Bruce Pearl just said....

[tennesseety]

the man that called Vandy a final 4 team should be removed from the air and considered a candidate for initiation of population control.

No (insert explative)! The love fest over Vandy when they're above .500 is tough to endure. And the lack of discussion surrounding the Vols is equally as tough to endure. Fogler is on once a week and adores the 'dores and his aversion to the Vols is very apparent.

 

[Unimane]

This place is so predictable sometimes. Lose one game after 7 wins in a row and it's back to Pearl sucks, can't coach, etc. for some. The whole "I expect improvement" line fails to recognize the fact that the season is not one upward arc of improvement and quality of play. Laying an egg and playing like garbage from time to time is not unexpected. If we win 7 out of 8 for the rest of the season, I will be very satisfied. Hell, we win 3 out of every 4, then we sit at 24-6 and will be in line for a 3 or 4 seed.

 

[LawVol13]

There are always seams in a 3-2. You just have to move to the baseline and post either the 4 or 5 man or cut from backside to high post or middle and kill the defender that's sloughing back. That, or a wing can always drive to the seam and force the defense to react. At that point, either the high or low post, if they've done anything to get open or seal a man, is available for the ball. If the low defenders are fronting and we can't find lobs or backdoor cutters, we suck.

There is no seam to attack when the wing defenders don't come out of the paint. If you can make a shot to force the wing man to actually extend a little bit, then you are absolutely right. The defense won't react on the drive when they are sitting in the paint daring you to shoot. But, I think everything else you said is correct assuming we can get someone to extend to create the seams.

They front the post when the ball is at the wing with the "gut man" in the 3-2. There is no lob available because the backman in the 3-2 is playing behind the post while the gutman is fronting the post. And the backside is covered by the backside guard keeping a backdoor cut from becoming available.

I played 3-2 almost exclusively during my playing career. It is a very difficult defense when it is played correctly. And UGA played it beautifully.

 

[BigPapaVol]

There is no seam to attack when the wing defenders don't come out of the paint. If you can make a shot to force the wing man to actually extend a little bit, then you are absolutely right. The defense won't react on the drive when they are sitting in the paint daring you to shoot. But, I think everything else you said is correct assuming we can get someone to extend to create the seams.

They front the post when the ball is at the wing with the "gut man" in the 3-2. There is no lob available because the backman in the 3-2 is playing behind the post while the gutman is fronting the post. And the backside is covered by the backside guard keeping a backdoor cut from becoming available.

I played 3-2 almost exclusively during my playing career. It is a very difficult defense when it is played correctly. And UGA played it beautifully.

That just isn't true. There is a separation between the front and back lines of the defense. If they aren't extending at all, it means that they arent in front of the offensive player and he is free to attack that gap. If they are rotating to stay in front of the guy to prevent that drive, then the rotation leaves room for ball movement to open seams. If they aren't rotating in front of the wings, then they're stupid to be in a 3-2 unless they're trapping from it. Against us, it works because we don't flash to the center or post hard the block. We like to pass back and forth.

If the gutman is fronting the post, how is he keeping the flasher from killing the defense. He can't do all of that and that's the weakness in the D. The middle of the floor will kill a 3-2. A base 1-4 all low offense would be indefensible for a non extended 3-2. PG is free to roam and drop the ball to an overloaded baseline with far post rolling through the center and far baseline going to the opening left by the vacating big.

The 2-3 doesn't share that weakness, but can't guard the floor. Teams packing it on us will be in the 2-3.

 

[LawVol13]

That just isn't true. There is a separation between the front and back lines of the defense. If they aren't extending at all, it means that they arent in front of the offensive player and he is free to attack that gap. If they are rotating to stay in front of the guy to prevent that drive, then the rotation leaves room for ball movement to open seams. If they aren't rotating in front of the wings, then they're stupid to be in a 3-2 unless they're trapping from it. Against us, it works because we don't flash to the center or post hard the block. We like to pass back and forth.

If the gutman is fronting the post, how is he keeping the flasher from killing the defense. He can't do all of that and that's the weakness in the D. The middle of the floor will kill a 3-2. A base 1-4 all low offense would be indefensible for a non extended 3-2. PG is free to roam and drop the ball to an overloaded baseline with far post rolling through the center and far baseline going to the opening left by the vacating big.

The 2-3 doesn't share that weakness, but can't guard the floor. Teams packing it on us will be in the 2-3.

The wing that's supposed to be extended on our perimeter players are dropped back making the high post pass flash impossible to complete.

I'm not saying it's impossible to beat; I'm saying it requires you to hit a jump shot..

 

[BigPapaVol]

The wing that's supposed to be extended on our perimeter players are dropped back making the high post pass flash impossible to complete.

And that creates the driving seam. Drive it right between the two and both have a decision to make. Most often, the post defender has to step up, leaving the post player to fade to the corner for an open 12 footer, which even we can make.

 

[Coastypop]

i see. so you like pathetic effort and 38% shooting. as long as we beat some high profile teams once or twice a year... you're happy. man you're hardcore.

And you perfer that we not beat any high profile teams, and have good numbers dueing the year just as long as we don't miss the tournament..... gee I thought that was Memphis method not UT. I would like to see us win them all myself, but I am not going to throw the bath water out with the baby in it. I like playing high profile and taking my chances with them. I, as well as you see several places we need to improve (free throws for one) but I know where this program was, I know where it has been and I can the forest, and not just the trees.... Even Ray Mears had some bad nights........ :hi:

 

[LawVol13]

And that creates the driving seam. Drive it right between the two and both have a decision to make. Most often, the post defender has to step up, leaving the post player to fade to the corner for an open 12 footer, which even we can make.

Not really. The gut man is in 3/4 denial on the post. He takes one step cuts off the penetration. The post defender would then follow the post to the corner not allowing an open 12 footer. I see what you are saying. But in reality, it is very, very easy for the gut man to cut off the penetration.

 

[BigPapaVol]

Not really. The gut man is in 3/4 denial on the post. He takes one step cuts off the penetration. The post defender would then follow the post to the corner not allowing an open 12 footer. I see what you are saying. But in reality, it is very, very easy for the gut man to cut off the penetration.

then it's not a 3-2. It's a 2-3. Who defends the flasher when the gut man stops the penetration?

 

[crusse10]

nah its january on my calEndAr too. i just like to see improvement from my team... but we're back to our pre KU days.

Erin Andrews? Electronic Arts?

...that's all I got

 

[LawVol13]

then it's not a 3-2. It's a 2-3. Who defends the flasher when the gut man stops the penetration?

Again, the wing man on the 3-2 is so compressed in the paint not guarding the perimeter player that he blocks the flasher. He would normally be in denial on the wing; when they don't pose a threat, he simply will stay at the elbow there where he could always defend the high post. If you can get the wings to extend, there will definitely be seams, and everything you said would absolutely work. But you still have to make the wings on the 3-2 respect your perimeter players to do what you were saying.

 

[BigPapaVol]

Again, the wing man on the 3-2 is so compressed in the paint not guarding the perimeter player that he blocks the flasher. He would normally be in denial on the wing; when they don't pose a threat, he simply will stay at the elbow there where he could always defend the high post. If you can get the wings to extend, there will definitely be seams, and everything you said would absolutely work. But you still have to make the wings on the 3-2 respect your perimeter players to do what you were saying.

Then you drive until they pick up or drill the 12 footer. I like our chances from 12 and in.

That said, we don't force the d to make that decision because we rarely flash the middle and our guys don't drive to the draw the D so they can dish.

 

[LawVol13]

Then you drive until they pick up or drill the 12 footer. I like our chances from 12 and in.

That said, we don't force the d to make that decision because we rarely flash the middle and our guys don't drive to the draw the D so they can dish.

