Bumped from the diaries. This is Part II of three installments of Nars' analysis. He posted Part I yesterday. GO BRUINS. -N

The Effect on Man to Man Defense

The Basics:
Even the term "Man to man defense" is an oversimplification of this defensive philosophy. While all man defenses are predicated on individual match up responsibilities, the actual systems utilized by different coaches are actually quite varied. From Old Man Bennett's pack-it-in man, to Howland's big-to-big double, to Shaky Lute's Matador defense (yell Ole! as the offensive player blows past you), each system is unique in its philosophy. Given that I really only care about UCLA, let's focus there.

While there is much individual responsibility in this defense, the ability to help each other is vital. The proverbial line, "a chain is only as strong as its weakest link" fits perfectly when we talk about Howland's man-to-man defense. Using superior on-ball defenders and great help defense, Howland's defense has made mince meat out of opponents. The primary tactic the team uses to disrupt the flow of the opponent is guard pressure and a devastating post-to-post or big-to-big double team.

I would argue that the two most devastating things to a man defense are PG dribble penetration and a good low-post entry pass. With a ball-hawking PG defender like Collison, the more serious threat becomes the post-entry pass. Against quality big men, and the Pac-10's got lots of them, Howland usually doubles on the post entry pass with the secondary defender coming from the other post. To visualize this imagine Luc (X4) coming over to help Mata (X5) while Shipp (X3) slides down to defend the PF while AA (X2) drifts out to challenge shots by either off-ball opponent wing.

The beauty of this tactic is that to beat the double, the opposing team needs its C/PF to make a clean cross court pass to a wing in space with the ability to knock down a three. The other key to beating this trap is to have two skilled big men where the second big can exploit the size mismatch against the SF coming for help. Really, we've only seen one team with the skill at both positions to consistently beat the trap both ways.

Usually, teams will double in the post with the other on ball defender. In this diagram, Collison (X1) or Afflalo (X2). The problem here is that you eliminate the ability to help with other defenders that are on the help side. Secondly, the C/PF (5) still has a good path to the lane given the angle of the double team. Lastly, you open up their PG (1) or SG (2) for a shot that is hard to close out on. Otherwise, initiating the trap with the SF (X3) defender is difficult since they have so much ground to cover.

Marginal Contribution:

Positive:
Again, the point of this exercise isn't to break down the defense to see if it works (it does), but rather to see what the marginal impact is of the rules change. As opposed to the zone, the impact is less dramatic.

Looking at the two best ways to break down man defense, it isn't as readily apparent how the line will impact the defensive scheme. First, the ability of an opposing guard to break down a defender off the dribble won't be impacted by the line placement. However, perhaps there is a second order benefit to the rule change. As help comes off dribble penetration, it usually results in an uncontested 3-point opportunity for the opponent. This shot will be marginally more difficult given the new rule change, and thus aid the defense.

The second way to really break man to man defense is through the post entry pass. I feel that given Howland's preference to double in the post, the rule change will have the biggest impact in this part of the scheme. Given the commitment to stop opposing big men with a post-to-post double, Howland teams are more likely to let opponents bomb away from 3 point territory than score inside. Hell after an AA2 elbow to the face who in their right mind wouldn't look to pass out of the double? So making the best scoring option more difficult certainly aids to the defense.

Negative:
The rules change is attempting to create better spacing and reduce physical play. Both endeavors are detrimental to Howland's system. The frontline has been as physical as any in the country the past two years, and its prowess has been eating up space and shutting down passing lanes.

Furthermore, the system is predicated on the double team. When there is more spacing, it makes it more difficult to properly execute the double team. However, of all the ways to double, Howland's keeps the distance the shortest, and will likely be the least impacted by the rule change. Since they aren't doubling with a perimeter player, the wings only need to slide down to cover the 4 in the opposite post rather than come cross court to initiate the double. But all things considered, this is clearly a more difficult task when the players have more ground to cover.

What I think we may see more of is a double by a wing coming from the on-ball side of the court. Say, DC is matched up against a poor outside shooting player like Justin Dentmon at UW, he could double into the post without worrying about Dentmon making him pay with a 3 pointer. Only speculation here, but look for different double teams from Howland in the new system.

Tomorrow: Part 3 - Personnel Effects