Roles to Play -- 5 Elements of Championship Defense
In years past, I've posted my ideas on the critical components of Championship Defense. Obviously, I am most likely not fit to get water for a graduate assistant for CBH's staff, but I think I have some good ideas to explain what's worked in the past, what's missing now... and what I believe we can do to fix things now.
It's not one thing that's missing, or one person. Instead, it's a slight decrease in pretty much all of the different elements of our defense, resulting in a systemic lowering of the quality of our overall defensive effectiveness. In other words, we're the sum of our parts, and our parts have really changed.
Here are my basic elements of Championship Defense, with the newly added/ realized element of No. 4 (for illustrative purposes, examples are taken from the starters for the 1995, 2008, and 2009 teams, along with descriptions excerpted from some of my past posts):
(1) INTERCEPTOR -- A guy with sufficient quickness to disrupt the opposing PG's movement, and delay the immediate set-up of the opponent's base offense (halfcourt or breakneck transition). Preferably your PG or other good handles guy who can steal the ball and score at the other end on his own.
1995 - Tyus Edney
2008 -- Darren Collison
2009 -- DC.
ANALYSIS: DC still has the speed, quickness, and experience of a top-flight interceptor. However, without a dominant post-presence, and without an experienced backup at the point, DC has seemingly gotten tired more and more at the ends of games. Continued growth and steady minutes by Jerime Anderson -- ready or not -- should help keep DC fresher on D. However, one player does not an entire defense make.
(2) SEEKER -- If the other team has a freakish shooter off screens, or a crazy slash and finisher, you send THIS GUY to cuff him and stuff him. However, this person needs physical toughness to fight over screens, stamina to chase and change direction for 30+ minutes a game, and sufficient length to bother shooters when he's a step behind.
1995 -- Toby Bailey
2008 -- Russell Westbrook
2009 -- Jrue Holiday
ANALYSIS: Personally, I am not big on having seekers at 6-3 or less, as I think it leaves us vulnerable to bigger 2-guards, although RW did an outstanding job last year at 6-3 based on his intensity. In any event, JH has the quickness and length, but right now, the question is not his physical size, but his physical toughness. Indeed, CBH noted specifically that JH did not handle screens well early against WSU, allowing Rochestie Klay Thompson (thanks, H) to get hot. JH has the physical tools, but he has to learn to just lock people down and shut them up.
It may very well come in time, but for now... it just is not there yet. If needs be, I think Malcolm Lee may yet take the job before the season's out. From what I've seen, he has JH's quickness, but more size, more length, and, after playing center during his senior year in high school, more practice banging around.
(3) INTERCHANGEABLE WINGS -- Again, you know the types. Mainly perimeter defenders, 6-4 to 6-8 guys, long-armed, good quick-twitch muscles. Guys who can double the post and still get back to the shooters. Guys who can switch off on pick and rolls or fon regular screens, yet can still pick up the other guy's man with no worries. These can include your seeker or even your interceptor, or even the 'new element' (No. 4). Since it's a plural designation, you need 2, but 3 is better.
1995 -- Bailey and Charles O'Bannon, occasionally Ed O'Bannon.
2008 -- RW, JS and Luc Richard Mbah a Moute.
2009 -- JS and Nikola Dragovic.
ANALYSIS -- You need two good interchangeable wings, and our two are... Josh and Nikola? Yep, and they're looking fairly good doing it. JS has improved his transition defense (just check the blocks on breaks), and, combined with 4+ playing years in the system and his new decision-making on offense, is establishing himself as an effective two-way presence (if not necessarily a lockdown-stopper). ND has been visibily more active with hands and feet, and is improving on the double-down. Again, however, guards have to run more, and without JH filling in at the switching-wing role as in the past, our schemes look a bit different, as designated backcourt shooters are lighting us up more than shooters at the 3 and 4 positions.
(4) SHOTGUN -- On stagecoaches, there were always two guys riding up top -- the guy wih the reins, and the guy packing heat. Shotgun was there so the driver could do his job. Shotgun gave cover-fire when bad guys were chasing, stiff-armed robbers trying to grab the bank pouch, and glared at would-be trespassers with a nail-spitting glare. On defense, you know who the shotgun is -- he gets rebounds or boxes out so his teammate can get them, he double-teams the post or in the corner when the ballhandler gets lost, he shifts over when a perimeter teammate gets beat.
1995 -- Ed O'Bannon
2008 -- LMRAM
2009 -- ND
ANALYSIS: ND is improving every week at the glass, and his hands are active in the mid-range passing lanes. He's like a sniper rifle for us on offense. But a SHOTGUN? Hooo boy. With LMRAM, we had one guy covering a lot of defensive ills -- or if not ills, then a lot of "just OK's" -- with a lot of superlative play. At 6-8, 230, with a 7-foot wingspan and tireless (if somewhat injury prone) ankles and feet, LMRAM was the prototypical shotgun. Ed O'Bannon also filled much of the same role, filling gaps and punching holes when needed. At 6-9, 216, the lighter, thinner ND is not getting outworked, but he is occasionally out-toughed
What now, then??? Well, we can balance an OK shotgun with great wings, or vice versa, but we can't fix all at the same time, since our guys are either too young (the froshies) or a little light (ND) or not producing (Keefe). Either JH HAS to step up at the seeker, OR we put ML there, OR we put in Keefe at shotgun and risk losing our sniper. I had thought/ hoped Keefe was well on his way to riding shotgun in pre-season, but he hasn't kept the playing time.
(5) BACKSTOP -- Shotblocking is great, but not entirely essential, depending on the team. However, the backstop has to take up space (by muscle or plain mass), control that space (by length or by strength), and make other guys regret going into the surrounding airspace (block 'em or rock' em). Plus, like in baseball, a backspace has to control any and all balls that clang, tip, ricochet, or otherwise just miss their target. In other words, the backstop controls the REBOUNDS.
1995 -- George Zidek
2008 -- Kevin Love/ Lorenzo Mata-Real
2009 -- Alfred Aboya
ANALYSIS: Whether by drawing charges or going beast-like on the glass, AA2 is chipping in with 6 boards a game and effective post-defense. However, we still have a drop off from last year's 6-10, 255 backstop in Love. Add it with all the little drops at each defensive position, and the problems mount.
So, if you made it this long, the point is this: At both the first line (interceptor) and the last line (backstop) of our defense, we're fine. But from seeker to wings to shotgun, we are all a bit different from last year. It's those slight scratches and bends in our gears -- a slow-reacting seeker, resulting in a mis-matched pair of wings, plus a hunting rifle instead of a sawed-off -- that's making our defensive engine stall and sputter.
An opponent's dribble penetration looks burns us 3-4 plays in a game when the interceptor has to go without the interchangeable wings adding defensive backup, and the opponent can drive without changing direction or being forced to give up the ball outside the paint.
Another 3-4 shots become wide-open when a seeker loses sight of his man.
We lose 3-4 offensive rebounds without another physical presence covering the backstop.
Each of these items is small on its own. But add them all up, and what do you get? Anywhere from 3-12 defensive breakdowns a game.
Seem like a lot? Think back over the last 5-6 games. If the devil is in the details, so is our DEFENSE. And our details still need work.
OK, enough from me. Feedback is welcome.
M
1 recs |
11 comments
|
Comments
Minor correction
JH was guarding Thompson early, and that’s who CBH was referring to. When ML took over, he shut him out. Unfortunately, Rochestie went nuts in the second half, and I’m pretty sure he was DC’s assignment, which fits your comment about DC wearing down late in games. The team’s 8-minute scoring drought didn’t help, but it seemed, at least until that wild finish, that Rochestie was the most active and energetic player on the court.
by Herodotus on Feb 25, 2009 5:16 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks. I'll put it in.
M
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
by Meriones on Feb 25, 2009 5:17 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
We are sorely missing the lockdown defense of LRMAM and RW
They were truly superb defenders, and it is their defense that’s allowing them to have so much playing time in the NBA. The question is, can such transcendent defense be taught, or does it require a certain level of talent?
by bruinbunz on Feb 25, 2009 5:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Yes, we are missing them
I saw LRMAM do things defensively that I’ve never seen anyone else do. Ever. Against Oregon in 2007, he cut off Aaron Brooks at the free throw line. Brooks passed to Hairston or Taylor in the corner for a 3-point attempt. Luc took two big steps following the pass and blocked the shot. He could double so quickly that you could almost feel sorry for the helpless post player. He could guard anyone on the court.
That being said, this team is capable of playing good defense. We have seen it. See my post here for more information.
by BruinsRule on Feb 25, 2009 7:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree with the conclusion that we're fine at the first line
I think this is an inspired post, and I appreciate it. However, I do disagree with your first conclusion. DC has “defended” the last two Pac-10 Players of the Week, Nic Wise and Taylor Rochestie. He had trouble with Isaiah Thomas and the Thomas kid from Notre Dame, Tajuan Porter, even Derek Glasser had a high scoring game against DC. He is not only not intercepting, he is allowing the point guard to impose his will on our defense, triggering a high number of our defensive breakdowns.
I think that DC is capable, but he’s not coming close to his potential. I do agree that part of the reason is that he is either fatigued or reserving energy for offense. More minutes from JA or JH at the 1 should allow him to have enough energy to perform well on defense, but until then, his poor defense may continue to be a big problem for this team.
I also have some comments about our 2,3 and4, but those will have to wait until my kids are in bed.
by BruinsRule on Feb 25, 2009 7:28 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
We can respectfully disagree, and I'd love the input.
Admittedly, I spliced this post out between old posts and between assignments at work. Feel free to chime in when you get the chance. It’s all good.
M
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
by Meriones on Feb 25, 2009 8:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
M
Absolutely. As the quote at the bottom of your posts reads, you have a full passion bucket, as do I. You put a lot of that passion into every one of your posts, and I am not the only one who appreciates it. When I read a post, I tend to point out the places where I disagree, not because I’m trying to make an argument but because I don’t see much of a point in repeating all of the areas of agreement.
One area of agreement that probably deserves mentioning is with respect to what PAA has been doing on defense. Baynes is a complete load and PAA limited him to 7 shots in 26 minutes and helped him to foul out with 13 pts and 6 rebs. PAA got his own 13 points and had 11 boards and only 1 foul. PAA has come so far this year. I love watching him play.
by BruinsRule on Feb 25, 2009 8:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Interchangeable Wings
I would argue that JH and JS are the wings. ND plays the 4, so he is usually on a low post or a high post, except against those rare offenses that feature 4 perimeter players and 1 post (like Oregon last year). Putting that aside, you said that ND and JS are cutting it because the back court is doing most of the damage, but I think the reason for that is that ND takes the weaker of the two “posts” on offense and JS takes the weaker of the two wings. So, on Saturday, ND was guarding Caleb Forrest, who absolutely went off against us twice this year. JS was covering Marcus Capers, who does not even look to shoot (1 shot in 17 minutes) while JH and DC were guarding WSU’s two best scorers, Klay Thompson and Taylor Rochestie. That is one example, but look through our games, and JS generally takes a guy who is the lesser offensive player. Sometimes there is a height issue and he will take the taller player, even though that player is s good scorer. So you have to look at who they are guarding.
Which leads me to the next point. I agree that JH is not fulfilling the role as “Seeker”, but I think he is still our best perimeter defender of the 3 starters. He’s close to being good at this role. Many of his mistakes result from leaving his man to help out, and he also is not great at getting through screens. He needs to disabuse himself of the notion that he is there to help, and instead focus on locking down his man. I think he is a smart kid and will learn from last Saturday’s benching by sticking to the script and being better at this role. If not, he’d better improve on offense or Lee will take minutes away from him.
by BruinsRule on Feb 25, 2009 8:14 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Good points BR. I agree JH is the seeker...
