Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Logo
Search Members FAQ Portal
  • Navigation
  • Our Hoosier Board
  • →
  • Big Ten Sports
  • →
  • Hoosier Sports
  • →
  • VCU's defense is overrated.
Welcome to Our Hoosier Board!

Most of the posters here have been around for nearly a decade now. You'll find their knowledge and insight to be second to none. We have a really strong community and value everyone's opinions.

Feel free to jump into any thread and voice your opinion with conviction. We love heated debates and even some fanbase ribbing from time to time. We pride ourselves on the lack of moderation needed to make this board successful.

Please remember that we have been around many years and have an astute ability to tell the difference between an immature, childish, trash-talking troll and a passionate fan voicing his or her opinion. It is at the discretion of Jazen and myself whether any moderating actions should be taken at any given time. It's a very, very rare thing. In other words, no worries....you'll be fine!

Cheers,
sirbrianwilson

Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
VCU's defense is overrated.
Tweet Topic Started: Mar 19 2012, 09:33 AM (331 Views)
dreachon Mar 19 2012, 09:33 AM Post #1
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,067
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
There. I said it. Their "havoc" defense is overrated. I know what you're thinking. "But Dreach, they forced 22 turnovers. 22! They were everywhere!"

Oh they're good, don't get me wrong, but they're not nearly as good as people are making them out to be. It's not ALL about turnovers. How many layups and dunks did we get in that game after successfully breaking the press? 10? 15? In my opinion, every single time the press fails and leads to a layup or dunk, that cancels out one of the turnovers that it causes. While we had 22 turnovers, we also had at least 10 gimme baskets. In realty, it was like playing a game where we had 12-14 turnovers. Nothing crazy. That's part of the reason why we were able to shoot 52% from the field, have so many points in the paint and yet only take 11 foul shots. Cuz most of those points in the paint weren't even challenged.

I was just thinking about how sick I was of hearing about the "havoc" defense during the game. Hearing the announcers constantly harp on the turnovers and yet not once talk about the ridiculously easy baskets we were getting at the same time. Ok. Rant over.
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BoilerFan24 Mar 19 2012, 10:10 AM Post #2
Senior
Posts:
962
Group:
Members
Member
#79
Joined:
February 6, 2008
I agree. I also don't think it will work long term in the Big Ten if Smart goes to Illinois.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
obatskii Mar 19 2012, 10:19 AM Post #3
Member Avatar
Go Tebow!
Posts:
22,925
Group:
Members
Member
#69
Joined:
February 6, 2008
It was a good fit for playing a team like IU without a quick PG. We obviously missed Verdell, and next year when you have a quick PG that can handle the rock in Yogi, I think it would be ineffective.
Posted Image


"They say it takes a village to raise a family. Well, it took a nation to rebuild a program. THANK YOU HOOSIER NATION!" -Tom Crean

Proud Swiftie
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dut1101 Mar 19 2012, 10:32 AM Post #4
Member Avatar
All-Star
Posts:
1,666
Group:
Members
Member
#378
Joined:
December 2, 2010
alot of our turnovers were self imposed IMO
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dçamden03 Mar 19 2012, 10:41 AM Post #5
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
24,523
Group:
Members
Member
#8
Joined:
February 4, 2008
63 points in 66 possessions. I'd say the VCU D was fairly effective. That was the first game all year that Indiana won while scoring less than a point per possession.
“He’s always been a guy — maybe to a fault — he would always try to do what I said. That seems like something simple in coaching, but those are the guys I hang my hat on. We’ve had some guys in our program, we had a couple guys that felt I had a bias towards E’Twaun Moore. And they were right — I do have a bias towards E’Twaun Moore. I like guys that go to class, that are academic All-Americans, that come early, that stay late, that love the game of basketball. I am biased towards those guys. And I’m biased towards Rob Hummel. But I’m also biased towards their habits, their work ethic, and how they carry themselves."

"I’d take him to the ends of the earth — I’d want him playing for me.” - Bo Ryan on Robbie Hummel

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon Mar 19 2012, 11:04 AM Post #6
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,067
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
dçamden03
Mar 19 2012, 10:41 AM
63 points in 66 possessions. I'd say the VCU D was fairly effective. That was the first game all year that Indiana won while scoring less than a point per possession.
Their defense is very effective. That's not what I was arguing. Simply saying that the announcers just constantly gushed over the turnovers like somehow turnovers are the only measure of how good a defense is. The full court press is a part of it, but when you give up so many layups and dunks from the press not working, that's basically the opposite of forcing a turnover. In reality VCU's defense is good because they are aggressive and stick tight in the half court as well. The full court pressure gets way more of the credit than it deserves, I think.
Edited by dreachon, Mar 19 2012, 11:06 AM.
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dçamden03 Mar 19 2012, 11:10 AM Post #7
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
24,523
Group:
Members
Member
#8
Joined:
February 4, 2008
dreachon
Mar 19 2012, 11:04 AM
dçamden03
Mar 19 2012, 10:41 AM
63 points in 66 possessions. I'd say the VCU D was fairly effective. That was the first game all year that Indiana won while scoring less than a point per possession.
Their defense is very effective. That's not what I was arguing. Simply saying that the announcers just constantly gushed over the turnovers like somehow turnovers are the only measure of how good a defense is. The full court press is a part of it, but when you give up so many layups and dunks from the press not working, that's basically the opposite of forcing a turnover. In reality VCU's defense is good because they are aggressive and stick tight in the half court as well. The full court pressure gets way too much credit than it deserves, I think.
Probably so, but the press' effectiveness isn't only measured in baskets given up and turnovers forced. It shrinks the shot clock, something I think can be very effective vs a team like Indiana or MSU which has multiple sets that are called from the sideline every possession. It also speeds teams up which can force quick, long shots at times.
“He’s always been a guy — maybe to a fault — he would always try to do what I said. That seems like something simple in coaching, but those are the guys I hang my hat on. We’ve had some guys in our program, we had a couple guys that felt I had a bias towards E’Twaun Moore. And they were right — I do have a bias towards E’Twaun Moore. I like guys that go to class, that are academic All-Americans, that come early, that stay late, that love the game of basketball. I am biased towards those guys. And I’m biased towards Rob Hummel. But I’m also biased towards their habits, their work ethic, and how they carry themselves."

"I’d take him to the ends of the earth — I’d want him playing for me.” - Bo Ryan on Robbie Hummel

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon Mar 19 2012, 11:16 AM Post #8
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,067
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
dçamden03
Mar 19 2012, 11:10 AM
dreachon
Mar 19 2012, 11:04 AM
dçamden03
Mar 19 2012, 10:41 AM
63 points in 66 possessions. I'd say the VCU D was fairly effective. That was the first game all year that Indiana won while scoring less than a point per possession.
Their defense is very effective. That's not what I was arguing. Simply saying that the announcers just constantly gushed over the turnovers like somehow turnovers are the only measure of how good a defense is. The full court press is a part of it, but when you give up so many layups and dunks from the press not working, that's basically the opposite of forcing a turnover. In reality VCU's defense is good because they are aggressive and stick tight in the half court as well. The full court pressure gets way too much credit than it deserves, I think.
Probably so, but the press' effectiveness isn't only measured in baskets given up and turnovers forced. It shrinks the shot clock, something I think can be very effective vs a team like Indiana or MSU which has multiple sets that are called from the sideline every possession. It also speeds teams up which can force quick, long shots at times.
Fair enough. Just wanted to point out that full court press + turnovers /= great defense. As a team, you have to be more than that, because every time you try to press and fail, it's an easy bucket for the other team. I felt like no one wanted to point this out while praising their defense on Saturday. In fact, one could argue that had they stuck with their half court defense and not tried to press, they would have had a much better chance to win in that game. Their half court defense was excellent as well and it would have erased all of the easy buckets we got from breaking their full court press.
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
benhyoung14 Mar 19 2012, 11:38 AM Post #9
Senior
Posts:
767
Group:
Members
Member
#199
Joined:
March 12, 2008
If you throw in our rebound margin plus our field goal percentage then you start to see the downside of a full court press and double teams.
Edited by benhyoung14, Mar 19 2012, 11:42 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mr Gray Mar 19 2012, 11:56 AM Post #10
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
16,503
Group:
Members
Member
#26
Joined:
February 5, 2008
I think the most effective part of their defense isn't their full-court pressure, rather their willingness to play so physical and keep their hands all over the ball handler. I agree with dreach in that their full court press was probably a net-neutral (at best) for them, but their half-court physical defense did cause some problems for us...particularly for Hulls and often Zeller.

