My theory on our defensive struggles

[UKBB4Ever]

Curious, what teams use zone as primary D? All i see is mantoman.

I don’t know. I don’t watch Syracuse so I don’t know if their new coach plays the zone still.

Pitino is a zone coach now. I don’t know what he’s doing at St John’s but he played about as much zone at Louisville as man.

Many of the lower level teams play a lot of zone.

Tubby’s “ball line” and Bennett’s “pac line” are basically the same thing and really just glorified zone.

It’s an inferior defense against good players.

But the last 2 seasons we had no one to stay in front of their man.

Wheeler was little and couldn’t guard.

Toppin and Brooks couldn’t guard their shadows.

2 years ago Tyty was our only defender. Last season Cason was it.

And both were hurt at some point

 

[The_Answer1313]

Our defensive Four Factors are ranked between 100 and 130 across the board. There isn't deficit in a single area that's a death sentence, but rather our true weakness is that we aren't particularly strong in any of the Four Factors.

Yep we need to do at least SOMETHING well on defense.

Given the players on this team, if I was Cal I might want to try and switch it up and at least try to create more turnovers. You have guys like Reed that seem to have a knack for the ball.

This team should be able to force more turnovers on defense IMO. I know that was never Cal's defensive philosophy but switch it up a bit here.

 

[UK-chulo]

The 70 points doesn't come close to happening if not for the 24 OR's. As for rebounding, much like defense, that is mostly effort based. I was unathletic and a hair under 6', but was a good rebounder, better than I should have been given my height and vertical. How? Because when the shot went up, and everyone else freezes, I would move, find the open spot, get to the weakside, spin around a blockout.
I know this was on the offensive glass, not defensive, but too many times I've seen Mitchell and Bradshaw and Edwards simply head back up the court on a missed shot even before the other team has possession. It's like in their head they are thinking "I'm blocked out, so no point in me even trying". WTF! You don't see Theiro giving up like that. Edwards does do a bit more work on the offensive glass, and Bradshaw did 1 game.

Good rebounding is 90% effort. A few years ago some youngsters asked me to go run in a tournament with them. We were getting killed on the boards as our big sucked, frankly. So I shifted down to the block and matched up with some dude that had 5” on me. He got called for 3 straight over the back calls and started to complain to the ref. The ref said, “He’s had position on you every time the ball is shot.” Great rebounders don’t take a play off and work to have position as the ball comes off the rim. It’s not rocket science.

 

[jameslee32]

Last I checked blocks, steals and deflections are defense and we do pretty well in those areas.

 

[The_Answer1313]

Last I checked blocks, steals and deflections are defense and we do pretty well in those areas.

The massive amount of blocks doesn't mean much when teams are still able to pound the ball inside against us and shoot a good %.

The steals are great but again even with those steals overall our turnover % is only 106th.

The bottom line is the four factors are what matters the most and we don't do any of the four particularly well.

 

[Dontworryboutit23]

I'm certainly not denying the defense has been an issue. Giving up 70 points, 45 rebounds, including 24 offensive rebounds to Illinois State is a problem. However, I think part of our issue is just human nature due to how good we are offensively. We gave up 70 but we scored 96. When you're winning by 20+ most of the game, it's easy to become satisfied just trading baskets. In most of our games, we haven't had to play shut down defense or focus on boxing out for rebounds. I think that's what happened with the IL State game.

Now, having said this, at Florida is next, followed by Missouri, and then at Texas A&M. Those teams are all better than both Louisville and IL State. I'm glad Calipari isn't letting this slide. If this team can learn to play defense and learn to rebound at a similar level to the way they score, this team really could be a legit national title contender.

A big issue I’ve noticed is our guards take so many gambles for steals that they end getting in bad positions because of it

 

[UKBB4Ever]

A big issue I’ve noticed is our guards take so many gambles for steals that they end getting out in bad positions because of it

They do. And that is contrary to what Cal teaches. I would guess we will come out of the break doing less of that.

 

[jameslee32]

The massive amount of blocks doesn't mean much when teams are still able to pound the ball inside against us and shoot a good %.

The steals are great but again even with those steals overall our turnover % is only 106th.

The bottom line is the four factors are what matters the most and we don't do any of the four particularly well.

I'd say 10-2 matters most.

 

[bigbluelou]

Currently this is where we are at

UK 118.8 (8th) 97.3 (53rd) = Efficiency Margin of 21.57 (18th)

So the offense could get better but there's a bit a ceiling on that one considering we already have a top 10 offense. There's just more room for the defensive number to get lower.

Ideally you'd want top 20 in both. Especially when the tournament is one and done and one aspect of your team just might not show up one night and you can be sent packing. If the offense has an off night you want to know you have a defense that can still win you the game. Same the other way around.

Good stuff, thanks.

 

[Wildcats1st]

No defense. Try to outscore your opponent toe to toe with more possessions this is what cal is doing.

 

[bigbluelou]

You know, if Cal would just read this thread and take notes, we would be so much better.

 

[ukfan1622]

We've played 11 games and our shot blockers have played 3 games and 2 games respectively. Also, during the first 8 games without our shot blockers we played 4 freshmen big minutes. So there was never any reason to expect we'd be a good defensive team so far this year. The next 10 games will tell us more.

 

[The_Answer1313]

I'd say 10-2 matters most.

Well yeah but we are trying to get the best seed possible and not an early bounce from the tournament.

Getting better on defense will only help that.

 

[fatguy87]

We've played 11 games and our shot blockers have played 3 games and 2 games respectively. Also, during the first 8 games without our shot blockers we played 4 freshmen big minutes. So there was never any reason to expect we'd be a good defensive team so far this year. The next 10 games will tell us more.

Ugo can be a real difference maker here, but how many minutes should we expect him to log?

 

[jameslee32]

Well yeah but we are trying to get the best seed possible and not an early bounce from the tournament.

Getting better on defense will only help that.

More concerned about health. If they can stay healthy, the rebounding will improve. Not sure the on-ball defense will improve as much as rim protection, blocks etc but the youthful guards give hope for that as well.

 

[Jmeeks54thebest]

that is because we were relying on 5th year transfers
as the old saying goes "you can't teach old dogs new tricks"

How old do you think they are/were? They are/were all in their early 20s. Hardly what I would consider old and very capable of learning new things if the one who teaches them were a capable teacher.

 

[UKBB4Ever]

How old do you think they are/were? They are/were all in their early 20s. Hardly what I would consider old and very capable of learning new things if the one who teaches them were a capable teacher.

Wonder why they aren't guarding now with their new teams if they could guard and only needed teaching?

They had the best teaching here and didn't learn.

Where I fault Cal was continuing to play man with players not capable of guarding a man.

 

[TNCatfanforever]

We also play super fast, which means that while we get more possessions, the other team does as well. The more opportunities your opponent has to score, the more likely they are to hang a higher number on you.

We just need to keep scoring more than the other team

Good point but when we get into a slugfest UT for example we have to stop getting beat off the dribble

 

[YardCat]

Most of the bigs don’t know how to block out or use their body to get position. It’s going to be hard to teach someone how to rebound in a couple weeks. Now I do agree, we can out score teams by 20 and lose the rebounding battle, so be it. We can be the worst rebounding team in history but win #9.

 

[Mike-McD]

Theiro being out hurt as well. With him playing it would have reduced that 24 to 18. But 18 is still too many.

His presence alone would have cut it down to about half. He gets good blockout position and he muscles guys around in there.

 

[Mike-McD]

Might? But that’s not how Cal plays defense. Cal is a Larry Brown disciple. First shot defense, rebound!!

Larry Brown, the guy who couldn't win a title despite having Shaq for three years?

Explains a lot.

 

[Titpwhami2014]

I don’t see us improving much on defense between now and March. Every player outside of Wagner and Thiero consistently gets beat off the dribble. I don’t think that’s something that’s fixable in two months. And we know Cal doesn’t play zone.

 

[The_Answer1313]

How old do you think they are/were? They are/were all in their early 20s. Hardly what I would consider old and very capable of learning new things if the one who teaches them were a capable teacher.

There's always a chance a player picks something up and learns but usually by that point, they kind of are what they are IMO.

 

[ukfan1622]

Larry Brown, the guy who couldn't win a title despite having Shaq for three years?

Explains a lot.

I think that was Dale Brown.

 

[Jmeeks54thebest]

There's always a chance a player picks something up and learns but usually by that point, they kind of are what they are IMO.

It depends on the person. But scientifically speaking, there is nothing about their age that should indicate a lack of an ability to learn. Suggesting that someone in their early 20s is old and can’t learn new tricks is absurd.

 

[Tampa_cat54]

Larry Brown, the guy who couldn't win a title despite having Shaq for three years?

Explains a lot.

That was Dale Brown.

