Season update

[JZVOL]

Hey John, go in there and frustrate their thin team. Be the big man, use your body to throw some weight around without fouling and get a couple blocks that make them feel disrespected. Then dribble once and go straight up for a dunk and try not to get hurt when you land after the hack.

It is a really complicated plan...

Right. It's just that easy against a top 10 team.

 

[LawVol13]

No, it means he's not a straight post guy.

Wrong. Pearl uses the term because he was using the 4 man, Tyler Smith, to break down the defense because of our non-existent halfcourt offense. I expect Harris will be doing much of the same.

 

[JZVOL]

It's going to be a great game. Fields is going to dominate on both ends of the court, BW is going to go for 20/10 and have the best game of his career and TH is going to blow up @ MSG thus opening up the NYC pipeline for Pearl.

 

[emainvol]

I just want to make sure I am understanding this right, Bruce Pearl recruited New York like no one else before him has been able to do?

Umm, Ernie and Bernie?

 

[JZVOL]

At best? No way.

You make a good argument that the frontcourts MIGHT be a push, but that's not Tennessee's "best" scenario. If Tennessee gets "best" from its frontcourt, then we'll have a strong post advantage.

I do agree that's not UT's best scenario.

I just don't see it. We have no consistent low-post scoring and you never know what you will get from BW.

As a side I will admit Jay Wright is my favorite coach and I've gotten to know some of the guys on staff there and they are fantastic so I'm biased toward them at this point.

 

[JZVOL]

I just want to make sure I am understanding this right, Bruce Pearl recruited New York like no one else before him has been able to do?

Umm, Ernie and Bernie?

I'm still trying to figure that out.

 

[TennesseeFan07]

MSG will soon be dubbed "the House that Pearl Built".

 

[LawVol13]

I do agree that's not UT's best scenario.

I just don't see it. We have no consistent low-post scoring and you never know what you will get from BW.

As a side I will admit Jay Wright is my favorite coach and I've gotten to know some of the guys on staff there and they are fantastic so I'm biased toward them at this point.

I think Harris could be pretty consistent from the low post. Unfortunately, we seem to intentionally try to not get him the ball on the block.

 

[StepCross]

I do agree that's not UT's best scenario.

I just don't see it. We have no consistent low-post scoring and you never know what you will get from BW.

Yeah, as I said, you make a good argument that a frontcourt "push" is a likely outcome.

But you also said that it was "best case," which is where I had an issue.

It sounds like we more or less agree, actually.

 

[JZVOL]

Yeah, as I said, you make a good argument that a frontcourt "push" is a likely outcome.

But you also said that it was "best case," which is where I had an issue.

It sounds like we more or less agree, actually.

No, you are right it isn't the best case.

 

[StepCross]

That's code for: We don't run an offense, so the closest thing we can come to a point guard is our 4 man trying to break down the defense.

Well, not exactly.

In the traditional flex, the first pass is from the PG to the 4, who gets the ball at a guard position. Then some other stuff happens, but the point is the 4 gets the ball first in the offense, on the perimeter, and has a chance to create.

In the diagram below, the 4 gets the ball at the elbow. In reality, most defenses force this pass to be out at the three-point line.

That is, technically speaking, why Pearl likes a creator at the 4 position.

Anyway, here's the flex:

 

[zjcvols]

Wrong. Pearl uses the term because he was using the 4 man, Tyler Smith, to break down the defense because of our non-existent halfcourt offense. I expect Harris will be doing much of the same.

Do I think the offense will run through Harris? Yes. Will he actually have to bring the ball up and set it up? No.

 

[zjcvols]

Well, not exactly.

In the traditional flex, the first pass is from the PG to the 4, who gets the ball at a guard position. Then some other stuff happens, but the point is the 4 gets the ball first in the offense, on the perimeter, and has a chance to create.

In the diagram below, the 4 gets the ball at the elbow. In reality, most defenses force this pass to be out at the three-point line.

That is, technically speaking, why Pearl likes a creator at the 4 position.

Anyway, here's the flex:

Step, please post more.

 

[LawVol13]

Well, not exactly.

In the traditional flex, the first pass is from the PG to the 4, who gets the ball at a guard position. Then some other stuff happens, but the point is the 4 gets the ball first in the offense, on the perimeter, and has a chance to create.

In the diagram below, the 4 gets the ball at the elbow. In reality, most defenses force this pass to be out at the three-point line.

That is, technically speaking, why Pearl likes a creator at the 4 position.

Anyway, here's the flex:

Nice find on the diagrams of the flex. Our flex is actually different than that though. We don't bring the 4 to the elbow. We have two people at the top of the key passing back in forth and people running flex cuts on the baseline. It's much more vanilla than a traditional flex offense.

Most flex offenses start in a 1-4 set like the one you linked. Ours does not.

 

[IPorange]

Well, not exactly.

In the traditional flex, the first pass is from the PG to the 4, who gets the ball at a guard position. Then some other stuff happens, but the point is the 4 gets the ball first in the offense, on the perimeter, and has a chance to create.

In the diagram below, the 4 gets the ball at the elbow. In reality, most defenses force this pass to be out at the three-point line.

That is, technically speaking, why Pearl likes a creator at the 4 position.