Exactly right. We have to make them at least guard our wings from 12-15 ft. If we can knock a couple mid-range jumpers down, the whole zone would open up and everything you said would be applicable like flashing to the high post.

 

[orange_blood]

No I wasn't Ivy. I was a runner. And I ran hard.. I was the captain of my high school team - all state. And I went D3 instead of D1 because I would have rather been a baller than a runner. Unfortunately I was really good at running and only played JV for b-ball. I just was not good enough to play b-ball, but I guarantee that I had more heart and fire than anyone playing in front of me. When I finally got in a game I nailed four straight 3's to bring my team back to respectability. I went to one of "them private schools" in Chatt. and my coach was a tool. Basketball that is...

McCallie? I think I have some track records there.

 

[PoochPunt3rdDown]

McCallie? I think I have some track records there.

Yeeeeeessss! Go Big Blue!!!!

 

[orange_blood]

Yeeeeeessss! Go Big Blue!!!!

Ah yes, some of the best years of my life were at that school. I love the bball courts there.. that rubberized court they have (had?). I forget the coach there now but he was a big dude.. like 7' tall. Reynolds maybe? The older I get the better I was lol. :rock:

 

[BasketvolsFan]

FAIL. anyone with a JV IQ knows you can't stand around and expect any production versus any defense. ball movement and player movement (screens, overloads, penetration etc... ) is the foundation for good sound, fundamental basketball. standing around and jacking up 3's is a good sound fundamental way of getting blown out.[/QUOTE]

A real simple question--why do people play a packed in zone defense if it is so easy to screen and drive against? It is clearly obvious to a 5th grader that it is to force teams to beat you from the outside which we have great difficulity doing. An effective zone will shut down ball screens and drives to the basket--basic zone strategy.

 

[BasketVolKid]

Exactly right. We have to make them at least guard our wings from 12-15 ft. If we can knock a couple mid-range jumpers down, the whole zone would open up and everything you said would be applicable like flashing to the high post.

don't pretend that you meant 12-15ft shots all along. i stated several times that your argument was "they have to hit 3's." you never corrected me by saying "no not 3's just 12-15 ft shots".

now after BPV comments... suddenly the 12-15ft shot blows the zone wide open.

you don't get 12-15ft shots by standing around the 3 point line tossing the ball around waiting for someone to jack up a 3. that has been my main criticism of their execution versus the zone... (and versus man). you get those 12-15ft shots (and easier ones as well) implenting ALL of the techniques i've mentioned... overloads, screens, pentration, purposeful ball movement, player movement... you have to ATTACK the zone. standing around the perimeter tossing the ball around waiting to go 6-20 from 3 is not ATTACKING. it's playing right into the zone strategy.

again... the great motivator CANNOT get his team to play with the kind of discipline, patience and effort that it takes to beat these zones that we now will see every game. i don't even think he knows what to do except tell them to keep shooting.

 

[Heebs]

Please stop you two, it's agonizing.

 

[BasketVolKid]

A real simple question--why do people play a packed in zone defense if it is so easy to screen and drive against? It is clearly obvious to a 5th grader that it is to force teams to beat you from the outside which we have great difficulity doing. An effective zone will shut down ball screens and drives to the basket--basic zone strategy.

obviously, people play zone to stop you inside and make you win from outside.

i NEVER once said it was easy to beat such a zone. i have repeatedly said it takes discipline and patience and good coaching. others are arguing that "the only way to beat a zone is to make 3's". this is a complete mis-conception. the way to win is to force your will and determination on your opponent regardless of their strategy. unfortunately, this team doesn't know its strengths and weaknesses and is only willing to play lazy, undisciplined basketball. how much sense does it make for a lousy 3 point shooting team to jack up 20 three pointers???? isn't that exactly what the opponent wants us to do? i'm sure we'll just keep firing away from 3. and at the end of the season pearl will say something like... "ya know bob, it's just hard to win games when you can't hit from 3".