Larry Brown is a Hall of Famer with championships in both the NCAA and the NBA, former NBA Coach of the Year, NCAA Coach of the Year, ABA Coach of the Year, and was named one of the Top 15 Coaches in NBA History by the NBA's 75th Anniversary Panel.

 

[mebeblue2]

How old do you think they are/were? They are/were all in their early 20s. Hardly what I would consider old and very capable of learning new things if the one who teaches them were a capable teacher.

it is much easier to paint on a clean canvas as opposed to one that has already been painted on

 

[Kentucky15]

Larry Brown, the guy who couldn't win a title despite having Shaq for three years?

Explains a lot.

Yea, and Calipari idolizes Larry Brown. If it weren’t for him Calipari would have never been offered a good job in college upon his return. His reputation was ruined at that point due to scandals in college and the disdain Nets players had for him. He was considered damaged until Larry Brown convinced RC Johnson to hire him.

Calipari revitalized his image as a “players coach” in direct response to the rumors of player distrust as a means to recruit. Still today he’s doing this, and I think to a large degree has convince himself that this tactic was ever anything more than that.

I’ve always been surprised Calipari never made a push to get him on staff. In reality I’m sure he did, and also think it’s possible he had something to do with Memphis taking him on.

 

[IL Wildcat]

That was Dale Brown.

Larry Brown is a Hall of Famer with championships in both the NCAA and the NBA, former NBA Coach of the Year, NCAA Coach of the Year, ABA Coach of the Year, and was named one of the Top 15 Coaches in NBA History by the NBA's 75th Anniversary Panel.

I'm glad you pointed that out. Larry Brown wasn't the coach of LSU when Shaq was there but his Pistons did beat Shaq and Kobe and the Lakers in 2004 in the finals for an NBA title- they beat them 4-1 in the best of 7. Dale Brown was the coach of LSU, as you say. Not even close to the same guy!

Larry Brown also won an NCAA title at Kansas in 1988, which propelled him later to the NBA. There is no need to make up stuff to use to attack Calipari. Folks look desperate when they do this. Just use Cal's own failings, which should suffice. 😀

 

[Cornett195]

The defense needs to improve around three plays a game. Drop the points per 100 from 97 to 90-91. That team can make that improvement. A few extra blocks, rebounds, cutting off drives to basket mm. 3-4 plays that take away a basket. No reason we can’t improve that much.

 

[CincyUKFan]

My theory is simply that our two worst defenders are also the two guys that average the most minutes. Tre plays nearly 34mpg (which is absolutely unnecessary and statistically unjustifiable) and Reeves plays nearly 31mpg.

You’re just not going to be great defensively when you have two really poor defensive players on the court over 3/4 of the game.

 

[The_Answer1313]

It depends on the person. But scientifically speaking, there is nothing about their age that should indicate a lack of an ability to learn. Suggesting that someone in their early 20s is old and can’t learn new tricks is absurd.

I don't think it's necessary about "learning" new tricks. I completely agree with you. I'm 42 and still learning things in my job on a daily basis.

But rather what I'm saying is from a skill standpoint. If someone is in college for three years and they shoot 25% from 3, they probably aren't shooting much better than 25% in year 4. Obviously there's exceptions to the rule. Maybe a coach discovers something in their shooting stroke they make an adjustment and become better but for the most part that person isn't drastically changing.

If a player is poor defensively and they've been poor for some years, I tend to think it's not really about learning anything but rather just a weakness in their skill set. They might know what they are supposed to be doing, but still can't do it.

I can go outside to a park and shoot thousands of shots a day. I might learn something and my % might go up but I'm never making the NBA.

After you have so many years of data on someone, the best predictor going forward is what they've already done.

 

[UKBB4Ever]

Larry Brown, the guy who couldn't win a title despite having Shaq for three years?

Explains a lo

My theory is simply that our two worst defenders are also the two guys that average the most minutes. Tre plays nearly 34mpg (which is absolutely unnecessary and statistically unjustifiable) and Reeves plays nearly 31mpg.

You’re just not going to be great defensively when you have two really poor defensive players on the court over 3/4 of the game.

My theory is simply that our two worst defenders are also the two guys that average the most minutes. Tre plays nearly 34mpg (which is absolutely unnecessary and statistically unjustifiable) and Reeves plays nearly 31mpg.

You’re just not going to be great defensively when you have two really poor defensive players on the court over 3/4 of the game.

Exactly.

Neither Mitchell or Reeves can guard. And they are not going to learn to guard in their 5th year

Reeves is far worse than Mitchell.

It’s great that Reeves is scoring because he gives nothing else.

Mitchell does get some rebounds and Mitchell does pass the ball.

This team will never reach defensive elite with only 3 defenders on the floor.

We may not need to if we just keep scoring like this.

The number one reason both of them are 5th year guys is because they can’t guard.

 

[Jmeeks54thebest]

it is much easier to paint on a clean canvas as opposed to one that has already been painted on

So if people in their early 20s are so freaking old and dumb why don’t we start sending kids to high school at the grand old age of 8?

Comparing a young man between 20-23 as old dog or a used paint canvas is the most biologically ignorant thought process I have heard of.

 

[mebeblue2]

So if people in their early 20s are so freaking old and dumb why don’t we start sending kids to high school at the grand old age of 8?

Comparing a young man between 20-23 as old dog or a used paint canvas is the most biologically ignorant thought process I have heard of.

if i have to explain then it went way over your head

 

[Jmeeks54thebest]

I don't think it's necessary about "learning" new tricks. I completely agree with you. I'm 42 and still learning things in my job on a daily basis.

But rather what I'm saying is from a skill standpoint. If someone is in college for three years and they shoot 25% from 3, they probably aren't shooting much better than 25% in year 4. Obviously there's exceptions to the rule. Maybe a coach discovers something in their shooting stroke they make an adjustment and become better but for the most part that person isn't drastically changing.

If a player is poor defensively and they've been poor for some years, I tend to think it's not really about learning anything but rather just a weakness in their skill set. They might know what they are supposed to be doing, but still can't do it.

I can go outside to a park and shoot thousands of shots a day. I might learn something and my % might go up but I'm never making the NBA.

After you have so many years of data on someone, the best predictor going forward is what they've already done.

You articulated your argument very well here and I agree with you more than I disagree.

However, in your example of the 25% 3 point shooter (Wheeler comes to mind even if he was slightly better than that) I would say it has less to do with their potential to grow versus their willingness to do so.

I’d be willing to bet if Wheeler stayed in the gym for an extra 30 min-hour (or showed up 30min-1hr early to avoid tired arms and legs) and threw up shots for his first 3-4 years of college he would be a demonstrably better 3 pt shooter today. And I’m willing to put money down that he didn’t do that.

Look how hard guys like Curry, Kobe, MJ, and others worked at their craft while they were young and how huge it paid off for them. But, again, I do agree more than disagree with you because I don’t believe modern players (with some exceptions) have the same work ethic of their predecessors. Can you imagine a guy like Kobe or MJ letting a younger guy come in and take their starting spot without a fight, then proceed to take their ball and go home (like Wheeler)?

Sorry, went on a bit of a tangent there. Thank you for the civil, well articulated reply.

 

[Jmeeks54thebest]

if i have to explain then it went way over your head

We clearly disagree. But trust me, it’s not because I’m having a hard time understanding your point of view. I got my bachelor’s degree in biology and specialized in sport science. I’ve added 10 years of experience working with my degree on top of that education. So don’t worry, I’m subjects I am able to keep my head above your arguments!

I do apologize if I came across rudely in my original reply to you. I was just reading my response and while I had no bad intentions I can see how, through text, it may have came across as rude to you and thus prompted your ad hominem reply.

 

[The_Answer1313]

You articulated your argument very well here and I agree with you more than I disagree.

However, in your example of the 25% 3 point shooter (Wheeler comes to mind even if he was slightly better than that) I would say it has less to do with their potential to grow versus their willingness to do so.

I’d be willing to bet if Wheeler stayed in the gym for an extra 30 min-hour (or showed up 30min-1hr early to avoid tired arms and legs) and threw up shots for his first 3-4 years of college he would be a demonstrably better 3 pt shooter today. And I’m willing to put money down that he didn’t do that.

Look how hard guys like Curry, Kobe, MJ, and others worked at their craft while they were young and how huge it paid off for them. But, again, I do agree more than disagree with you because I don’t believe modern players (with some exceptions) have the same work ethic of their predecessors. Can you imagine a guy like Kobe or MJ letting a younger guy come in and take their starting spot without a fight, then proceed to take their ball and go home (like Wheeler)?

Sorry, went on a bit of a tangent there. Thank you for the civil, well articulated reply.

Yep totally agree.

Tho I will say work ethic probably falls under a similar category as skill. I feel like work ethic depends on the individual. So if a person hasn't worked on their shot in 3 years, I tend to think they won't spend much time in the gym in year 4 either working on it.