UNC fans got what they were hoping for on Tuesday night with a desperately-needed win over NC State after a week off. Much of the message board banter and punditry during the week focused on what adjustments Roy Williams and the coaching staff would make during the football equivalent of the open date.
If you don’t mind the “inside baseball” talk, here is the take on the tactical side of the State game:
Inside first: UNC clearly wanted to establish the inside play with Deon Thompson and Ed Davis. While State’s bigs had been playing pretty well of late, neither Tracy Smith nor Dennis Horner are particularly adept post defenders. UNC cleared out one side of the floor and attacked, since State does not double down in the post. As a result, Thompson and Davis got some easy buckets early, and certainly in Thompson’s case, seemed to prime the pump offensively.
Transition offense: Larry Drew seemed to focus more on dribbling the ball up the floor against NC State that passing up the floor. Earlier this season it seemed Drew was trying to speed up the offense through long, down-court passing, which is great when the passes are accurate. Drew is perfectly fine as a ball-handler, and dribbling allowed him to take better care of the ball even if it is not as fast in transition.
Halfcourt offense: UNC showed more offensive continuity against State, primarily based on being able to flatten out the top of the offense and start from the top of the key. Carolina also employed a lot of shuffle cuts (where a player on the side away from the ball flashed horizontally across the lane) rather than more vertical basket cuts, which put the bigs (and Ginyard at least once) in the position to get the ball within 5-10 feet of the basket. As State spread out to stop the shuffle cuts, the middle opened up.
State did make a half-time adjustment to this and jammed the lane to prevent the cuts. UNC responded by jacking up some outside shots and the Pack took advantage to make their early 2nd half run. Drew finally stopped the bleeding with a three and State had to stop jamming the middle, leading to two quick inside baskets.
General defense: Carolina brought a more focused defensive intensity to the game, holding State to less than 65 points. The Heels made a couple of defensive tweaks of note. First, UNC delayed a little on the double down in the post, rather than doubling down and trapping immediately. This seemed to encourage State’s bigs to go ahead and commit to making a basket move, thereby reducing the kick-outs back to the perimeter. Plus, their basket moves were mostly lane-side, rather than baseline side, which allowed the guard dropping for the double-team to be able to hesitate for a second and still recover to challenge the shot.
The team seemed to be more technically sound on defense as well, which is usually the result of a lot of practice work. The spacing in defending the passing lanes was much better, as was the positioning on defense off the ball (Bobby Knight used to tape a line on the floor to demonstrate this). Carolina also went back to fighting through screens rather than switching but did a much better job showing on the screens. There were a couple of times where UNC was beaten on screens, particularly the screen and roll, but for the most part Carolina defended the screens well which led to more contested shots on State’s part.
Zone defense: UNC continued to mix up its man and zone defenses, and the zone used in this game had more of a traditional Dean Smith-style “point zone” look than the basic 2-3 that we had seen most of the season. The result ws a little more ball pressure and freedom of movement for the bigs.
Post defense: Carolina played straight behind the post instead of trying to deny the entry pass, but denied anything outside the paint. As a result, Tracy Smith (who posts up) became a jump shooter and Dennis Horner (who doesn’t post up a lot from the 4 position) didn’t get a lot of touches. UNC also rotated players on Smith, using fouls and keeping people fresh.
Line-up: The coaching staff must have seen something from John Henson in practice because he took the minutes David Wear had been getting, and to a good result. No starter played more than 33 minutes, and other than the cameo appearances from David and Leslie McDonald, UNC settled into an 8-man rotation.
As C. Michael pointed out in the game summary comments and Eric Montross confirmed yesterday on the radio, Drew and Strickland seem to play well together we may see more of that as the season progresses.
In summary, it was exactly what we have come to expect from a Hall-of-Fame coach with a top-notch staff. Carolina had scouted State well and addressed some of their own needs also. Now, with an early-week game before a Sunday night game, UNC gets extra practice time to prepare for UVa’s somewhat unique offense.
![[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)
Thanks for this. I think this could be a regular feature that adds a lot of value, particularly for those of us who never made our high school teams, since a lot of this is above what kids learn as 14 and 15 year olds.
It also does help us remember that while a lot of good defensive work is based upon talent, desire and hardwork, there is also a real mental component that is less apparent merely by watching. Often, we may blame one particular player for an opponent’s goal, when actually the breakdown was more oblique and something that the players and coaching staff are more likely to notice.
I think a reason why Strickland and Drew work so well together is that with Stickland on the floor you have a player who is quick enough to go the rim. If Ginyard and Graves are on the wings, teams don’t have to worry about anyone trying slash into the paint. The Heels are easier to defend.
good stuff Doc.
Ho: I’m guessing that (shuffle cuts)really played to Deon’s strengths.
Thanks Doc!
“In summary, it was exactly what we have come to expect from a Hall-of-Fame coach with a top-notch staff.”
Without question. Roy is now 76-14 (84.4%) when he has 5 or more days in between games. At UNC he is even better, 17-3 (85%).
Thats a great analysis Doc! I agree with William – I’d love to see stuff like this more often.
Well, you hardly need to be a hall-of-fame coach to know Horner at the 4 is a big problem for State. Lowe has little choice until Howell improves as an ACC player. Lowe is trying to steal wins for his less talented team with his incredible ability to make in-game adjustments and exploit matchups. I would really like to see what Sidney Lowe could do with a good team. His coaching has impressed me. He just hasn’t had anything at all the past few years. Degand’s injury destroyed any chances of 07-08, and last year’s team was plagued with injury. People can talk about “chemistry”, but Degand driving and dishing to Hickson in the ACC schedule in 07-08 would have solved a lot of chemistry issues. Last year, Lowe struggled to find any consistency with three injured and ineffective point guards and Fells’ ankle injury. (Fells could barely make it down the court after playing defense, but Lowe still had to use a box-and-one with the hobbling Fells on the opponent’s best guard last year.) Usually the breaks will even out, but I don’t think Lowe has gotten a break yet. He’s had the Sean May foot injury type of season for three years. This year’s team is much better, but so close to the margin that all 9 guys have to play above-average games for State to win. (The Duke game is a good example.) Next year, with a true point guard coming in, the first since Engin Atsur, hopefully Lowe will have a team that can run his stuff. (I kind of root for Lowe to make it, since he is one of the most genuine, non-jerk head coaches ever.)
The Heels, you could see, just stuck to their stuff and let the talent differential win the game for them. State, knowing they had to be perfect to win, started pressing.
What I liked was Henson’s emergence. He and Strickland are the core of something good over the next couple of years.
I think Coach Williams this year is getting a taste of what it’s like every game for Coach Lowe: You put in your gameplan, you get your guys to buy into it, but they just don’t quite have the talent level and experience to pull it off.
I’m looking forward to the UVA game. I think we’ll see a great defense and it will be reminiscent of our Sweet 16 game v. WSU. Roy seemed to have a good plan for defending that offense.
This is very good analysis – thanks for posting it. This kind of stuff is what makes me a regular reader here.
Knowing how good the unc coaching staff is, I was not optimistic going into this game – carolina riding a 3-game losing streak with extra time to prepare. State would have to play a flawless game, and they didn’t, obviously.
TheUNCFan, I also appreciate your insight on Lowe’s struggles thus far – an “outsider’s” perspective is helpful. Maybe we’ll get a better idea of what kind of coach he can be in the next year or two with Ryan Harrow running the point. Hey, I’m used to waiting until next year.
Great stuff, Doc. Echo others’ comments that I’d love to see more of this. I’m a hoops head and have coaches in my earlier days, so all this strategy/breakdown stuff is awesome.
I thought one other thing the Heels did really well in the HC offense was get ball reversals (that’s plural on purpose). It was often quick reversals, allowing Deon and Ed to pin his defender and make their post move.
We did play more point zone, but since our man-to-man principles are sometimes lacking, those still carry over to zone defense and we often leave shooters open. The easiest way to describe successfully playing a zone is that, as a defender, you want to be able to cover two guys at once. For instance, if you’re on the bottom wing spot, you want the offense to think you can dart in and steal a post-entry pass, yet still be in a position to close out and/or contest a shot on the wing or corner.
I think it will be interested how Roy prepares for UVa and its new coach. It’s pretty obvious Roy and staff have NCSU’s schemes/tendencies figured out, but this will present entire new challenges on Sunday. A good point by @UNC33, but that of course was a different team that was fairly good at executing game plans and being more efficient offensively.
This is easily one of the best technical posts on this site. Congratulations.
Every game left this year is must win. You can be sure that none will be easy. As long as they make a consistent effort, this team has shown an aptitude to adapt and improve.
No underclassman is going to the NBA, so next year could easily be even better.
“this team has shown an aptitude to adapt and improve.”
Huh? What year this?
The NC State win was bsed on changing the way the team as a whole played. They tried harder and as Doc wrote in his piece clearly responded to coaching with overall sustained effort. Hence the result. An ACC road win for the 2009-10 season.
Last year’s perimeter players were very good at making the pass into the post. Until the State game, we have been having problems making those passes this season. As you pointed out, we did a nice job getting the ball into the post against State. Hopefully, it was something we did differently and not bad perimeter defense on State’s part.
1 game does not represent an aptitude in my eyes, but to each his own…….
Pomeroy has us as a five point dog against his alma mater, VPI. Who the heck have they beaten to be 37th in the country? They are half a game better in conference and depending on their game with Virginia and ours on Sunday, they may not even be that come game time. I have a hard time taking Tech or UVa seriously.
The season happens one game at a time. The key to this game is that improvement and effort happened for almost every player.
It wasn’t just Graves shooting or a couple of inside players.
It was a team effort. Not just a series of individuals.
As someone said, “you’re only as good as your last case”. But they’ve had a start.
Excellent work Doc.
There’s something about the Pomeroy model that seems to make more sense towards the end of the year, although it probably shouldn’t. Right now, for example, he has Maryland at #8 and Sagarin has them at #31. Maybe I just haven’t paid attention to the disparity between the two and this is fairly typical.
Charleston, you’re right about our perimeter passing improvement. As Doc said, we were putting our post players in better position to receive the ball and score, but our passing just seemed snappier and more accurate to me.
William:
Sure the Virginia teams are not going to the final four. I hope they get crushed by UNC.
However, if the team gets complacent you know what will happen. Again! One COC this year please.
Speaking of politics, did you see one or two favorable calls go for Duke at home last night? That stuff gives them a 10 point advantage. At Hansbrough Indoor. Where their only losses for the last two years have been to guess who!
From News and Observer:
A breakdown of what’s left:
Must win these: vs. Virginia (on Sunday) vs. N.C. State (Feb. 13), at Boston College (Feb. 20); vs. Florida State (Feb. 24), vs. Miami (March 2).
Virginia and Miami, despite good starts, have shown why they were picked to finish near the bottom of the league in recent performances.
Even though it beat Clemson on Tuesday, Boston College hasn’t proven that its veterans know how to play together consistently.
The rematch with N.C. State, plus the matchup with FSU, are at home, and the Tar Heels must use their crowd to their advantage — especially since they have already lost two ACC games in the Smith Center.
Challenging, but winnable: at Virginia Tech (Feb. 4), vs. Duke (Feb. 10), at Georgia Tech (Feb. 16); at Wake Forest (Feb. 27).
The Tar Heels have won one ACC road game. Can they win more? That’s the conundrum here, especially against the Yellow Jackets and Demon Deacons, who have claimed wins already this season over the Tar Heels.
Duke, meanwhile, is clearly the better team right now, but it’s an anticipated national rivalry – and emotions will be running high, what with UNC planning to retire Tyler Hansbrough’s jersey at halftime.
Looking for an upset: at Maryland (Feb. 7) and at Duke (March 6).
@ Minny:
Good point about the ball reversals. I had that in my original notes but neglected to put it in the post. UNC has shown a propensity to play to the left side of the floor, especially against Wake Forest (this is odd because most right-handed guards tend to go to the right side), but Carolina did a much better job reversing the ball, which may have been a function of being a little more deliberate on offense.
Aha!
from tarheelblue.com:
The N.C. State game was the seventh this season in which UNC hoisted 57 or fewer shots. UNC is 6-1 in such contests. Last year’s more experienced unit averaged 66 shots per game; this year’s team is 6-4 when trying that many shots or more. (Two losses came in games with 61 and 63 field goal attempts.)
Excellent analysis all the way around. Nice work guys. I enjoy watching the Drew/Strickland backcourt, and I think it can be very competitive in March if Roy let’s them play together regularly. I love Marcus, but he just doesn’t seem to have it anymore.