Had a good conversation with @Crimsonorblue22 regarding three point defense and personnel. Clearly, our best lineup will be a 3/2 with Doke and SDS manning the post.
So what happens when we face a 4/1 team with excellent three point shooting -- even one that has all five guys that are threats from the arc?
Do we adjust to them? Do we relent? Do we now play Garrett at the 4 spot and substantially compromise how WE play?
No. That's a clear way NOT to win a national championship.
This requires coach Self to adjust and change. He has to get away from the standard defensive principles that he has relied upon for years. Those principles compromise the ability to guard the line.
Self's defensive principles are inside out. That is, the most threatening spot is nearest the basket and that progressively works out. His entire defensive scheme is premised upon this outdated philosophy. He has attempted to make adjustments, but we have seen, we constantly give up open three point shots.
We've seen it in action. The most clear and obvious example was the absolute thrashing we received from Villanova in the 2018 Final Four. The question we all asked, "How were their shooters so wide open?"
It's easy. We were playing inside out defense. Self is a master of that philosophy. But it is suicide in certain games.
Let's start with the first, most easy way to guard the three point line. You would play zone, position five defenders on the line and cover every shot like a blanket. Of course, then, you'd give up easy buckets at the rim. That's the starting point.
I've long since believed the best way to guard the line is a 3-2 zone with the perimeter guys and a one post defender (depending on the side of the ball) attacking those shots. But Self won't play zone. Heck, when only a three point shot could TIE us at the end of a game, Self was still guarding guys inside the three point line (see Michigan 2013). He'll never go zone.
So what do we do? The fact is, you can play man and guard the line. But you have to be willing to give up uncontested two point jumpers, and you have to understand, that at times, we'll give up an easy bucket at the rim. You sacrifice. This assessment has to be game by game, situation by situation.
To beat the best 4/1 teams, you have to limit three point attempts AND contest those attempts.
But here's how you do it.
-
You have to scrap double teaming in the post, and collapsing in the post except in certain circumstances.
-
You can’t hedge out top or double the pick and roll. Good three point teams make you pay for that.
-
You have to create conditions that invite the two point jumper. That means attacking the three point shooter (selling out) and giving up the two point jumper, and also slacking off off guys in that two point range in favor of shutting off the drive. But you can’t regularly help with the perimeter defender on drives. Leave open areas on the court for jumpers if necessary.
-
You have to incorporate zone principles off the ball. So when the ball is on one wing, you’d have a defender focused on the near corner, one out from the near corner at the top of the key, one at the far corner top of the key, and another near the far wing. If there is a post man, that defender has that responsibility, but you don’t shade to help there. You shade to help the perimeter.
-
You can’t help from a shooter that is one pass away. Huge. As an example, and we see this happen, screen high, hedge, defender from the wing slides up, and his man slides down a bit and is open for three in the deep wing or corner. Heck, Svi did that for us all the time when teams made that error.
-
Very importantly, we can’t help from the weak side on drives from the strong side. Right, there is an open three point shooter.
-
And as a basic principle, you have to switch every screen on the perimeter. Period. You then work to re-switch into your favored match-up. Getting over screens is just too slow much of the time.
How much of that seems counter to what Self does? Pretty much all of it. That’s my point. Think about that. Think about Self's defense.
I’m not suggesting perfection. I’m not suggesting that there aren’t exceptions. And there are varying degrees, of course, on how you approach each item. You can gameplan and scheme to permit certain guys to shoot threes. All of this is macro in nature.
But if you want to really guard the three point line and still actively guard the rim, this is how you do it.
The counter position is to permit teams to make us play their way. To remove our core players. No way. We can passively just take it, and accept that we are weak. Or we can actively dictate and be strong. Easy choice in my book.
But it requires Self to adapt his defense to permit us to play OUR game. It also requires Self to CHANGE. How often to we double the pick and roll, help from the weak side on a drive, work over a screen, slack back in the lane, etc.? How often is a three point shooter left open because his defender is helping inside the arc?
This requires Self to change.
Sound familiar? We know the man can change because he has changed in other aspects. Remember when the three point shot was fool's gold? It never was fool's gold. It's a staple of modern basketball. Our coach took time to adapt.
Also, as an aside, I've always liked alternating defenses and scheme mid-game, and for certain possessions. This approach could be used even against inferior teams, or non 4/1 teams as a change-up.
I strongly think we should play a lot of 3-2 zone with this team. But that's another topic.
Regarding our man to man, the philosophical change mentioned above, for certain opponents, may determine our fate. Hot shooting does not just happen much of the time -- it can be created by a defense that permits volume and open looks from the spots the shooters are comfortable.
