What we learned last night that we really hope are not ongoing problems.
A loss like this one certainly will give the UNC coaches and player pause. It also opens up the debate as to what went wrong. To great extent I am more than willing to chalk this up as simply a crappy game that hopefully will not be repeated anytime this season. There are some aspects of the loss that warrants a second look and improvement on the part of the Heels lest it bites them in a Sweet Sixteen game.
1. Point guard play
Yes, Ty Lawson is a sensational point guard as long as he does not face a point guard at least his equal and the lane is not clogged with big men who can play defense. That is what happened against Boston College and incidentally that is also what happened against Kansas and also the problem in the Maryland game UNC lost last season. Now, I don’t consider Grevis Vasquez to be at least the equal of Lawson on a regular basis but he was in that particular game. UNC goes has Lawson goes. If Lawson is matched then the Heels struggle. If Lawson cannot dominate the matchup then the Heels get the transition game going and tons of easy baskets. Versus Boston College it was the former as Tyrese Rice dominated on both ends of the court. Lawson could not stop Rice and Rice, with help did a good job keeping Lawson off his game. The result was predictable, mainly because we only have a handful of losses to look at in the past two seasons and Lawson’s poor play is one common theme.
Fixes?: Nothing concrete. Lawson needs to step up and stay aggressive. It may simply be a matter of Lawson being tougher when the game is not coming easily to him. There are no fixes for the fact he is only 5-11 but I would think he can do a much better job preparing mentally for the game. UNC can accomodate bad games from pretty much anyone on the team with the exception of Ty Lawson. The past two years if proof of that.
2. Interior Play
First issue: Deon Thompson played about as soft as he has played in his career versus Boston College. Without even bothering with pesky issues like missing 5 of 6 free throws, Thompson did a fairly poor job playing strong defense. For example, Thompson’s idea of defending a BC player driving to the basket for a layup is to bump him with his chest on the way up. Something tells me, most players can score after a little bump but if you pop up there and take a swipe at the ball, maybe commit a hard foul, at least you stop the basket. The frustrating thing about Thompson is his play is markedly better in terms of his ability to score. He is very smooth with his footwork and shots. The downside is he still lacks toughness when it comes to rebounding and allowed himself to be physicaled out of the game by the BC frontline. On one hand, Brandan Wright had the same problem and physical teams, like Michigan State neutralized him much the same way Thompson was last night. The difference is Thompson is now a junior and has enough experience to figure out how he can still make an impact even if the matchup is not favorable.
Second issue: Let me say that no one will ever argue Tyler Hansbrough is anything but one of the great Tar Heel players of all time. That being said there are times when his individual play does not mesh in with the rest of the team. There is a disjointed feel to the way the Heels execute on offense at times as though the team offense stops when the ball goes into Hansbrough. Obviously given Hansbrough’s track record, he should be the first option for the offense and the offensive flow should have him as the focal point in the halfcourt. The chief complaint I have is the offense executes but once the ball goes into Hansbrough that is the offense. It is well known that Hansbrough does not look to pass the ball once he gets it on the block. I would venture to say 85% of the time that is fine because he shoots a high percentage and is an excellent free throw shooter. The other 15% of the time is when Hansbrough needs to recognize that there are other offensive options on the floor. Granted this is a tough call to make when you are being double teamed and possibly hacked on the arms but something that needs to be added as a dimension to his game. All great players get evaluated not only on their skills and production but also on whether they make their teammates better. I am not sure that can be said of Hansbrough at this point. Whether UNC can get by with it remains to be seen.
Third issue: More of a question but where in the name of the Old Well was Ed Davis during the 2nd half last night? Davis only played 16 minutes down four from his 20 mpg average. During that time he had 5 boards and six points. He also had two blocks and only one personal foul. So I have to wonder why Roy decided to five Deon Thompson 20 minutes in this game in which he had basically the same output on worse shooting than Davis who is a much better rebounder? I am not sure how much it would have mattered but if Thompson is struggling early, I would think the logical move is to get Davis more minutes. You also had Danny Green on the bench with four fouls so I would question why Davis was not in more or why Roy did not think to try Thompson-Hansbrough-Davis at the same time for a stretch or two.
Fixes? Hansbrough needs to play in a way that does not obscure Thompson who in turn needs to play with some legitimate toughness. I think Thompson can make the leap but with Hansbrough I wonder if the manner in which he plays is too engrained. I also think the more Ed Davis the better given his natural talents. And if Tyler Zeller can go by mid-February, then bring him back. The interior needs depth and Zeller being a seven footer gives them a skilled big man who can, at the very least, make life hard for opposing big men.
3. Marcus Ginyard
I am beginning to wonder if Ginyard might be the missing piece of the puzzle. I know there has been lots of criticism of Ginyard for his lack of offensive production but consider the following. When Danny Green got into foul trouble Roy leaned pretty heavily on Will Graves to fill the gap which is fine, Graves is much improved but does not play defense at the same level as Ginyard. Secondly, does anyone think a healthy Ginyard playing at least 25 minutes and being assigned to Rakim Sanders, Reggie Jackson or even Tyrese Rice at times may have slowed any of those three players down? I think a a healthy Ginyard can do wonders to stop a hot player, especially where Sanders or Jackson were concerned. There is also the rebounding element. Ginyard averaged 4.5 boards per game last season and that is missing when you compare the team rebounding averages over last season. Ginyard is also a vocal leader. His presence on the court as a effective player should make this team better.
Fixes? The Heels need Ginyard back to 100%. Roy has expressed concerns about how well he is moving and that could be related to conditioning. If not that then I fear he has simply lost something going through the surgery and having been there when I ran cross country in college if you lose that extra edge it is nearly impossible to find it again. Hopefully Ginyard can find a groove, maybe even have a nice game to get some confidence back.
4. Defense
Roy indicated in the Monday press conference that he thinks the defense is better than it was last season. And taking the BC game with the Eagles’ flex offense in a vacuum there may not be any cause for concern about the defense. So many things went wrong against BC, that it coune be just another item on the list or taken with the games in December following MSU it might be the extension of a trend. In short the Heels’ defense has not been very good since the MSU game which was the point Pomeroy had them ranked 7th in defensive effeciency. Now the Heels are 20th and the stats bear out some of the issues since the MSU game. For example in the first eight games saw UNC hold opponents to an effective FG% of 43%. In the six games since then UNC has given up a eFG% of 48%. How does that rank? 43% puts you in the top 30 whereas 48% puts you around 130th in the category. During the past two games UNC has surrendered a fairly alarming amount offensive rebounds to the opposing team. Against Nevada, UNC gave up 44% of available opportunities on the defensive glass, against BC it was 40%. The Heels on average give up 31% of the available rebounds on defense, prior to the Nevada game that was 29%. Basically teams are shooting better against UNC since the Michigan State game and the defensive glass in the past two games has been found lacking. That is not a good combination because what it says is a team is able to hit shots and the ones they miss they are getting back meaning defensive stops are hard to come by. The silver lining is UNC does a good job creating turnovers via steals and blocks, that was not the case against BC but give the Eagles credit where that is concerned.
Fixes? Let’s see. Roy has taken rims down, talked about defense until he is blue in the face and spend huge swaths of practices on it. Based on that we can reasonably assume the lapses are not because the players have not practiced it. Lack of focus could be a key factor. Roy points to the gambling nature of the defense as giving up some easy looks and the press UNC employs at times always seems to be broken fairly easily. I wonder to what extent Roy could or should at least think about a zone defense at times but I know the answer to that already. You would think UNC has enough speed to trap more but there are too many issues with players not rotating fast enough or to the right place to make that work. In short, I have no idea. I do know the interior defense is only going to be average with Hansbrough and Thompson. Davis lends you a shot blocking element as does Green. Ginyard’s presence should improve certain aspects but I am reaching a point where I am not convinced this team can exceed a certain ceiling in terms of team defense which means they best avoid an offensive night like the last one.
5. General Intenisty and Focus
Going back to the beginning of the 2008 season, UNC loses about every 18 games on average. With the exception of the Duke game we have heard the same mantra: Players need to focus, need to do a better job, Roy needs to do a better job, team needs a wake-up call. My question is how many wake-up calls does it take to get this group to buy into the idea that every time you walk on the court you do so with the purpose of totally destroying the other team for FORTY FREAKING MINUTES. This group of players has the horrific tendency to show up in spurts only, especially where defense is concerned. I hoped like mad that the Michigan State game was a sign these guys finally understood how to come out with energy, bury someone and keep piling dirt on the grave until you created a small mountain. Since Detroit there has basically been none of that save what happened after Nevada jumped out early against the Heels on New Year’s Eve. Whether it was Oral Roberts or Evansville or Valpo, UNC played a game that was generally sloppy lacking a certain cohesion. At the time we blamed exams, Hansbrough chasing a record, snow in Chicago, small rodent like creature who were accidentally fed after midnight and jet lag for the Heels muddling through most of December.
Now if you recall, this is pretty much the same run-up to the Maryland game last season. The Heels had some muddle moments of tight first halves against Valpo and Kent State, needed OT to beat a good Clemson team, played a crappy game against UNCA followed by the drubbing of NCSU and a near loss at Georgia Tech. Outside the first half of the NCSU game, the 2nd halves against Valpo and Kent or brief flashes versus Clemson, we basically saw much the same sub-par play from the #1 team in the nation. Same deal this season only and much like the Maryland game, BC caught the Heels flat-footed when they stepped up to the challenge. It is a familiar pattern and one I personally would love to ditch.
Fixes? The only fix is for these players to commit individually and as a team to bring it at a top level every single night. By no means do I think anyone on this team is just slacking off for the sake of it but I do question whether they bring the mental toughness every single game. I question whether they are capable of consistently shooting for a certain caliber of play regardless of the opponent. I know you cannot always get there and we all know crap will happen to create a bad game but I would like to at least feel like these players are stepping their game up every time they take the floor. They seem to do it better on the road than they do at home which means I know they can do it.
The season has plenty of time left in it and nothing I see here is a deal breaker. My sincere hope is they find ways to improve on the above aspects of their game which would really be what’s needed to put them on a different level than everyone else.
![[Bloglines]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/bloglines.png)
![[del.icio.us]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/delicious.png)
![[Digg]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Facebook]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[MySpace]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/myspace.png)
![[Technorati]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/technorati.png)
![[Windows Live]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/windowslive.png)
![[Yahoo!]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/yahoo.png)
![[Email]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/email.png)
Nice observations. Email this to Roy he might find it useful. Right now we are the #3 team in the nation because we haven’t been playing like #1. I think most of our problems are mental and we need to get over them.
good stuff THF. IMO, (and I’m certainly not the first to say it), but UNC will go as Lawson goes this year. He needs what Rice had last night when facing another premier pg–”help defense”. I saw it a time or two last night, but not consistently. It’s a tough job for coaches at any level to get players to understand that defense is an art (both individually and collectively) and admittedly, Roy has his work cut out for him with this group. As for Ty’s offense, I believe that will come as he hasn’t been challenged as last night, and will make the necessary adjustments. Drew’s apprenticeship simply took another step up last night–he will be fine. If Deon’s backsliding continues, I have a feeling we’ll see Davis to fill the spot. I thought both Green & Hansbrough brought the necessary toughness last night, but they need some help.
Change the starting five around, don’t let the same 5 get so comfortable in their roles. Start Davis. Start Frasor along with Lawson and sit Green. Start Frasor instead of Lawson until Ty learns to hustle on defense. Start the whole second five except for Hansbrough and let the guys sit and think about playing hard while watching from the bench. I hate to say this but watch the suffocating man to man that Duke plays and then you really see how lame we are at it at times.
(1) Lawson’s gift is the one man fast-break. When the opposing team does not turn the ball over and is making shot or grabbing the offensive rebound, Lawson is not as effective. That was the case against BC.
(2) My understanding is that Zeller is not coming back this year because even if the bones heal, he has ligament damage (which is normal). So, we will be seeing him next fall. Deon has to show up or this team will not make it.
(3) I hear that Marcus’s foot is still not doing well. Nobody is sure when the foot will fully heal.
(4&5) The best teams can lose focus during the season, but always ramp it up at tournament time. The good news is we certainly have the ability. As much as we want this team to win, we are just going to hope that they stay motivated and injury free.
I would not go as far as Chris, but I think some adjustments to playing time, pegged to defensive success, have more potential than anything else to improve things. PT is one thing we can be pretty sure the players care about.
I have no standing to criticize a Hall of Fame coach, but I do find disconcerting Roy’s unwillingness to change with the exigencies of the game. This was most notoriously on display in the Kansas game last year, but it’s a habit with him. I think he over-learned Dean Smith’s policy of refusing to call timeouts when the team was in trouble, and more generally of staying the course, even if the course is downhill, as it was on Sunday.
I am a believer in sticking with what has worked, but there are exceptions, and I hope Roy will become more open to seeing this. What I have in mind specifically is his trapping/helping defense. He is aware, obviously, of the costs of that tactic, but has said the advantages outweigh the costs. With a 13-1 record, it’s hard to dispute that, but it was very much open to dispute in the BC game. It would help if Roy could see when there are games, or specific parts of games, in which his preferred defense is not working, and go to a conventional man-to-man instead.
Relatedly, I think man-to-man, rather than zone, is more likely to get done what needs to get done over the long haul. Except perhaps for Deon, we have the quickness to be successful at a conventional man-to-man. And its signal virtue is that it makes assignments of responsibility, and/or the failure to fulfill those assignments, quite clear. In other words, it is a defense that conspicuously rewards effort and conspicuously exposes lassitude. Thus it both more directly challenges the players, and facilitates adjusting playing time to defensive success.
wb3′s pt #1 got me thinking:
lawson has another 1-man fast break. after a MADE basket, with the flow of things, sometimes the PF (usually hansbrough) grabs the ball as it falls from the net, then quickly steps out of bounds and throws it inbounds to lawson. when done in a rhythmic fashion, lawson can at times outrun the defenders right through the middle for a lay up. however, i thought i saw a few times against BC where the basket was made, and a BC player grabbed the ball and left it on the floor. this gives the defenders extra two seconds to get set. this only stresses more to me that our bigs need to attack the defensive rim (whether to rebound or to grab the made basket) to nonetheless persistently up the tempo. Our ability to play fast tempo basketball is our biggest advantage over all our opponents, so i see this as key.
THF great points as usual. I think any team that is beating its opponent by at least double digits will eventually crack. A team that is not tested often enough is going to become fat and happy and I think thats what happened to the Heels. I think a tougher pre conference schedule would help prevent that.
What worries me the most is losing a game in which the Heels do not play their best, ie Georgetown and Kansas games. Those teams played well but the Heels lost those games due to their poor play. After the BC game, it could happen again.
Good point heeledsoul. Well coached teams are usually taught to rebound their MADE shots too when playing a fast breaking team for just the reason you mentioned. It’s up to the other team to go after the ball strong otherwise the refs will let it continue. Once the ball is through the net it belongs to the other team BUT it is their responsibility to actively go after it.
I was upset with this loss just like everyone else. I think most of us saw it coming. As has been pointed out, the Heels just haven’t played a complete game since Michigan State. We’ve seen a drop off in certain player’s games whether through lack of focus, nagging injury, or reverting to their old selves. We’ve seen this annoying habit of “just playing good enough” resurface. We know UNC has the horses to get the job done. They’re still the same team we’ve been so high on all year and still have the ability to bury very good teams (see Michigan State, Notre Dame, etc.). And we still have a Hall of Fame coach that certainly knows how to win.
A few good wins and the sting of this one will be gone.
Yes it will. We also may need to get used to the fact that Duke may be our new number one pretty soon. In that tough Big East conference, I expect that Pitt will get a few losses, and we know how tough it can be to give Duke a big L in the ACC. It may be up to us to deliver that one. Hopefully we will win all of our games up to that point, so that by beating them we regain our number one status. Even a few losses does not negate the fact that I think this team will be on top when all is said and done.
Duke will lose 4 ACC games this year. Mark it down.
I can’t really add much to this great discussion other than I am concerned about our depth, and I am serious. Frasor and Ginyard seem to be on facsimiles of themselves. The bright side is that both should be getting better as the season moves on…
I do think the Zeller injury set us back a notch as Deon seems to be regressing again. Go figure!
I liked the high/low with Tyler passing to Ed. Tyler passing, what a concept (as addressed by THF).
I just watched the last 15 minutes of the game again and thought I would throw some things out for you guys who know more about defensive schemes. It requires more effort because you have to look for numbers on jerseys because the announcers rarely talk about play not directly on the ball, so I don’t often watch this way but it was interesting.
BC got several lay-ups out of its halfcourt offense during the last 15 minutes and each time I went back and watched in slow motion and at least three times, it appeared to be Wayne Ellington’s man scoring. I understand that they do switches and things, but Wayne seemed to either have problems covering his guy or making proper switches. One of the worse lapses resulting in a lay-up was by Drew. He simply looked clueless about who he was supposed to be guarding. Maybe this is what the guys meant when they said they had trouble guarding the flex.
BC had several open looks from three point range during the game that were essentially 20 foot free throws, i.e., nobody guarding the shooter for as long as three to four seconds, or at all. BC missed a couple such shots down the stretch, or UNC wouldn’t even have had the slim prayer it had. We keep seeing this game after game, where our opponents are getting four or five uncontested three’s per game. Most teams are going to make at least two of those and some guys might hit all five.
I think Carolina might have won if they had played a zone defense in this game, but I understand why Roy doesn’t want to do this. It is sort of like papering over broken drywall. Bobby Knight never played zone either. He simply refused and actually got made at K once when Duke played zone in a game. Dean Smith was more likely to use a zone, although Carolina did go zone against Illinois to my recollection, at least for a while, so I am not sure exactly what the Roy Williams position on zone is, except that he hates to use it.
Carolina made several dumb fouls on Rice down the stretch. There is no point in fouling Rice if you blow the coverage. You just get a foul and he makes free throws. At least when Hansbrough fouled him, it prevented a basket. Lawson fouled him a couple of times when he was just dribbling for four automatic BC points. Another time, Lawson obviously fouled him when Rice was shooting but the ball went in and the officials didn’t call it, maybe payback for the block of Ellington’s dunk where the guy clearly hit Wayne’s wrist.
Honestly, the rebounding and intensity during the last eight minutes were pretty good, but this is too late to start. Yes, the Heels shot a lot of three’s but most of them were decent looks. Lawson, however, took one from NBA three point range and also took a terrible 17 foot twisting two-pointer, that hit only the backboard. Lawson also did not seem to be distributing the ball as well as he could have down the stretch, but then again, the Heels couldn’t make any shots anyway.
I do wish Lawson wouldn’t do that thing where he lets the ball roll up the court when there are still over two minutes left. It saves very little time and I think it is psychologically harmful because it leads the team to think they have to throw up the first shot they get. Lawson’s job is to keep the team calm, a la Ed Cota back in 1993.
The free throw shooting down the stretch really didn’t lose it for UNC because BC also missed a pair and also because Carolina kept getting the rebounds when we missed. What hurt was that we couldn’t score on the putbacks after the rebounds.
Carolina did shoot poorly from the line though, at 15-27, which should actually be 15-28 in a sense, to indicate that we also blew an opportunity at a rebound due to a lane violation in the last minute. So, in essence, Hansbrough went 9-13 from the line, with one of them being a one and one, but the Heels did get the rebound when he missed.
You also have to give credit to BC for knowing to foul Deon Thompson. Thompson has become an excellent inside shooter (although not in this game) and BC knew that and wisely decided to make him earn his points from the line. Even mediocre free throw shooters usually make four out of six free throws, but Thompson left at least two or three points on the line.
To me, the bottom line is that this was a two point game with about 13 minutes to play and then Carolina made several defensive lapses in the half-court game resulting in lay-ups, uncontested three point shots and free throws for Rice. Three lay-ups and two three-pointers and you are looking at 11 easy points and by the 8 minute mark, Carolina is down 15 and it was more BC’s lapses and bad luck down the stetch (three marginal calls that went our way on Hansbrough rebounds) than our good play that made it close, unfortunately.
I know people on here have wondered about the importance of steals for guards. Both Lawson and Ellington are in the top 8 in the ACC in steals, with Lawson leading the conference. I am not sure how important steals are. It seems like it might be more important defensively to guard one’s man tight and prevent him from scoring as opposed to getting a couple of flashy steals, particularly when the opponent doesn’t turn the ball over much.
I guess we will see against Wake. Wake is supposed to have pretty good guard play, although Ishmael Smith has a bit of the Quentin Thomas style in him. Jeff Teague is even bigger than Rice, and like Rice, there is no point in fouling him, as he makes over 84% of his free throws.
Roy says he does not like zone and also said he cannot coach it nor can any of his assistants. I would feel better if it at least was an option.
Did you mean Derrick Phelps in 1993 and not Ed Cota?
Yes, Derrick Phelps, but the point is probably valid for Cota as well. If you look at the 1982, 1993 and 1998 Heels, years where we arguably had the best team or won it all, our guards focused on defense and passing and leadership and did not shoot all that much. Even Kenny Smith never averaged that much when he played the point. Obviously, Phil Ford and Ray Felton are exceptions to this, so there is no set rule.
Thinking back, I believe UCLA rarely played zone defense but Marquette did win the title in 1977 playing mostly zone and I believe Carolina played mostly zone in 1957. I think UVa played a lot of zone in the late 70′s with Sampson.
One reason why the four corners did work amazingly well at times was that under the rules existing then, teams had to defend the four corners using a man to man defense. Some teams seldom even practiced man to man defense back then. USC under Frank McGuire always played zone and the first time Carolina used the four corners on McGuire’s team in 1971, the Heels ran circles around them. Donnie Walsh then schooled the Gamecocks in man to man during the next two months and USC ended up beating Carolina during the last two match-ups that year, most importantly in the ACC title game.
The problem with zone defenses is that a good team will exploit the “holes” and end up with a bunch of open shots. On the other hand it is valuable to at least know how to play a good matching type zone well because it can be used for a short period of time to throw the other team off balance. A suffocating man to man defense like Duke plays is the best defense of all, IF you can maintain the intensity for 40 minutes in a tight game. It’s just very tiring to play like that unless you have great defensive depth. I think this is one of the reasons Duke faded so badly at the end of last year. We play a half-hearted man to man that desperately needs to improve as we get into the better games. As a side point, I think we will see the Big East not fare as well at the end of the year as they play more zone defense as their primary defense.
I agree on the zone analysis by Chris, and would add playing zone against a explosive guard like Rice is dangerous. He “floats” into an area covered by a defender that is incapable of guarding him, and those free looks add up quickly. Very few teams anymore mix zone and man defenses, in part because young player today have very poor defensive principles (AAU ball being the man culprit). You can’t play good zone defense without good defensive principles. Syracuse is the obvious exception here. Zone will work against teams that can’t shoot from outside, which wasn’t the case with BC.
Roy’s switching/trapping/helping defense has helped produce 13 victories for us this season, but the great majority of them have been against physically overmatched teams. Its flaws against a more athletic team were exposed on Sunday. What this means is not that the switching/trapping/helping defense needs to be abandoned. It means that there should be alternaives at the ready when it’s not working (and it was not working — indeed it was being used by the opposition — in the BC game).
Accordingly, Roy needs to install AND BE WILLING TO USE something else when the ship is sinking. My preference is straight man-to-man, because you won’t need slow motion replays to figure out who is getting beaten. I suppose we could at least have a version of zone on the clipboard, since there will probably be situations in which it will work, and there will certainly be situations in which it will throw a wrinkle in the other side’s offensive set-up’s, particularly with inexperienced point guards.
As THF has noted, one of the problems this year has been lack of defensive focus and intensity. This has been lingering in the background for some time, largely obscured by blow-out wins against second tier competition. But it’s out in the open now, and the way to address it, I think, is less to use the old things that haven’t succeeded (practicing without rims, for example), but simply, and more or less ruthlessly, to hand out playing time based on defensive results.
Chris’s last point about the exhausting nature of a good man-to-man defense is certainly worth noting, but so is his observation that Dook has used it successfully. And we can use the depth that Dook simply doesn’t have to ameliorate the fatigue factor.
As with the problems since Roy arrived, UNC is STILL getting burned on screen and rolls. The philosiphy of having a defender “step out” and then recover leads to a lot of open layups and jump shots. The only time I’ve seen Roy have his players stay with guys on screens is the Duke game in Cameron last year. It worked well. Granted we had Hansbrough on Paulus at one point, but since it was Greg Paulus, there was nothing to worry about. I think our players are quick enough and athletic enough to do this. Roy obviously feels different, but we arguably have the fastest and most athletic team in the country.
In terms of individual defense, Deon and Tyler play pretty soft. I understand Deon has had a history with foul trouble, but he has to at least contest shots,, and you can do it without fouling. I would love for Tyler to do the same. I know he can get a lot more blocks, but his soft play is starting to lead to more rebounds from the other teams. Ellington just plays smaller than what he is. What I see from him is awareness to at least stay in between the hoop and his man, but he contests few shots. When he had that running block early on, I was impressed. I wish he would show that intensity throughout.
If I were Roy, I would try to shake up the starting lineup a little bit. I would start Ed Davis for a game or two, and have Deon come off the bench. I think Davis is our best down low defender, and he has no qualms about contesting shots or fighting for rebounds. Maybe that would wake Deon up out of his funk.
It’s patently absurd not to have some zone in your arsenal. Look no further than the semi game last year when UNC made their run. Employing a zone at that time would have done two things: given our guys a much needed respite, and given KU a different look, and quite possibly accelerated panic on KU’s part. It should at least be an option. I’m not a big fan of zone either, and it has to be schemed appropriately (3/2 can be very effective) for example:
http://www.angelfire.com/nc/ezyduzits12steptools/3_2_zone.html), but it does have a place in the strategy of the game.