… and that, in the past, the seeker has also served as one of our interchangeable wings.
Looking at the 2007 team, our IW’s were AA and JS, and AA was clearly our seeker.
For NBA examples, Jordan, Pippen and Harper on the ‘96-’98 teams were all the pinnacle in IWs, and Harper was also their interceptor, and Jordan was their seeker, too.
With the Shaq-Kobe Lakers, Kobe and Fox and Horry all served as IWs, with Fox as the seeker against guys like Peja.
Normally, I’d say Jrue and Josh are our IWs… except I have not been seeing Jrue switch off and rotate consistently in the past 3 weeks. He has been getting burned on screens and on skip passes, so the interchanging and rotation and reads have not been there. However, I’ve been seeing a lot mroe on the defensive adjustments and activity by Nikola.
Which, of course, presents part of the problem — LMRAM could swing between rotating out on eprimeter and still running shotgun inside with the center. ND is proving to be a capable defesnvie forward, but he’s still more of a SF than a PF.
A few weeks ago, I had suggested moving ND to the 3 and JS to the 2, as JH was having problems attacking zones. JS has shown improvement and variety on offense, but can he D up against SGs?. This would require JK at the 4… whoa.
Barring that, if we can’t have a true shotgun at the 4, I’d rather go the 2000-02 route and have three interchangeables who can rotate and switch and use quickness and aggressiveness to negate any bulk deficiencies.
Right now, that would be JS at the 3, ND at the pseudo-4… and ML at the 2. ND may be light for a 4, but ML is better-sized and stronger at the 2.
All in all, good points there, BR. Keep ’em coming.
M
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
by Meriones on Feb 25, 2009 8:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I see your point on interchanging
It would be nice to have 3 guys between 6’5" and 6’8" who can guard 2s to 4s. You know what team had that? The 2006 UCLA Bruins.
Not to get ahead of ourselves, but from what I’ve heard, we are getting two 6’7" guys who fit the bill in Mike Moser and Tyler Honeycutt. Imagine their length and quickness with ML’s 6’5" frame next year, or more likely, the following year.
I am glad that ML appears that he will get more playing time down the stretch. Even better would be to have him start to contribute on offense like did a few times before his injury.
What do you think about Jrue playing some at the point to get his offense going? During 0the 4-game homestand, he seemed to take the ball up the court quite a lot and did good things with it, and DC had less of a dribbling burden and played his best defense of the past 2 months. Maybe Jrue needs the ball in his hands more on offense for his entire game to come through?
by BruinsRule on Feb 25, 2009 8:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree. 2006 had the right mix there.
Ced was the seeker, but AA was already gearing up to take that role, etc. With LMRAM coming on surprisingly strong at the 4, we had three interchangers right there. Switch off one, run a screen, run a guy through 2 or 3 picks… and there’d be little drop-off from one guy to the next between Ced, AA and LMRAM.
For me, that’s the key with IWs. If a defender is guarded by the SG, and the Sf or PF switches out on him, a good set of IWs minimizes any mismatches that may develop
This year, though, I am not YET confident JH is versatile enough, or confident enough himself, to switch onto someone else other than his primary assignment.
As for JH at the point, I am more inclined to have JH as the primary reserve point backing up DC, so he can (a) develop leadership and decision-making skills, (b) be a sparkplug off the bench, and © be matched up against presumably younger, less experienced reserve guards, where his physical gifts can be used to our advantage.
I also personally disagree with having DC as the SG, particularly if the backcourt partner is no taller than 6-3. If ML is running point, I cans ee DC at the 2, but with any other guard it screams of a physical mismatch on D.
M
M
"In this program your passion bucket must be full to play SC." -- CRN, to Dan Patrick, 1/2008
by Meriones on Feb 25, 2009 9:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

by 


















