Opponents' 3 point shooting

Donate To GopherHole
B

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
59,335
Reaction score
22,675
Points
113
Yesterday toward the end of the game I was saying- "please no three pointers". But that's exactly what Penn State got to get back in the game. A little research on the Big Ten site shows our biggest issue this season:

Opponent 3 point shooting versus league leaders (Big Ten games only)
Wisky - 29% - 41-143
Illinois - 30% - 80-269
MSU - 31% - 77-246
Purdue - 35% - 58-166
OSU - 38% - 87-232
Minn - 42% - 82-201

The three pointer fires up a team and can change a game fast. It seems like no lead is big enough for us because of our poor three point defense.

Look at Wisky and Purdue- teams don't even get the chance to shoot the 3 real often. I would say that the 3 point stat for Wisky opponents goes a long way toward explaining their 8-3 record.

This isn't luck, I am constantly seeing our players way out of position against the three and opponents are wide open. Is this Tubby's defense or the players? Friend of Tubby or others- what's the Tubby history on this? In my view you have to have a defense that stops the game's most devastating play.
 

Agree 100%

How frustating is it to watch a Gopher defender fall asleep and give up an open 3?

We'd be 7-3 in B10 with decent perimter D. 42% is terrible. That's the equivalent 63% from inside the arc. We'd be better off giving up layups late in a game to save the extra 3rd point.
 

The defense that Tubby prefers is called ball line defense - it focuses on preventing penetration into the lane and frustrating ball handlers by taking away passing lanes.

It is very weak against defending the 3 on ball reversals though, and it's also a fairly complex defense, so it can take some time before everyone knows it well enough to not make mistakes.

Personally, I agree that we should use a more standard defense and stay at home on the shooters more, even if it means giving up a couple more layups.
 

bga1 said:
Yesterday toward the end of the game I was saying- "please no three pointers". But that's exactly what Penn State got to get back in the game. A little research on the Big Ten site shows our biggest issue this season:

Opponent 3 point shooting versus league leaders (Big Ten games only)
Wisky - 29% - 41-143
Illinois - 30% - 80-269
MSU - 31% - 77-246
Purdue - 35% - 58-166
OSU - 38% - 87-232
Minn - 42% - 82-201

The three pointer fires up a team and can change a game fast. It seems like no lead is big enough for us because of our poor three point defense.

Look at Wisky and Purdue- teams don't even get the chance to shoot the 3 real often. I would say that the 3 point stat for Wisky opponents goes a long way toward explaining their 8-3 record.

This isn't luck, I am constantly seeing our players way out of positition against the three and opponents are wide open. Is this Tubby's defense or the players. FOT of Tubby or others- what's the Tubby history on this? In my view you have to have a defense that stops the game's most devastating play.
Click to expand...

It depends on the players. The Ball Line Defense is either very effective, or vulnerable to 3-pt FG shots - depending on how the players execute it.
 

Granted, the ball-line defense is more vulnerable to ball reversal than good man to man. But, well executed ball reversal is still very hard to defend with man to man unless you hound every opponent wing player by effectively minimizing help defense.

Our problem, as I see it, is that we do not have the number of good defenders necessary to play man to man and consistently stop our opponents. Even in straight man to man scheme, we will have many games wherein we have to pick our poison in terms of the area we put our defensive emphasis on -- either emphasizing inside and against penetration or emphasizing perimeter.

Another factor is that we do not have consistent half-court offense (though improving with Sampson). Therefore, an emphasis on defending higher percentage shots off penetration and post plays and taking some chance at perimeter do make sense to me -- at least, theoretically.

It is true that our 3 pt defense is inadequate as we are the last in the conference in that respect. But, I am wondering if we need to change the defensive scheme or shift the emphasis except some tweaking and adjustment to better cope with some opponents.

I guess Tubby’s ball-line defense has no true advantage over man to man when you play against a team like PSU or NW who heavily depend on perimeter shooting. Funny thing is that PSU and NW combined shot 42.3% (30-71) from 3 point range, and we won them though registering wins could have been easier with better 3 pt defense.
 


A few more examples of it in our losses. Portland shot 32% (8-25) from 3 point range, Miami 30.4% (7-23), MSU at Breslin 27.8% (5-18) and Purdue 35.3% (6-17). So, our trey defense was not big a factor in those losses.

Texas A&M 43% (6-14), and Indiana 47.1% (8-17) while MSU at the Barn 45.8% (11-24). Our trey defense was a factor there.

One outlier is at OSU. They just shot the lights out from everywhere including from 3 pt range (45%, 9-20) and everywhere else (73%, 25-34 excluding 3 pts made and attempted). It probably is meaningless to gauge the effect of treys in that rout as they would have killed us anyway by making 6 or 7 treys instead of 9 in that game.

So, poor 3 pt defense by emphasizing inside defense -- TAM, Indiana and MSU shot 38.6%, 42.1%, and 39.3% of FG% respectively -- could have been a determining factor in the three losses.

Again, I am not saying our 3 point defense is alright. But, considering the trade-off of perimeter defense/inside defense and the actual contribution to outcome, its ultimate effect on win-loss might have been a bit exaggerated.
 

Kentucky "Fans" Often Complained About Tubby's Teams On 3-Pt Defense

Yet his teams there over 10 years (1998 through 2007) averaged under 33% by opponents on 3-pt FG shooting.
 

Friend Of Tubby said:
Yet his teams there over 10 years (1998 through 2007) averaged under 33% by opponents on 3-pt FG shooting.
Click to expand...

OK. That's interesting. Perhaps it's this group of players. We are not tall on the perimeter and without Nolen, not speedy either. Maybe we need to adapt to who we have. At any rate we are not good enough to surive many games where teams shoot 40+% from the 3 pt line.
 

This is pretty much the way it's been with Tubby here. I checked back and in '08 we were 8th in this category, and 9th last year.
 





Saber said:
The defense that Tubby prefers is called ball line defense - it focuses on preventing penetration into the lane and frustrating ball handlers by taking away passing lanes.

Personally, I agree that we should use a more standard defense and stay at home on the shooters more, even if it means giving up a couple more layups.
Click to expand...

I would think with two (three?) of the best shot blockers in the conference, we could afford to let some shooters drive by our defenders when the opposition badly needs three's?

I have noticed our guards always take that step back when the ball-handler makes the slightest move towards the basket. The ball-handler then simply steps back and takes the three. It is human nature to do so, but defenders need to know you can't do that in certain situations. Easier said than done though. Watch the great defenders in the NBA and you see them stay put on such occasions. Doesn't happen very often as great defenders and the NBA usually don't go together.
 

I think Paul Carter may be boosting that percentage almost single-handedly. His man always makes at least a few three pointers that would be easily preventable, if Paul didn't inevitably drift into the lane looking for a blocked shot. Granted, Paul's one of our few rebounders, but it is very frustrating to see him drift three steps off his man and then get three after three nailed in his grill. At the Northwestern game, I was close enough to hear Jirsa yell at him time after time "Only one step off, only one step off", as Paul would continue to drift. Granted, you can't lay all of the blame on one guy. We also have problems hedging on screens, among other things. But there are a few guys who attempt to cheat off their man a little too often.
 



I really just don't understand why we double in the post all the time. Ralph isn't an awful defender, and there aren't too many dominating big men in the BT. We could at least vary it. And why do you continue to double inside at the end of the games when we're up by a lot and the only way to lose is to give up open 3s? That cost us the last Michigan St game, and we could all see it coming.
 


bga1 said:
Yesterday toward the end of the game I was saying- "please no three pointers". But that's exactly what Penn State got to get back in the game. A little research on the Big Ten site shows our biggest issue this season:

Opponent 3 point shooting versus league leaders (Big Ten games only)
Wisky - 29% - 41-143
Illinois - 30% - 80-269
MSU - 31% - 77-246
Purdue - 35% - 58-166
OSU - 38% - 87-232
Minn - 42% - 82-201

The three pointer fires up a team and can change a game fast. It seems like no lead is big enough for us because of our poor three point defense.

Look at Wisky and Purdue- teams don't even get the chance to shoot the 3 real often. I would say that the 3 point stat for Wisky opponents goes a long way toward explaining their 8-3 record.

This isn't luck, I am constantly seeing our players way out of position against the three and opponents are wide open. Is this Tubby's defense or the players? Friend of Tubby or others- what's the Tubby history on this? In my view you have to have a defense that stops the game's most devastating play.
Click to expand...

Spot on and I've argued this very often in the past. What I especially don't understand is why the Gophers don't even try to play better D against the 3 in these two situations:
(1) when we have a lead where basically only 3-pointers would allow the other team a realistic chance to win; or
(2) when the other team's whole game is based on 3-point shooting (e.g., Portland, NDSU)
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom