It might - although theyāve played both offenses a lot this year so I donāt think they need to re-create the wheel.
Iām not aware whether the practice ratio off/def under CTB is the same under CRS.
Theyāre getting better at using principles of both, while still mostly playing Sides. But Iāll notice that sometimes theyāll be in Sides and then theyāll use that high post reset from the new offense and then go back to Sides. Stuff like that.
In this past game they were in sides most of the possession and then one of the post players would set a ball screen at the end of the possession and the wing on that side would flare out to the corner - which is a deviation as most of our two-man game in Sides come from the wing and the post on aā¦ well, side.
I think thereās some potential there especially if youāre setting up your frontcourt rotations to compliment what youāre leaning into.
Will be interesting to test this theory.
I just think the guys are playing freer and less encumbered. They seem to be playing offense with an objective and I donāt think two bigs in sides is what unlocked it. I do think sides generally helped - it was better suited for where the team was mentally.
1 Like
I think both helped a lot, actually (both Sides and the personnel within it).
Sides because they had to think less and because the actions are mostly away from the ball so pressure defenses havenāt been able to blow up our ball screens/DHOs like they could out of the new offenses by over playing our wings and bigs.
Two bigs because the wings are getting better screens to free them, have had better finishing options on the roll, and have been able to pressure the rim with their presence on finishing opportunities, offensive rebounds, etc.
If you start jamming Saunders into Sides at the 4, I expect weāre going to see a decline in efficiency on both ends - but I do think there are effective ways to integrate him.
3 Likes
We did. He only played 11 mins, though, with no points and 2 turnovers (1 assist) and we were -1 during those minutes. More, he just seemed less comfortable out there and some of that was working his way back, but some of it is just that itās not a great offense for him to play the PF.
Some other ideas for how we could use him that may not all work but I think would be better options to explore than jamming him at PF in Sides:
At PF:
With Cofie - play the new offense - look to get looks for Cofie in the high post with things cleared out so that he can attack (unlike when we use that group with Blake and heās limited to being a passer out there).
With any of our other bigs, preferably ARob to help protect him on defense - run Flow. Let the Center ball screen for Ames (or maybe Rohde but probably Ames) and use him for spacing/to crash in from the wing.
With Cofie - Give some Inside Triangle possessions - use their spacing to clear out the lane and get three-point shots.
At SF:
Try him in Sides alongside two bigs. He can catch and shoot. Run more of your back screen actions to get him some easy buckets around the rim against mismatches.
Play him with Cofie and a Center - run big Inside Triangle designed to get post looks for whoever has the mismatch on offense. Let either he or Cofie drift away once the post entry is there to help keep spacing, Center (if doesnāt get the ball) on opposite block - similar to how we used to run it for Gill:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdi_acL9l6o
At least 5 options without really giving exhaustive thought to it that seem like better places to explore, without having to design anything new, that could help him find a better niche on offense, without pairing him with just Blake on defense.
2 Likes
One other idea with Cofie and Saunders in the game is to create some confusion by allowing them switch between being movers and blockers. I think Cofie probably has better ball skills but Saunders is a much better shooter (although Iām not sure if Saunders is as good of a shooter while on the move).
Just keep it closer to the hoop when screening for Cofie so he can take the mid-range heās more confident in and give them the freedom to slip the pindown screen to punish teams that decide to switch.
One other bonus is that if Saunders/Cofie can catch the ball around the free throw line, the flare screen opposite is more difficult to guard because of the angle the pass would be coming from.
3 Likes
This is such an important train of thought in the post mortem for Tony.
So many people said his system no longer worked. Iām not a fan of Sides, but it can still be effective (look at the last few games). It frustrates me that people want to paint our success under tony as some sort of short-term gimmick he discovered.
Tonyās problem was he fell in love with modern, stretch 4s but didnāt deploy modern schemes around them. Either play 4 or 5 out with a modern, stretch 4 and/or 5ā¦or put 2 athletes at the 4 and 5 that can rebound, defend, and set screens in Sides.
His biggest problem was a mismatch of talent strategy (Defensive, non-scoring guards and shooting bigs) with offensive strategy (sides). If we stopped chasing the BVPs and Groves and Traudts and TJPs of the world and just ran sides or inside triangle with an athletic front line, weād have had lot more success post-natty. Or recruit your stretch bigs and commit to a more spread offense. Instead we got a mismatch of talent to scheme every year.
5 Likes
Sure, if you want to read ānot a whole lotā as ānoā thatās fine to cite Randy Johnson as one of maybe half a dozen TJ Power height major leaguers in history. Thats cool. Jon Rauch was a 6ā11ā pitcher. 6ā11ā Sean Hjelle pitched for the Giants last season. Eric Hillman, Chris Young, Aaron Slegers, Mark Hendrickson and Bailey Ober were also 6ā9ā or 6ā10ā pitchers. Tony Clark was the tallest position player at 6ā8ā. And Aaron Judge and ONeil Cruz are famously 6ā7ā.
If TJ Power can join that club of 7 6ā9ā or taller major leaguers in history, more power to him. Iād say he has a better future with basketball even if heās spent the last 2 years warming the bench and regressing on the court.
He will have to do a little dribbling to make this work too. Not a ton, like the same amount Taine does, but weāve seen what happens when only two guys on the court can dribble in the TJP-at-3 minutes.
Iām not sure TJP has been in at 3 in Sides a ton has he? More SF in the old offense and 4 in Sides?
Iād have to go back and revisit that; Iām sure itās happened some but heās been overwhelmed on the perimeter from any look.
Sure, heād have to dribble some - but he wouldnāt need to be the primary point of attack that often. Iād like to see how this looks some - I think there are some nice cutting options off of screens for lobs or back door cuts, etc. Itās possible you canāt run it but we havenāt tried.
My concern with Saunders at the 3 in Sides is that while itās a good answer to āWhat do we do with Saundersā, it may not be a good answer to āWho are our best personnel in Sidesā. I think any combination of 3 guards is better there. Course weād have to see more of it to know, and it would be an interesting defensive look.
8 Likes
I think thatās fair considering how Ames, Rohde, and iMac are playing together and the pop Sharma offers.
But itās one of those things where you might find something. You also probably make up a lot on defense/the glass.
2 Likes
I see a lot of criticism of what Tony did with the stretch 4. And that he got away from what had worked previously. But I have two problems with it:
- Our big problem IMO was guard recruiting. Through 2016, we recruited two NBA second contract caliber guys. And a third guy who was two time first team all ACC (and an MOP oh by the way). After 2016, the best guard we recruited (or who we got) was a 2-way caliber NBA player who made second team all ACC in his senior year. Thatās a big drop off!
- Our best teams always had 4s who could score prolifically and were not primarily or just defenders, screeners, etc. Gill and Dre.
Look, Iāve wasted a lot of time griping about Tonyās coaching style from 2020-2024, so I get it, but the major drop off was talent. The style gripes wouldāve made us better but not that much better and a lot of my pace complaints were that it hurt recruiting.
3 Likes
Yeah good call idk what I was thinking.
Man it was barely 2 years ago that we were ranked 2nd in the country hosting a top 5 Houston team.
Thatās 2023 team wasnāt bad. Was it a top 5 team, no. But one goddam idiotic play by a player who made too many of them caused us to forget that was actually a solid squad for most of the year.
5 Likes
And one idiotic play might be making you forget that a mid major put on a CYO 1-3-1 and we proceeded to poop down our leg for several minutes while we tried to figure it out.
I swear I played a 1-2-1-1 in CYO. CYO was the best
And this guy was the 1!
2 Likes
The last 1. Thats where they get ya
3 Likes
No argument here.
7 Likes
That and a really destructive, poorly handled and conceived frontcourt situation that handicapped our team for the majority of the second half of the year (as well as the roster compression created by still playing both Kihei and Reece 33mpg).
I swear - if we simply figure out that BVP and Gardner were bad at running the 4-5 together and if KC played likeā¦ 26-28 mins instead of 33 so that heās fresh at the end of the season and we also realize we can play a little bigger when we need to - that team is probably a 2-3 seed.
4 Likes
Maybe a crazy take but I feel like in hindsight, I wish we had leaned into Caffaro playing a Jack Salt role more than we did. Not sure that would have been the solution to that team (the best solution would have been Shedrick being what we thought he was going to be) but I think we should have given more of Kadinās minutes to Caffaro than BVP.
4 Likes