clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Defensive Charting vs Boston College

At Inside Carolina, frequent poster feedmyego compiles the defensive charting for each and every game. I have taken the liberty of reposting his work here for the THF community to chew on. Click here for the original post at IC.

Defensive Efficiency

1st Half Defensive Efficiency: 139.4 (46 points allowed on 33 BC possessions)
2nd Half Defensive Efficiency: 100.0 (39 points allowed on 39 BC possessions)
Total Defensive Efficiency: 118.1

** After getting down 78-63, UNC only allowed 7 points in BC's final 13 possessions.  But it was too late to start defending at that point.

Misc Defensive Stats

2-Pt FG%: 50.0% (23-46)
3-Pt FG%: 37.5% (9-24)
eFG%: 52.1%

FTA Allowed Rate: 22.9
TOF%: 15.3%
DR%: 57.9%

BC Shot Distribution by Level of Contestedness:

Open: 6-8 (1-2 3Pt.); 81.3 eFG%
Lightly contested: 19-34 (6-14); 64.7 eFG%
Contested: 6-20 (2-7); 35.0 eFG%
Heavily contested: 1-8 (0-1); 12.5 eFG%

** Actually not as many contested/heavily contested makes as I thought.  Sanders hit a couple of tough ones early to give him (and BC) confidence, but this is a pretty normal contestedness breakdown (both in terms of FG%'s and distribution of attempts).


Davis: 100.0%
Thompson: 67.1%
Hansbrough: 64.5%
Ginyard: 57.6%
Lawson: 52.8%
Green: 50.8%
Avg.: 48.7%
Ellington: 45.9%
Graves: 42.3%
Frasor: 37.7%
Team Poss.: 26.4%
Drew: 19.6%

Points Allowed (FG-A, 3Pt-A, FT-A):

Team: 22 (9-11, 4-5, 0-0)
Ellington: 13 (5-11, 1-3, 2-4)
Lawson: 9.5 (3-8, 0.5-4.5, 3-4)
Graves: 8.5 (2.5-4.5, 1.5-2.5, 2-2)
Green: 8 (2-5, 1-2, 3-4)
Frasor: 6 (3-5, 0-1, 0-0)
Hansbrough: 5.5 (1.5-5, 0.5-2.5, 2-2)
Drew: 5.5 (2.5-3, 0.5-0.5, 0-0)
Ginyard: 4 (2-4, 0-0, 0-0)
Thompson: 3 (1.5-7, 0-1, 0-0)
Davis: 0 (0-6.5, 0-2, 0-0)

** UNC gave up a bunch of team baskets-- mostly after failed traps or live-ball turnovers.

Forced Turnovers (11):

Lawson: 2
Ellington: 2
Team: 2
Ginyard: 1.5
Green: 1
Frasor: 1
Hansbrough: 1
Graves: 0.5

Deflections (24):

Lawson: 8
Ellington: 5
Hansbrough: 3
Frasor: 3
Ginyard: 2
Graves: 2
Green: 1

Floorburns (4):

Hansbrough: 2
Lawson/Ellington; 1

Forced Resets/Denies (3):

Lawson/Ginyard/Graves: 1

Defensive Rebounds (OR Allowed):

Hansbrough: 5 (1)
Davis: 3 (3)
Green: 3 (3)
Graves: 3 (1)
Lawson: 2 (0)
Thompson: 2 (3)
Ellington: 1 (0)
Ginyard: 1 (0)
Drew: 1 (0)
Team: 1 (3)
Frasor: 0 (2)

** UNC allowed 16 points (including 4 made 3s) on 9 possessions of halfcourt trapping and 4 points on 4 possessions of fullcourt trapping.  Like most talented and experienced guards, Rice had little trouble breaking and attacking UNC's trap for scores/open shots.

** BC also scored 24 points in 17 transition possessions.  While Lawson, in general, did a good job of locating Rice in transition, he did have a few breakdowns that led to hoops or fouls.  BC also used a halfcourt high screen for Rice a couple of times as a secondary break option.  UNC communicated these quite poorly (not Lawson's fault) which freed Rice for a couple other transition penetration opportunities.

I thought BC had a solid gameplan against Carolina-- they attacked in transition at every opportunity (where UNC is vulnerable), pounded the offensive glass, and ran their halfcourt (flex) offense with a ton of patience when they weren't able to get a good transition look.  UNC wasn't able to bait BC into an up-and-down game, but BC was still able to get plenty of points in its early offense (by running selectively and having a great finisher and decision-maker at PG).

** In my opinion, Lawson played a pretty strong defensive game against Rice.  He did have a couple of transition breakdowns in which he was way too late in locating and stopping Rice's dribble.  But, in the halfcourt, Lawson was pretty disruptive (8 deflections) and contained penetration well.  He also forced Rice into a bunch of contested shots.

It is true that Lawson (and UNC in general) was not disruptive enough to force BC out of its flex offense.  This is more a testment to BC's execution than UNC's lack of effort/ball pressure, though.  I thought UNC overplayed the flex entries (at the elbows) very well.  But BC used its size and technique (posting up to receive elbow entries, tight, well-placed passes, etc.) to make clean entries all night (despite decent pressure from Carolina).

In general, BC's flex cuts weren't what killed UNC on Sunday (unlike games against BC in 2006 and Maryland in 2007).  They did get a few easy lay-ups out of the flex, but most of the damage was in transition, on the offensive glass, and off of high screens.

BC was able to score 7 times using high screens (in limited opportunities since their offense isn't really built around the high screen--- it's a nice wrinkle added by Skinner to take advantage of Rice's talent).  Graves, who was playing extensive minutes at the 4 for the first time in his career (usually Green plays the 4 when Green/Graves are on the court together like they were against BC), had a couple of breakdowns against the high screen that cost UNC 5 points.

As usual, BC should get credit for setting solid screens (both high screens and flex screens) in the halfcourt offense.  Skinner likes phyiscal players, and BC is always among the best screening teams in the conference (more of a Big East style).  Lawson and Ellington both got caught up on a few screens, and need to take better angles (and sometimes just be stronger at fighting through).