Anyway, here's the flex:

There's a lot more movement in those illustrations than we have typically seen out of our offense...

 

[LawVol13]

There's a lot more movement in those illustrations than we have typically seen out of our offense...

It's much different. The flex out of the 1-4 can actually be a good offense. Our flex is a 2-3 alignment that has people toss the ball back and forth and run flex cuts on the baseline. Very easy to defend.

 

[zjcvols]

I'm not a big flex fan. If I was a coach at a big college program, I'd run pick-n-rolls and spread the floor. Have a PG who can handle and attack the bucket, a couple shooters, a big with a 15ft. game, and then a bruiser/windex guy.

 

[StepCross]

Nice find on the diagrams of the flex. Our flex is actually different than that though. We don't bring the 4 to the elbow. We have two people at the top of the key passing back in forth and people running flex cuts on the baseline. It's much more vanilla than a traditional flex offense.

I've seen us run it both ways.

If you check out the highlights on utsports.com from the Chattanooga game, there is a play where Pearl hits Cam under the basket for a reverse layup. That's classic flex, exactly as in the diagram, and the positions are even the same (PF with the ball at the extended elbow, SF running off that backscreen--it's diagram #2 from my above picture).

I think maybe our guards have the option of staying out top (because you're exactly right that we run a lot of that baseline flex stuff with only 2 players staying out top, 3 cutting on the baseline) OR setting the downscreen and getting one of the other guys up top.

But a LOT of time, the first pass in our offense is PG to PF across the top.

Tobias is a better fit for that spot than any PF we've had. Tyler wouldn't shoot the 3, Wayne wasn't a driver or passer, and Dane was no scoring threat at all. Tobias can shoot, drive, and pass. Really ideal for the position...but OTOH, it means he won't be living in the block posting up, which is what some fans would like to see.

 

[StepCross]

I'm not a big flex fan. If I was a coach at a big college program, I'd run pick-n-rolls and spread the floor. Have a PG who can handle and attack the bucket, a couple shooters, a big with a 15ft. game, and then a bruiser/windex guy.

I have no idea what I'd do, but from my amateur seat I think I'd prefer a ballscreen offense. It's more immediately threatening, whereas the flex is more of an indirect threat, if that makes any sense.

Tons of NBA teams run the flex, though.

 

[LawVol13]

If you check out the highlights on utsports.com from the Chattanooga game, there is a play where Pearl hits Cam under the basket for a reverse layup. That's classic flex, exactly as in the diagram, and the positions are even the same (PF with the ball at the extended elbow, SF running off that backscreen--it's diagram #2 from my above picture).

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but that was just out of our normal cutters offense. Pearl just happened to be the last one up the floor and was one of the guys that pass it back and forth at the top of the key. He did not come from the block to the elbow, and it did not start in a 1-4 set like a normal flex. You can clearly see that Pearl is about 35 feet away from the basket when making that pass.

 

[zjcvols]

I've seen us run it both ways.

If you check out the highlights on utsports.com from the Chattanooga game, there is a play where Pearl hits Cam under the basket for a reverse layup. That's classic flex, exactly as in the diagram, and the positions are even the same (PF with the ball at the extended elbow, SF running off that backscreen--it's diagram #2 from my above picture).

I think maybe our guards have the option of staying out top (because you're exactly right that we run a lot of that baseline flex stuff with only 2 players staying out top, 3 cutting on the baseline) OR setting the downscreen and getting one of the other guys up top.

But a LOT of time, the first pass in our offense is PG to PF across the top.

Tobias is a better fit for that spot than any PF we've had. Tyler wouldn't shoot the 3, Wayne wasn't a driver or passer, and Dane was no scoring threat at all. Tobias can shoot, drive, and pass. Really ideal for the position...but OTOH, it means he won't be living in the block posting up, which is what some fans would like to see.

My question is, why have one set offense? Call some plays for Tobias on the block. Call double screens for Cam/Scotty. Call a pick-n-roll with Golden/Williams. I felt like we have been too one-dimensional in our offense until the final half of last year.

 

[JZVOL]

Here is a brief overview of UT's offense, written by Jason Shay for those interested.

 

[JZVOL]

I have no idea what I'd do, but from my amateur seat I think I'd prefer a ballscreen offense. It's more immediately threatening, whereas the flex is more of an indirect threat, if that makes any sense.

Tons of NBA teams run the flex, though.

My question is, why have one set offense? Call some plays for Tobias on the block. Call double screens for Cam/Scotty. Call a pick-n-roll with Golden/Williams. I felt like we have been too one-dimensional in our offense until the final half of last year.

It's why I prefer to learn from coaches who run a motion offense. Out of the motion you can do anything you want from drive and space to ball screens and post ups depending on your team's strengths in any given year. It's why I like Jay Wright so much among other reasons.

 

[volfan2024]

I think for the first time your input may have surpassed HV's.

j/k Hard to top HV. He knows bball coast to coast.

 

[zjcvols]

I have no idea what I'd do, but from my amateur seat I think I'd prefer a ballscreen offense. It's more immediately threatening, whereas the flex is more of an indirect threat, if that makes any sense.

Tons of NBA teams run the flex, though.

A lot of teams run the flex, that is true. However, they run it to get it to 10 seconds and get it to their best player for a post up or pick-n-roll.