ADVERTISEMENT

Relatively Easy Solution

ThePhoenix

Sophomore
Jan 14, 2003
1,521
152
63
Seems to me that an easy fix to our offensive woes would be to a more transition, fast break, up tempo style.

It's obvious we don't have an interior post presence. We don't have a single guy that is equipped to post up, get it, and score. And we have 3 PGs basically. So why are we playing this half court grind it out style of ball?

When that is the case it's logical to make it a 94 foot game rather than a half court game. We're not built that well for a half court grind it out style. I think Cal is just caught up in trying to teach them how to do certain things. Part of it is he has to coach the basics because of high turnover of players. He does have to prepare us for the last 5 minutes of a close game when we have to execute in the half court. I get that. Trying to make them better at their weaknesses is fine for a while. That's all well and good now, but at some point I think you have to play towards your strengths moreso than trying to lessen your weaknesses.

And this team is built perfectly for a running push the ball style. Ulis is great at pushing it. Great passer and decision maker on the run. Briscoe is ideal for it because he's best at going to the goal headfirst in a bull rush, and in the fast break the lane is open for when he does that (as opposed to when he gets in trouble driving into traffic). Murray is the shooter and I think fits the filling of the wing nicely (think Jeff Fryer's role on those old Loyola Marymount teams, only expanded because he can also drive). Our bigs aren't much posting in the block, but Poythress/Lee/Skal are all really really good at running the floor and finishing good set ups (like lobs).

All our guys would flourish in an up and down game imo. The extra space to operate would help accentuate Briscoe's positives while negating his bad points, and I think Skal would really benefit from not operating in traffic with as much help defense.

I wish I could ask Cal why he hasn't done it, because it really just makes all kinds of logical sense. If your half court offense is blah, then make it a full court offense. When your players strengths are geared towards a full court game then play that way. It's like we're a football team with a great QB and some talented WRs, but are insistent on running it up the gut every down. At some point you have to just do what you're good at.
 
When Ulis and Murray are pushing it there's no spot up shooter (other than the other of them) on the wing which is a key factor in transition.
 
When Ulis and Murray are pushing it there's no spot up shooter (other than the other of them) on the wing which is a key factor in transition.

I'm not talking they turn into Loyola Marymount from 1990. I'm merely saying that they should make a concerted effort to push the tempo every chance they get imo.

You can certainly successfully fast break with 2 shooters. Again it's not like Marymount and you're not looking to shoot 3's off the break per se. This team would be looking to add a lot of dunks. Poy/Lee/Skal are all equipped to beat their man down the floor and all finish lobs/dunks well.

If the guys we have ran the floor I'm confident Ulis would find them for a ton of easy shots. Which also might wake up Skal and Poythress. Both might have a little more zeal and confidence if they were running the floor and dunking left and right.

Why don't you start coaching the team if it's so easy then?

It's not easy. I love Cal and think he does a GREAT job, and wouldn't trade him for any coach in America. But I am pretty baffled as to why he doesn't have them push it more.

Particularly when he's made comments even last year that he wanted them to push the ball. I've been at games when he yelled at Andrew Harrison to push the ball. That makes it extra baffling. I think that sometimes it's easy for a coach to fall into valuing the ball TOO much. Nobody likes turnovers but when you make avoiding them the end all be all you end up stifling your guys and it leads to paralysis by analysis.

It's a pretty logical idea I think. Like I said, this team's personnel isn't built for long halfcourt possessions because there is no offensive post presence. It's 3 guards (ideal for running), and the bigs all excel at finishing nice passes/lobs and all run the floor really well (also ideal for running).

It really is tailor made for getting out on the break. A great all around decision maker PG (Ulis), a great shooter good slasher (Murray), a great penetrator that excels at beating his man to the goal (Briscoe), and 3 long athletic bigs that run the floor and finish well. I even think guys like Matthews would excel in the system because it plays to their athleticism. Also guys like Willis would excel too because they could just spot up on the break and get wide wide open 3's potentially.

It would help offset weaknesses. Briscoe's strength is driving headfirst toward the goal. He gets in trouble because of help defense and driving in traffic. On a fast break that negative wouldn't be as bad because of less help D and traffic.

Skal really struggles in traffic. Any little bump throws him off. Hands reaching in cause him to lose the ball often. His weakness is he's physically weaker than all the guys he plays against. His strength is that he's more agile than most anyone his size. So put him in space and let him take advantage of his strength. Don't put him in the lane in traffic and let the other team take advantage of his weakness.

Like I said, this team is built for that. When you have no post presence you are not built for a halfcourt slugfest. Using the football analogy, if you have a great QB, good WR's, and are light on the line, you don't try to pound the ball up the middle. If you have a great RB and big O line but a lacking QB and poor WRs you don't try to throw it all over the place.

This isn't some brilliant insight. This is simply logic. When you have 3 guards and 3 rim runners the obvious choice is to up the tempo and run. That's what you're built for.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT