W. Basketball. Turnovers Doom @LATechWBB in Loss at MT

[BruisedOrange]

Looking forward to BruisedOrange's view of the game.

Well, I've been kinda dreading offering it. (and I write this having just learned results of the UAB game )

I don't disagree with what Russdawg and eddawgfan have written, regarding the season's home games. The MTSU game was only one game, and the only one I've seen and all I can comment on. Nothing that follows is written out of anger or retribution (for the time spent, the price of the ticket and the trip). Nor is this about the pain of an important loss.

Y'all it was awful basketball. Awful to look at, awful to have paid money to see. It was a 40-year journey back in time in women's basketball history. I regretted attending the game. I couldn't imagine making the trip next season. Those are offered as confessions, not insults.

Yes, the refereeing was ludicrously terrible--on both sides. It was called as if each ref started the game with only 4 fouls in their quota, and had to hold them until the end.

Yet my initial impression from the first 5 minutes of the game was that we were taller, stronger, and athletically superior to the team MTSU had on the court. I knew we could (and should) dominate their girls. But...

Observation 1: (and evidently this traveled with us to B'ham Saturday) we could not shoot, and we shot like we knew we couldn't shoot. We were playing dominating defense early, but as we continued to miss open shots and layups at the other end, you could see MTSU's confidence grow. They stopped fearing us and focused on patiently working their own offense until it began to produce.

Observation 2: The game was played as if from one of those eras when the defensive game has tactically stymied all offensive schemes. It was the basketball equivalent of World War I trench warfare--the offense just kept throwing itself futiley against an impenitrable wall.

I saw repeated here something I noticed a few weeks ago at a male high school game (between state contenders). Instead of players passing, moving or dribbling into an open spot to take an unchallenged shot, they passed or dribbled the ball through the open spot until they made contact with the defenders, and then tried to "get off" some kind of shot. At that point, they've ceded all advantages to the defenders. Maybe the idea is to create contact and try to get to the free throw line and put defenders on the bench with fouls (see comment above on the refereeing to understand the tactical illogic in that thought). I just don't know, but would love to hear from our forum coaches on the current offensive philosophy.

All I can say is, I'd certainly prefer our shooting chances from 3 feet further out if relatively open and unchallenged. And I would not relinquish control over my destiny to the vagueries of CUSA referees. If drawing fouls is not one of the goals of this kind of play, then our players just have no feel for anticipating defensive movement and floor spacing. I don't know any other way to explain it.

Taking the ball into the teeth of the defense was the impetus for many of our turnovers. I don't remember a lot of unforced turnovers. I'd describe them as forced, but with an assist from us.

Observation 3: It didn't look like we lost intensity from fatigue, but rather from futility and loss of confidence, especially when Brea Edwards got hot from outside. She was stroking the ball; we were chunking, heaving, and flinging it. It wasn't that our technique was so obviously bad, but I'd say lack of forethought or estimation for where the optimal launch point would be. Individually, the result was loss of rhythm and compromised timing.

Observation 4: This is just an aside, but I was shocked at how unathletic Cleaver looked, doing anything, with or without the ball.

I'm sorry everything I had to say was so negative, but it was truly the worst basketball I've seen since watching a childrens' game. Now maybe we aren't so much bad as MTSU and UAB were just well-prepared for us defensively, anticipating us to the spot. But come tourney time, that's just as bad as being awful.

[champion110]

Well, I've been kinda dreading offering it. (and I write this having just learned results of the UAB game )

I don't disagree with what Russdawg and eddawgfan have written, regarding the season's home games. The MTSU game was only one game, and the only one I've seen and all I can comment on. Nothing that follows is written out of anger or retribution (for the time spent, the price of the ticket and the trip). Nor is this about the pain of an important loss.

Y'all it was awful basketball. Awful to look at, awful to have paid money to see. It was a 40-year journey back in time in women's basketball history. I regretted attending the game. I couldn't imagine making the trip next season. Those are offered as confessions, not insults.

Yes, the refereeing was ludicrously terrible--on both sides. It was called as if each ref started the game with only 4 fouls in their quota, and had to hold them until the end.

Yet my initial impression from the first 5 minutes of the game was that we were taller, stronger, and athletically superior to the team MTSU had on the court. I knew we could (and should) dominate their girls. But...

Observation 1: (and evidently this traveled with us to B'ham Saturday) we could not shoot, and we shot like we knew we couldn't shoot. We were playing dominating defense early, but as we continued to miss open shots and layups at the other end, you could see MTSU's confidence grow. They stopped fearing us and focused on patiently working their own offense until it began to produce.

Observation 2: The game was played as if from one of those eras when the defensive game has tactically stymied all offensive schemes. It was the basketball equivalent of World War I trench warfare--the offense just kept throwing itself futiley against an impenitrable wall.

I saw repeated here something I noticed a few weeks ago at a male high school game (between state contenders). Instead of players passing, moving or dribbling into an open spot to take an unchallenged shot, they passed or dribbled the ball through the open spot until they made contact with the defenders, and then tried to "get off" some kind of shot. At that point, they've ceded all advantages to the defenders. Maybe the idea is to create contact and try to get to the free throw line and put defenders on the bench with fouls (see comment above on the refereeing to understand the tactical illogic in that thought). I just don't know, but would love to hear from our forum coaches on the current offensive philosophy.

All I can say is, I'd certainly prefer our shooting chances from 3 feet further out if relatively open and unchallenged. And I would not relinquish control over my destiny to the vagueries of CUSA referees. If drawing fouls is not one of the goals of this kind of play, then our players just have no feel for anticipating defensive movement and floor spacing. I don't know any other way to explain it.

Taking the ball into the teeth of the defense was the impetus for many of our turnovers. I don't remember a lot of unforced turnovers. I'd describe them as forced, but with an assist from us.

Observation 3: It didn't look like we lost intensity from fatigue, but rather from futility and loss of confidence, especially when Brea Edwards got hot from outside. She was stroking the ball; we were chunking, heaving, and flinging it. It wasn't that our technique was so obviously bad, but I'd say lack of forethought or estimation for where the optimal launch point would be. Individually, the result was loss of rhythm and compromised timing.

Observation 4: This is just an aside, but I was shocked at how unathletic Cleaver looked, doing anything, with or without the ball.

I'm sorry everything I had to say was so negative, but it was truly the worst basketball I've seen since watching a childrens' game. Now maybe we aren't so much bad as MTSU and UAB were just well-prepared for us defensively, anticipating us to the spot. But come tourney time, that's just as bad as being awful.

I totally agree with everything you stated. That was some bad basketball. I am trying to be positive, but it is hard to do with that performance. Luckily, I know that the last two games have been out of character from where we were headed - so, I know we have it in us. Hopefully, the ship can be righted very quickly headed down the home stretch.

[HoDo-Tech70]

Observation 2: The game was played as if from one of those eras when the defensive game has tactically stymied all offensive schemes. It was the basketball equivalent of World War I trench warfare--the offense just kept throwing itself futiley against an impenitrable wall.

I saw repeated here something I noticed a few weeks ago at a male high school game (between state contenders). Instead of players passing, moving or dribbling into an open spot to take an unchallenged shot, they passed or dribbled the ball through the open spot until they made contact with the defenders, and then tried to "get off" some kind of shot. At that point, they've ceded all advantages to the defenders. Maybe the idea is to create contact and try to get to the free throw line and put defenders on the bench with fouls (see comment above on the refereeing to understand the tactical illogic in that thought). I just don't know, but would love to hear from our forum coaches on the current offensive philosophy.

All I can say is, I'd certainly prefer our shooting chances from 3 feet further out if relatively open and unchallenged. And I would not relinquish control over my destiny to the vagueries of CUSA referees. If drawing fouls is not one of the goals of this kind of play, then our players just have no feel for anticipating defensive movement and floor spacing. I don't know any other way to explain it.

Taking the ball into the teeth of the defense was the impetus for many of our turnovers. I don't remember a lot of unforced turnovers. I'd describe them as forced, but with an assist from us.

With your permission, I'd like to borrow this well written observation to use in my description of our men's basketball team's performance in several games. I'll give you credit for the observation.

IMO, this kind of offensive strategy does not maximize the point productivity per possession. The MBB team sometimes goes minutes doing the same thing over and over again and getting the same results. This happened in the UAB game yesterday and the Bulldogs got 10 points behind. A couple of defensive stops woke the team up and the offensive strategy changed to one of sharing the ball with the open man and driving the lane when open. We overcame the 10 point deficit and won by 9 against the #1 team in the conference.

In yesterday's game, I saw the Bulldogs fail to pass to an open man on possession after possession. I wanted to shout "this is insanity".

Talent wins game, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships. Michael Jordan

[BruisedOrange]

IMO, this kind of offensive strategy does not maximize the point productivity per possession. The MBB team sometimes goes minutes doing the same thing over and over again and getting the same results. This happened in the UAB game yesterday and the Bulldogs got 10 points behind.

I think you got to the heart of it, Ho-Do-Tech.

An astute observer who was unfamiliar with the rules of the game might logically conclude that shots in the 8-15 foot range are only worth a single point. On the floor of the Murphy Center we left un-attempted at least 20 uncontested shots within that range.

Defenses have successfully clogged the middle against the dribble-drive and in-the-lane dump off passes, and the better teams are alert and quick enough to also defend the kick-out trey. It seems to me an offensive strategy that was dictating to defenses two years ago has now been effectively checked by the top 50 centile of defenses.

[caveat: I just sent in my tax forms. You may be able to guess how much I earned as a coaching consultant.]

But my impression is that players are still being coached with an aggressive mindset that expects to dictate to defenses. Now maybe I've just not seen offenses which do it well, and maybe that concept still works when run correctly. But I think against today's defenses it requires a few skill mismatches (see Golden Gate Warriors).

I don't think it's time to abandon that offense, but maybe it's time to encourage a "differently aggressive" mindset: one that looks to take what the defense is giving. Putting my coaching credentials on the line (ahem), I think this summer I'd have my 4s and 5s shooting 10-12 foot jumpers from the high post, my 2s and 3s practicing 10-15 foot pull-up jumpers from the wings and baseline, and my pg shooting treys from behind (or coming off) a tall screen. Those seem to be where the defensive gaps are currently. Once defenders come out to stop those, you'll see diagonal passing lanes open up for layups, or treys from the shallow corners.

A related side point: if your point guard is not considered a danger to shoot the trey , screens up top serve no effective purpose. I watched MTSU defenders pass behind screens all evening, confident that they only needed to be in position to protect against our pg driving the lane. They were not concerned about us pulling up to shoot an open trey off that screen.