Is Tubby's half-court offense just too complicated?

Donate To GopherHole
tinyarch

tinyarch

Banned
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Messages
9,367
Reaction score
0
Points
36
[url]http://www.startribune.com/sports/gophers/195487511.html[/URL]

But when they find themselves needing half-court baskets — an inevitable scenario in the Big Ten and NCAA tournaments — Gophers coach Tubby Smith has decided to make things as simple as possible.

“I think we went back to the fundamentals, No. 1,” Smith said. “We sort of narrowed what we’re doing offensively as well. We limited what they could do with the ball.”
Click to expand...

Is it possible that the reason why players stand and the ball comes to a screeching halt in the half-court offense is that Tubby's offense is just too complicated for his players basketball IQ?
 






This thought has occurred to me. Whatever system you run, it has to be executable - by human beings - and teachable.

Ben Leber was on KFAN several weeks ago talking about the Saints' firing of defensive coordinator Steve Spagnuolo. The Saints had given up some kind of NFL record for yards or points or both this past year. According to Leber, Spagnuolo runs what might be the most sophisticated defensive system in the league. The problem is that it's practically impossible for players to implement at full speed on the field. It's too complicated to be practical. He said a team would have to play together for about 5 years to completely master it as a unit, and even then he wonders whether it would work because you have to do too much thinking on the fly. Players are thinking and not playing.

I've always felt one of the keys to coaching is to implement systems that people can learn and execute. And if you want to implement something complicated, you had better be the king of teachers because you'll need to be.

I've wondered for some time why Tubby went back to his old offense once he saw how effective the simpler offensive schemes were in last year's postseason. It reminds me of how he went back to the ball line defense after his vanilla man-to-man defense shut down the Illini in Champaign. It seems like he's convinced the more complex schemes must be inherently better because, well, because they're more complex, so he keeps trying to push them.
 


Bad Gopher said:
This thought has occurred to me. Whatever system you run, it has to be executable - by human beings - and teachable.

Ben Leber was on KFAN several weeks ago talking about the Saints' firing of defensive coordinator Steve Spagnuolo. The Saints had given up some kind of NFL record for yards or points or both this past year. According to Leber, Spagnuolo runs what might be the most sophisticated defensive system in the league. The problem is that it's practically impossible for players to implement at full speed on the field. It's too complicated to be practical. He said a team would have to play together for about 5 years to completely master it as a unit, and even then he wonders whether it would work because you have to do too much thinking on the fly. Players are thinking and not playing.

I've always felt one of the keys to coaching is to implement systems that people can learn and execute. And if you want to implement something complicated, you had better be the king of teachers because you'll need to be.

I've wondered for some time why Tubby went back to his old offense once he saw how effective the simpler offensive schemes were in last year's postseason. It reminds me of how he went back to the ball line defense after his vanilla man-to-man defense shut down the Illini in Champagne. It seems like he's convinced the more complex schemes must be inherently better because, well, because they're more complex, so he keeps trying to push them.
Click to expand...

I think you have a good point. Bo Ryan basically runs variations off of the Swing offense. He doesn't really complicate the system, but instead recruits kids who will function well within his system. Tubby has, at times, run a generic version of the Flex in order to get more motion. It seems especially effective when you have generally mid-sized players on the court like the Gophers often have.

Of course going with a pure pattern along with having a shot clock means that other teams can easily game plan to disrupt the pattern. I'm guessing that this is one reason why Tubby would opt to stay away from something too simple. However, Minnesota's offense does look better and provide better looks at the basket when the kids move and swing the ball.
 

tinyarch said:
I think you have a good point. Bo Ryan basically runs variations off of the Swing offense. He doesn't really complicate the system, but instead recruits kids who will function well within his system. Tubby has, at times, run a generic version of the Flex in order to get more motion. It seems especially effective when you have generally mid-sized players on the court like the Gophers often have.

Of course going with a pure pattern along with having a shot clock means that other teams can easily game plan to disrupt the pattern. I'm guessing that this is one reason why Tubby would opt to stay away from something too simple. However, Minnesota's offense does look better and provide better looks at the basket when the kids move and swing the ball.
Click to expand...

Good points. Bo's systems work on execution. He's written a book on the swing offense, so it's not like he's running some Ancient Chinese Double Secret Probation offense or anything. His kids have a combination of skill, size and savvy so that they can overcome the opposing defense. The swing is designed to exploit the favorable matchups that occur in any defensive variation against it. All that said, he has had to vary it with wrinkles in order to thwart intensive game planning. It's a take-off on game theory.

Simplicity with wrinkles plus game planning.
 




No

We run a high lo

A flex

And a dribble drive weave
So, no, our offense is definitely not too complicated, our players may be too dumb, or our coach cannot explain... The offense is not too complicated
 

Coach Tim Miles "we are going to make them beat us by shooting 3's". That is a better game plan than Tubby has ever stated against an opponent.
 

There is nothing complicated about his offense. There isn't anything real complicated about any offense. The only thing complicated is Tubby because he hasn't defined a philosophy for the team, defined roles, or emphasized any consistency with the little fundamentals that make a difference.
 



Better question IMO is why did the offense look good vs Indiana and other teams and then turn around and look so poor vs teams like Nebraska and Iowa etc?

Is it a motivation problem? Then tubby brought in the wrong kids. i just can't figure it out? We can look like a top 10 team one game and ten turn around and look like a mid major the next.
 

lakesgopher said:
Better question IMO is why did the offense look good vs Indiana and other teams and then turn around and look so poor vs teams like Nebraska and Iowa etc?

Is it a motivation problem? Then tubby brought in the wrong kids. i just can't figure it out? We can look like a top 10 team one game and ten turn around and look like a mid major the next.
Click to expand...

He changed his approach, basic offense, in the games. That is confusing to the kids. They have never run motion well, or a passing game, which is hard to do if you don't have kids on the same page. That's about coaching.
 

We looked better against Indiana because of rebounds (especially offensive) and transition. Last night we lacked in both areas.
 

Ozzy&Ray said:
He changed his approach, basic offense, in the games. That is confusing to the kids. They have never run motion well, or a passing game, which is hard to do if you don't have kids on the same page. That's about coaching.
Click to expand...

Basic offense? What changed specifically?
 

Tubby told the media that he changed the offense. Put in a more basic scheme.

I didn't see a damn difference. Same old sh!t.
 

I don't know of many offenses that will work well when you don't have a single guy on the court who is making outside shots. It's not the offense in my opinion, it's lack of shooting.
 

nokomismod said:
I don't know of many offenses that will work well when you don't have a single guy on the court who is making outside shots. It's not the offense in my opinion, it's lack of shooting.
Click to expand...

Chicken and egg issue. They were hitting shots like pros when they were getting open looks in non-conference. There's enough guys that can hit shots if they are A) playing confidently and B) getting open in the offense. The quality of shots is definitely getting worse and the confidence is SHOT. Other teams are GIVING Rodney and Ingram and Coleman wide open looks to hedge on everyone else. No more than one of those guys should be on floor at one time agianst better teams.
 

Complicated? Please describe what it is we're trying to accomplish with the half court? We don't set solid picks, we don't cut hard to open spots, don't try to post up and we don't feed post well. It always looks like a walk-through. Throw in that we don't have any consistent jump shooters and we're in big trouble. Our only chance is if we play teams that allow us to fly up and down the court and dunk because of their poor shooting or turnovers.
 

Lack of a strong personality at guard for leadership is pretty evident also.
 

bga1 said:
Chicken and egg issue. They were hitting shots like pros when they were getting open looks in non-conference. There's enough guys that can hit shots if they are A) playing confidently and B) getting open in the offense. The quality of shots is definitely getting worse and the confidence is SHOT. Other teams are GIVING Rodney and Ingram and Coleman wide open looks to hedge on everyone else. No more than one of those guys should be on floor at one time agianst better teams.
Click to expand...
I agree with you completely. Does Austin get lumped into that category too or do you let him fight through it?
 

It may be. The more important question is why he is so stubborn to stop beating a dead horse?
 

Rodney's Open said:
It may be. The more important question is why he is so stubborn to stop beating a dead horse?
Click to expand...

You believe he hasn't tried to make changes? Not saying they've worked, but I can't picture a scenario where people don't think he's not trying to improve/change the offense. It's like the zone- people think they don't work on it in practice and that a d1 coach doesn't know, in principle, how to break a zone? They do, and he does, but either the coaches can't get it across or the players can't execute, or both.
 

I'll say no, just too many pussies on this team these are d1 athletes and they crawl in the fetal position when the coach yells at them. Imagine if Bobby Knight was coaching Rodney Williams
 

Agree with a few others that offense is basic. Hi-lo and flex are taught to sixth graders. I ran flex way back as a sixth grader at least. Sometimes I believe things are over thought though. At times last night we had Eliason and Mbakwe with favorable match ups vs a defense that was not fronting in the post. Should have pounded the ball in the paint and played to our strength. IMO.

Another concern is what we run out of a timeout. Hard to remember a time when we ran a set play that worked out of the huddle. Whether that's Tubby or the players I don't know. But is concerning. I can't argue that this team has talent but it terms of basketball IQ we are average. Regardless this is the team I will be backing next week in Chicago and hopefully in the NCAA Tourney. That's all a guy like myself can do. Go Gophers!
 

nokomismod said:
I don't know of many offenses that will work well when you don't have a single guy on the court who is making outside shots. It's not the offense in my opinion, it's lack of shooting.
Click to expand...

100% true.

Another issue is if no one looks for penetration when there is a seal on the high side. there are numerous occasisions when teams give us the opening to the baseline and Trevor or EE have a seal on their guy to the high side. Two dribbles to the baseline and make the big choose between the guard for a contested layup or staying with the big. We do not capitalize on any of the opportunities that a High Lo or Flex offense are designed to expose.

You cannot run a high low when you cannot knock down an outside shot.

We shot better against Indiana, Defense extends and you can throw the over the top pass...
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom