Same Ole Story: Cant defend the three!!

Donate To GopherHole
G

gopherinpain

Banned
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
Messages
504
Reaction score
0
Points
16
8 threes for Indiana St in the first half. You would think Tubby would learn but he never does.
 

i can't believe ryan james posted this morning that D under tubby should be admired. what team is he watching? this D is horrible.
 

3 came on fast breaks
1 was from 26 feet before any offense was run
4 came out of the regular offense, as did their 4 misses.
 

This is the first game I have watched this season, but that defense in the first half was ridiculous. Good shooters left wide open to spot up and shoot easy jumpers.
 

Then you could say the same about ISU...we're 'only' 8-14, and we've had a few WIDE open looks. Good to see the outside shooting make up for an oddly quiet game from Trevor.
 


This team may not be that good, but they show a ton more heart and drive than last year. Thoroughly enjoyable second hands this weekend so far.
 

This thread should be changed to ISU can't defend the 3! Gophers shot a better percentage from 3pt land than the Sycamores.
 

Gotta give Tubby the Benefit of the Doubt

In these tournaments the coaching staff has very little time to scout. A lot of the scouting is done during halftime. I don't know the exact statistic but ISU hit far fewer 3's in the second half and the Gophs seemed to be much more in tune defensively . It wish the Gophs could put a full game togather but hey, I'll take a solid W any way we can get it.
 

topos said:
In these tournaments the coaching staff has very little time to scout. A lot of the scouting is done during halftime. I don't know the exact statistic but ISU hit far fewer 3's in the second half and the Gophs seemed to be much more in tune defensively . It wish the Gophs could put a full game togather but hey, I'll take a solid W any way we can get it.
Click to expand...

I would agree with you and, yes, it was an excellent second half adjustment, but the inability to defend the 3 has been a chronic problem during Tubby's entire tenure at the U.
 



I'll take finishing in the bottom of the league defending the three if we do well in rebounding and steals. Tubby's teams always have a poor track record against the 3, its just his style. Over pursuit, etc. and then somebody gets open. That said, its awful tough to live and die by the three offensively... I doubt we will lose many game purely on our lack of ability to defend the three.

I like Tubby's aggressive style and if he has the athletes to pull it off, things get interesting. I think things are about to get interesting...
 

Why do we get these threads still? Tubby's ball line defensive philosophy is to defend passing lanes and collapse on penetration...this should lead to more steals and run outs on fast breaks but will also create open three point shots. If our tall and athletic wings are able to collapse and then run at shooters it should keep the three point shooters in check while giving those long rebound easy break out passes up the court for break away and odd man rushes.

If a team executes against us and shoots 40+% from 3...we probably lose...if not, we probably win...that is Tubby basketball...please stop creating this same thread 10 times a season.
 

Experienced Gopher fans know this defense works over the whole game. How'd it work for you Gopherinpain?
 

GopherinPhilly said:
Why do we get these threads still? Tubby's ball line defensive philosophy is to defend passing lanes and collapse on penetration...this should lead to more steals and run outs on fast breaks but will also create open three point shots. If our tall and athletic wings are able to collapse and then run at shooters it should keep the three point shooters in check while giving those long rebound easy break out passes up the court for break away and odd man rushes.

If a team executes against us and shoots 40+% from 3...we probably lose...if not, we probably win...that is Tubby basketball...please stop creating this same thread 10 times a season.
Click to expand...

don't underexaggerate. we've already sen this thread over 10x and its only game 6. by the end of the year I'm quite sure that the amount of these threads will increase exponentially no matter how many wins we get. :(
 



If we do not shoot 100% on 3's and our opponents don't shoot 0% on 3's, the sky will continue to fall for some.
 

Rouser said:
I doubt we will lose many game purely on our lack of ability to defend the three.
Click to expand...

Do you really think so? Maybe not strictly because of the 3,but maybe mainly because of the 3. I believe this team is much better than people think, but I also think they will lose some ugly games because of their inability to stop the 3-pointer. Tubby plays a very risky defense that lives and dies on steals.
 

BigGopherFan said:
Do you really think so? Maybe not strictly because of the 3,but maybe mainly because of the 3. I believe this team is much better than people think, but I also think they will lose some ugly games because of their inability to stop the 3-pointer. Tubby plays a very risky defense that lives and dies on steals.
Click to expand...

You have just officially proven your lack of basketball knowledge if you call Tubby's defensive philosophy "risky".
 

People love to throw out comments like Tubby's teams never defend the 3 quite often so I just looked up our 3 point D under Tubby. In conference play only, here is where we finished in the conference and the % that BT teams shot against us from behind the arc:

07-08: 8th/.352%
08-09: 9th/.368%
09-10: 11th/.371
10-11: 2nd/.336

The first three years were awful and last year was a dramatic improvement. So the OP says "You would think Tubby would learn but he never does." Maybe he learned last year but forgot? Not sure, though I do agree that the first three years from a statistical standpoint was really bad, and the first half today was awful. Though the second half was much better as was last year's 3 point D stats.

Go Gophers!!
 

I think it's obvious we have to defend the 3 better as a team. There are simply too many guys who can knock down a college 3 with regularity to give that shot up as part of your defensive philosophy. Also troubling was the penetration for easy layups the Gophers allowed in the first half...they were not stopping anything.

Bleed's stats show we were consistently terrible defending the 3 in Tubby's first 3 years, but much better last year. This is suprising to me considering the zone D we played for much of the Big Ten season where Trevor or Colton had to try to get out to the corner to defend 3's.
 

GopherinPhilly said:
Why do we get these threads still? Tubby's ball line defensive philosophy is to defend passing lanes and collapse on penetration...this should lead to more steals and run outs on fast breaks but will also create open three point shots. If our tall and athletic wings are able to collapse and then run at shooters it should keep the three point shooters in check while giving those long rebound easy break out passes up the court for break away and odd man rushes.

If a team executes against us and shoots 40+% from 3...we probably lose...if not, we probably win...that is Tubby basketball...please stop creating this same thread 10 times a season.
Click to expand...

The problem is that college basketball is a perimeter driven game, so collapsing the lanes almost misses the point (pardon the puns). If Tubby's scheme was having a lot of success you wouldn't see these threads. Perhaps he should adjust to the changes going on around him.
 

BleedGopher said:
People love to throw out comments like Tubby's teams never defend the 3 quite often so I just looked up our 3 point D under Tubby. In conference play only, here is where we finished in the conference and the % that BT teams shot against us from behind the arc:

07-08: 8th/.352%
08-09: 9th/.368%
09-10: 11th/.371
10-11: 2nd/.336

The first three years were awful and last year was a dramatic improvement. So the OP says "You would think Tubby would learn but he never does." Maybe he learned last year but forgot? Not sure, though I do agree that the first three years from a statistical standpoint was really bad, and the first half today was awful. Though the second half was much better as was last year's 3 point D stats.

Go Gophers!!
Click to expand...

You are right Bleed. However, if you look at the stats you will also find that last year teams threw up a spectacular number of threes. Why- if they are only averaging 33%? Well that's still as good as shooting 50% from the 2 point line and 50% shooting will win 90% plus of your games. They didn't relish going inside against our bigs so they took the open threes and got a pretty good return on their investment with very little risk of turnover. I'd have to go back and look but I'm pretty certain that we still gave up more threes than any other Big Ten team.

Edit: A quick check shows that we did give up more threes than any other Big Ten team and teams took 72 more 3 pt attempts against us than any other team (conference play only). This is not a coincidence - this is dictated strategy by opposing coaches. That's the book on us-good or bad.
 

bga1 said:
You are right Bleed. However, if you look at the stats you will also find that last year teams threw up a spectacular number of threes. Why- if they are only averaging 33%? Well that's still as good as shooting 50% from the 2 point line and 50% shooting will win 90% plus of your games. They didn't relish going inside against our bigs so they took the open threes and got a pretty good return on their investment with very little risk of turnover. I'd have to go back and look but I'm pretty certain that we still gave up more threes than any other Big Ten team.

Edit: A quick check shows that we did give up more threes than any other Big Ten team and teams took 72 more 3 pt attempts against us than any other team (conference play only). This is not a coincidence - this is dictated strategy by opposing coaches. That's the book on us-good or bad.
Click to expand...

Yes, but you can't blame last season on the way we defended the 3. You can blame it on a number of issues, including the fact that we had our best, and only, remaining shooter running the point once we lost al and devoe, which essentially took our best offensive weapon out of the game and left us with no backcourt depth. We also lacked front court depth once mo went down, which had trevor and ralph tired by the end of games. This all contributed to us not being able to finish games. If we had better offense, the number of threes wouldn't matter. Holding a team to under 33% is quite good when coupled with the amount of steals and blocks we generate. bottom line is that if we could have found ways to score, the number of threes would have mattered little. Case in point was yesterday. Ind. St. shot over 50% from 3 pt range, but we still won because we shot an even better percentage than they did. There is more to winning than defending the 3, imo. I say this, of course, hoping we can improve our 3 pt D as well. :)
 

07-08: 8th/.352%
08-09: 9th/.368%
09-10: 11th/.371
10-11: 2nd/.336
Click to expand...



So the first three years which were fairly successful in terms of the team, we finished in the bottom half and last year, which was the worst for the team, we finished near the top.

Can people stop focusing on this sh$t?
 

Rouser said:
So the first three years which were fairly successful in terms of the team, we finished in the bottom half and last year, which was the worst for the team, we finished near the top.

Can people stop focusing on this sh$t?
Click to expand...

Probably not.
 

Rouser said:
So the first three years which were fairly successful in terms of the team, we finished in the bottom half and last year, which was the worst for the team, we finished near the top.

Can people stop focusing on this sh$t?
Click to expand...

zactly!
 

Rouser said:
So the first three years which were fairly successful in terms of the team, we finished in the bottom half and last year, which was the worst for the team, we finished near the top.

Can people stop focusing on this sh$t?
Click to expand...

The trend appears to be that the better athletes we have on the team and the more experienced the players get in the defense, the better they defend the three. Amazing how that works.

It was obvious in the first two games in Florida that some of the players were a bit confused on d at times, making it look like bad defense, which Coach Welsh reminded us of ad nauseum on TV. I think there is a difference between can't play defense and haven't learned to play it yet.

This team gets better every game, which is all you can ask at this time of year, and keeps winning. Nice combination. I have concluded we have good players that need experience.
 

EG#9 said:
I think it's obvious we have to defend the 3 better as a team. There are simply too many guys who can knock down a college 3 with regularity to give that shot up as part of your defensive philosophy. Also troubling was the penetration for easy layups the Gophers allowed in the first half...they were not stopping anything.

Bleed's stats show we were consistently terrible defending the 3 in Tubby's first 3 years, but much better last year. This is suprising to me considering the zone D we played for much of the Big Ten season where Trevor or Colton had to try to get out to the corner to defend 3's.
Click to expand...

Also the dribble drive and kick-out for a 3. That first half was the worst D I HAVE seen since Tubby arrived.

Dre got burned time after time.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom