great analysis Nick. when I'm watch a game I'm too into the game and mostly follow the ball. I get a general impression of what the problems are, or why things are happening, but unless I watch the game afterwards, it's really hard to analyze it.
Your breakdown is outstanding (and I'm sure took a lot of time/effort), and your conclusions really wrap it up... that Colorado has an elite PG and a bucket full of shooters, including stretch 4s (while Utah does not)
But Cal has the worst 3 point defense in the conference (WSU best, and under performing UW and ASU the 10th and 11th worst)
My overall view is that our perimeter players aren't very good one-on-one defenders (except Brown) and we don't have shot blockers (like WSU) so we can't keep wings out of the paint. We therefore have to over help, which opens up 3 point shooters. If a team is a good 3 point shooting team like Colorado then we lose. If the team is a poor 3 point shooting team like Utah we win.
We also don't have a lot of length on the perimeter, which Fox apparently is trying to remedy with his recruiting
And as you pointed out, this team just doesn't have a high defensive IQ, as players are out of position and too often make the wrong decisions.
Not that this is really germane to this specific discussion but there's a movement in coaching circles - especially at high level basketball (NBA) to stop closing out on 3 point shooters but to instead jump and contest because for high level 3 point shooters, a "contest" doesn't really mean much anyways. You can't "contest" against Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, James Harden, etc. etc. anyways AND if they take the now open driving lane, you've done your job of getting them off the 3 point line. But the theory is that you don't leap all out, you leap, but land and are ready to leap again to contest the second shot on the side step or step back.
Guys like BBall Breakdown have been pushing this.
(Fox probably hasn't changed how he coaches defense so, again, not relevant)
interesting point. I agree that you can't bother an elite shooter like Curry or Klay with a late closeout. Therefore I think it comes down to scouting. Coaches could scout shooters to determine if closeouts are effective or not. Trouble is, with small coaching staffs I'm sure it's too much work and time to do so. I wonder if NCAA teams are allowed graduate assistants that could be devoted to this type of scouting/analytics
I’d definitely like to see the data indicating that leaving your feet 20+ feet from the basket is a good defensive decision!
There is a lot of information out there indicating that, as a general matter, number of 3’s is the bigger indicator of poor defense against the 3, and that % allowed is more a matter of bad luck. But there is also a lot of common sense in asking the question re why the same schools who tend to allow low 3 point %’s do so each year, so the data seems to be missing something, at least in some instances. Here, we have a LOT of open and wide open 3’s. I thought avoiding large numbers of those type of shots was supposed to be the reason we hired Mark Fox and why we have to live with an unimaginative and dated offensive philosophy.
You'd have to follow BBall Breakdown but his analysis is for the NBA - it might not be so relevant for college and high school athletes. I know I can hear my coach yelling at me to chop my feet and come balanced and not jump, but . . .
This is why I need to follow more NBA analytical stuff, they're obviously well ahead of any NCAA insights. I was also tempted to get into the '3 point shot prevention is more important than 3 point shot %," but this was long enough as it is
That's just a mess of number I wouldn't care to get into - seeing how many 3s opponents usually shoot vs opponents against us. And if we're pushing them to shoot more 2s (it doesn't feel like it at all)
great work, as usual, Nick. As an aside, I think I heard an announcer earlier this year say that Grant wanted to change the pronunciation of his last name, so that might be some of the confusion. What was preferred for the last three years, is not the correct pronunciation this year.
great analysis Nick. when I'm watch a game I'm too into the game and mostly follow the ball. I get a general impression of what the problems are, or why things are happening, but unless I watch the game afterwards, it's really hard to analyze it.
Your breakdown is outstanding (and I'm sure took a lot of time/effort), and your conclusions really wrap it up... that Colorado has an elite PG and a bucket full of shooters, including stretch 4s (while Utah does not)
But Cal has the worst 3 point defense in the conference (WSU best, and under performing UW and ASU the 10th and 11th worst)
https://www.barttorvik.com/trank.php?sort=19&begin=20201101&end=20210501&conlimit=All&year=2021&top=0&hteam=&quad=5&rpi=#
My overall view is that our perimeter players aren't very good one-on-one defenders (except Brown) and we don't have shot blockers (like WSU) so we can't keep wings out of the paint. We therefore have to over help, which opens up 3 point shooters. If a team is a good 3 point shooting team like Colorado then we lose. If the team is a poor 3 point shooting team like Utah we win.
We also don't have a lot of length on the perimeter, which Fox apparently is trying to remedy with his recruiting
And as you pointed out, this team just doesn't have a high defensive IQ, as players are out of position and too often make the wrong decisions.
It's a pick your poison kinda thing
Not that this is really germane to this specific discussion but there's a movement in coaching circles - especially at high level basketball (NBA) to stop closing out on 3 point shooters but to instead jump and contest because for high level 3 point shooters, a "contest" doesn't really mean much anyways. You can't "contest" against Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, James Harden, etc. etc. anyways AND if they take the now open driving lane, you've done your job of getting them off the 3 point line. But the theory is that you don't leap all out, you leap, but land and are ready to leap again to contest the second shot on the side step or step back.
Guys like BBall Breakdown have been pushing this.
(Fox probably hasn't changed how he coaches defense so, again, not relevant)
interesting point. I agree that you can't bother an elite shooter like Curry or Klay with a late closeout. Therefore I think it comes down to scouting. Coaches could scout shooters to determine if closeouts are effective or not. Trouble is, with small coaching staffs I'm sure it's too much work and time to do so. I wonder if NCAA teams are allowed graduate assistants that could be devoted to this type of scouting/analytics
I’d definitely like to see the data indicating that leaving your feet 20+ feet from the basket is a good defensive decision!
There is a lot of information out there indicating that, as a general matter, number of 3’s is the bigger indicator of poor defense against the 3, and that % allowed is more a matter of bad luck. But there is also a lot of common sense in asking the question re why the same schools who tend to allow low 3 point %’s do so each year, so the data seems to be missing something, at least in some instances. Here, we have a LOT of open and wide open 3’s. I thought avoiding large numbers of those type of shots was supposed to be the reason we hired Mark Fox and why we have to live with an unimaginative and dated offensive philosophy.
Great article, Nick!
You'd have to follow BBall Breakdown but his analysis is for the NBA - it might not be so relevant for college and high school athletes. I know I can hear my coach yelling at me to chop my feet and come balanced and not jump, but . . .
https://twitter.com/bballbreakdown/status/1074358282771324928?s=20
This is why I need to follow more NBA analytical stuff, they're obviously well ahead of any NCAA insights. I was also tempted to get into the '3 point shot prevention is more important than 3 point shot %," but this was long enough as it is
That's just a mess of number I wouldn't care to get into - seeing how many 3s opponents usually shoot vs opponents against us. And if we're pushing them to shoot more 2s (it doesn't feel like it at all)
great work, as usual, Nick. As an aside, I think I heard an announcer earlier this year say that Grant wanted to change the pronunciation of his last name, so that might be some of the confusion. What was preferred for the last three years, is not the correct pronunciation this year.
Nice analysis of behind the arc shooting. Thanks.