad hedging or missed defensive assignments wouldn’t we be better off?
Across The Face
we would indeed be better off...
if we had the players to make open shots and make FTs. If CBH thought he had anyone that could accomplish those tasks, we would have seen him already. I fully agree he should take them to task, but in the end there’s no crew waiting in the wings to take over, start, and win. (Keep in mind I’ve already stated RN and BL should get more time than they do, and that would help some, but the big picture is still there: we don’t have the players.)
formerly AZBruin
The problem right now is that the middle is clogged
And for good reason: we can’t shoot. I don’t want our players forcing the ball inside when we have defenders sagging in on them just on principle. My major complaint with the offense as-is, and this goes back to our FF runs, is that our motion off the ball almost always goes laterally or away from the basket. We don’t use dives to get open or to create mismatches in the defense. We use down screens to pop people to the corner or up top, so we should in theory be okay doing the opposite of that. With so many bigs, I’d also like to see us use the big to big baseline screen, which used to get KLove good position inside.
Movement
Couldn’t agree more Ty. I would also add that besides from the lateral ball movement that the only time we do get the ball in the middle is from players coming from the baseline up to the highpost. Again, this is players moving AWAY from the basket getting the ball. ML seems to be the only one capable of driving to the basket on his own, but that doesn’t mean that other players cant run backdoor cuts and away from the ball screens to get to the basket.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bruins Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