BTW, I know it isn't Zeller's style, but if he had "flopped" a few more times on Saturday that probably would have helped quite a bit.....when he stands tall after a foul, the refs seem less inclined to call it.
Posted Image
The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IUCOLTFAN Mar 19 2012, 12:18 PM Post #11
Coach
Posts:
10,098
Group:
Members
Member
#131
Joined:
February 9, 2008
Mr Gray
Mar 19 2012, 11:56 AM
I think the most effective part of their defense isn't their full-court pressure, rather their willingness to play so physical and keep their hands all over the ball handler. I agree with dreach in that their full court press was probably a net-neutral (at best) for them, but their half-court physical defense did cause some problems for us...particularly for Hulls and often Zeller.

BTW, I know it isn't Zeller's style, but if he had "flopped" a few more times on Saturday that probably would have helped quite a bit.....when he stands tall after a foul, the refs seem less inclined to call it.
IMO, the "havoc" would never even exist in the B1G....the officials would never let it happen....too much hands on contact, that usually isn't allowed in our conference. I think our boys did a nice job of adjusting and trying to play defense with alot of hands everywhere. It wasn't being called so they adjusted. I thought the refs were pretty consistent in letting the physical D be played.
Posted Image

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mr Gray Mar 19 2012, 12:27 PM Post #12
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
16,503
Group:
Members
Member
#26
Joined:
February 5, 2008
IUCOLTFAN
Mar 19 2012, 12:18 PM
Mr Gray
Mar 19 2012, 11:56 AM
I think the most effective part of their defense isn't their full-court pressure, rather their willingness to play so physical and keep their hands all over the ball handler. I agree with dreach in that their full court press was probably a net-neutral (at best) for them, but their half-court physical defense did cause some problems for us...particularly for Hulls and often Zeller.

BTW, I know it isn't Zeller's style, but if he had "flopped" a few more times on Saturday that probably would have helped quite a bit.....when he stands tall after a foul, the refs seem less inclined to call it.
IMO, the "havoc" would never even exist in the B1G....the officials would never let it happen....too much hands on contact, that usually isn't allowed in our conference. I think our boys did a nice job of adjusting and trying to play defense with alot of hands everywhere. It wasn't being called so they adjusted. I thought the refs were pretty consistent in letting the physical D be played.
I agree that it the calls were consistant, but that style of refereeing plays better for VCU, because frankly our guys just aren't that physical. I think the B1G is one of the most physical conferences down low, but I agree with you that they are pretty quick to call handchecking...etc
Posted Image
The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
benhyoung14 Mar 19 2012, 02:27 PM Post #13
Senior
Posts:
767
Group:
Members
Member
#199
Joined:
March 12, 2008
Mr Gray
Mar 19 2012, 12:27 PM
IUCOLTFAN
Mar 19 2012, 12:18 PM
Mr Gray
Mar 19 2012, 11:56 AM
I think the most effective part of their defense isn't their full-court pressure, rather their willingness to play so physical and keep their hands all over the ball handler. I agree with dreach in that their full court press was probably a net-neutral (at best) for them, but their half-court physical defense did cause some problems for us...particularly for Hulls and often Zeller.

BTW, I know it isn't Zeller's style, but if he had "flopped" a few more times on Saturday that probably would have helped quite a bit.....when he stands tall after a foul, the refs seem less inclined to call it.
IMO, the "havoc" would never even exist in the B1G....the officials would never let it happen....too much hands on contact, that usually isn't allowed in our conference. I think our boys did a nice job of adjusting and trying to play defense with alot of hands everywhere. It wasn't being called so they adjusted. I thought the refs were pretty consistent in letting the physical D be played.
I agree that it the calls were consistant, but that style of refereeing plays better for VCU, because frankly our guys just aren't that physical. I think the B1G is one of the most physical conferences down low, but I agree with you that they are pretty quick to call handchecking...etc
The calls were consistent, but I think the rules need changed....especially the foul on Sheehey. On a couple occasions it looked like players were pulled/or pushed out of bounds or over the 10 sec line and no calls were made. I saw something somewhere that hulls had said you can't hedge somebody so much that if pushes you out of bounds and it not be a foul, or at least it shouldn't. At that point how is it possible to drive? If you can change the speed or direction of a player then what is the point of a blocking or charging foul in basketball?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ShakeAndBake Mar 19 2012, 03:05 PM Post #14
Member Avatar
Senior
Posts:
488
Group:
Members
Member
#345
Joined:
December 10, 2009
benhyoung14
Mar 19 2012, 02:27 PM
Mr Gray
Mar 19 2012, 12:27 PM
IUCOLTFAN
Mar 19 2012, 12:18 PM
Mr Gray
Mar 19 2012, 11:56 AM
I think the most effective part of their defense isn't their full-court pressure, rather their willingness to play so physical and keep their hands all over the ball handler. I agree with dreach in that their full court press was probably a net-neutral (at best) for them, but their half-court physical defense did cause some problems for us...particularly for Hulls and often Zeller.

BTW, I know it isn't Zeller's style, but if he had "flopped" a few more times on Saturday that probably would have helped quite a bit.....when he stands tall after a foul, the refs seem less inclined to call it.
IMO, the "havoc" would never even exist in the B1G....the officials would never let it happen....too much hands on contact, that usually isn't allowed in our conference. I think our boys did a nice job of adjusting and trying to play defense with alot of hands everywhere. It wasn't being called so they adjusted. I thought the refs were pretty consistent in letting the physical D be played.
I agree that it the calls were consistant, but that style of refereeing plays better for VCU, because frankly our guys just aren't that physical. I think the B1G is one of the most physical conferences down low, but I agree with you that they are pretty quick to call handchecking...etc
The calls were consistent, but I think the rules need changed....especially the foul on Sheehey. On a couple occasions it looked like players were pulled/or pushed out of bounds or over the 10 sec line and no calls were made. I saw something somewhere that hulls had said you can't hedge somebody so much that if pushes you out of bounds and it not be a foul, or at least it shouldn't. At that point how is it possible to drive? If you can change the speed or direction of a player then what is the point of a blocking or charging foul in basketball?
I agree. You can't hedge someone straight out of bounds. A hedge is supposed to be when a defender comes up and disrupts a drive but then retreats back to there man. They were coming up and then pushing Hulls back. That's a foul. I know all of us on here have been giving Hulls a little bit of shit for not being able to break the press but how can he when the refs are letting this kind of thing happen. IMO the refs called a horrible game. Just because a team plays a different style of defense doesn't mean the refs should call the game any different than any other night. A foul is a foul. I think we need to see some changes in rules in the off-season as well. I'm tired of these charging calls this year. Refs are deciding games this year more than I've ever seen.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon Mar 19 2012, 03:26 PM Post #15
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,067
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
As Brum said though, Hulls needs to dribble into contact to get that foul call. On the one when he went back over halfcourt I don't think anyone touched him. He just dribbled backwards.
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Sign-up for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Hoosier Sports · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2

Track Topic · E-mail Topic Time: 7:29 PM Jul 10
Hosted for free by ZetaBoards · Privacy Policy