Musketeer Madness

Creighton, Marquette, Villanova are all match-up problems for not only X but most teams. We played them withe the 3-guard line-up and now we play them with the larger line-up. If they are a match-up for us, that could mean we are a match-up problem for them. We have to determine how to move the advantage to us.

Defending the 3 using the pack line defense is difficult whether we have a small line-up or larger line-up. The ball/passes moves faster than the defender. A team that allows their players to take quick transition 3’s, can get those on steals or long rebounds— many times instead of a lay-up. No doubt, taking care of the ball and making shots, will eliminate the transition 3’s. Probably easier said then done, but it is a possibility.

The big line-up has shown one big positive in two games—increased rebounding, especially offensive rebounding. If we can only shoot 30%, we have to increase the volume of shots. If an opponent is hitting 45-50% of their 3’s, most teams will have a problem, especially when the can shoot like a Blalock from 5 feet behind the line. Creighton looked unbeatable against us, but then they were very vulnerable against Butler at Butler. You pull your defense out to cover the 3, and you open the floor for drives and fouls. You back off a bit and they shoot the 3. So far, our results (losses) have been about the same, but unless our own 3pt shooting miraculously turns around, the bigger line-up with additional practice reps, might be our only answer.

We need to have our opponent adjust to us. We all think we have answers, but Steele and the rest of the staff, know the players and they are all capable coaches. They cannot control the missed FT’s and missed layups. They can and probably will adjust tempo and defenses to the personnel that we put on the floor.

Good luck against Marquette and Seton Hall. Nothing is easy in the Big East.

Lead Guitar wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 27, 2020 11:05 am

Creighton, Marquette, Villanova are all match-up problems for not only X but most teams. We played them withe the 3-guard line-up and now we play them with the larger line-up. If they are a match-up for us, that could mean we are a match-up problem for them. We have to determine how to move the advantage to us.

Defending the 3 using the pack line defense is difficult whether we have a small line-up or larger line-up. The ball/passes moves faster than the defender. A team that allows their players to take quick transition 3’s, can get those on steals or long rebounds— many times instead of a lay-up. No doubt, taking care of the ball and making shots, will eliminate the transition 3’s. Probably easier said then done, but it is a possibility.

The big line-up has shown one big positive in two games—increased rebounding, especially offensive rebounding. If we can only shoot 30%, we have to increase the volume of shots. If an opponent is hitting 45-50% of their 3’s, most teams will have a problem, especially when the can shoot like a Blalock from 5 feet behind the line. Creighton looked unbeatable against us, but then they were very vulnerable against Butler at Butler. You pull your defense out to cover the 3, and you open the floor for drives and fouls. You back off a bit and they shoot the 3. So far, our results (losses) have been about the same, but unless our own 3pt shooting miraculously turns around, the bigger line-up with additional practice reps, might be our only answer.

We need to have our opponent adjust to us. We all think we have answers, but Steele and the rest of the staff, know the players and they are all capable coaches. They cannot control the missed FT’s and missed layups. They can and probably will adjust tempo and defenses to the personnel that we put on the floor.

Good luck against Marquette and Seton Hall. Nothing is easy in the Big East.

LG,

Not a fan of the big lineup at all. X was never really in striking defense except for a few fleeting minutes yesterday, losing by double digits the majority of the time. Like I predicted before the game, the big lineup would be a disaster, which it was. TS doesn’t seem to understand the game isn’t played in a vacuum. Just because X won against G-Town with a big lineup, it apparently convinced him that one size fits all. They won in spite of the big lineup. Their shooting percentage that game was even lower than it normally is, which was a very low bar to begin with. They shot 37%. Their 10+ rebounding margin isn’t what won the game. It was due to their defense. The offense had no flow, and they still shot 25 treys, which is obviously ok with TS, because I assume they wouldn’t do it otherwise.

I also don’t buy his statement that “Starters are determined the Xavier Way, which is how they perform in practice. TS has always said that Leighton Schrand is the best practice player, which is why he started the first two games (conveniently against bottom feeders). Wonder why he hasn’t seen the floor for anything but junk minutes since then? My money is on the assumption that he still is the best practice player, and effort ain’t the reason why he didn’t start. TS is very Cronin-esque, which isn’t tolerable unless you’re winning at a very high clip. Playing three bigs against Creighton was exposed early and often. Jones got burned at least three times when his man pulled him out to the three point line, and FreeM, who isn’t a good defender to begin with (which is understandable as a freshman big), was abused often as well when pulled 17 feet out. I blame neither for this, just as I wouldn’t blame Scruggs if he is tasked with guarding Gtown’s center the next time they play, and he scores 30. I blame Steele. Creighton and X had virtually identical scores in both games, as X lost by 11 each time, and scored 65 points. With the big lineup yest., they had about 17 more rebounds and 15 more shots, and still never were close to competing. The big lineup win was fool’s gold, which anyone who coached 4th grade CYO would have known.

They lost because Creighton went to the line 15 more times. Why? When their smaller, quicker players drove to the hole, they were often fouled by the bigs. TS will blame it on poor shot selection, not cheering enough on the bench, or some other cliche he spews each game but never seems to have a remedy for. I completely agree Creighton is a better team this year, so a loss isn’t unexpected, but this team still has talent. The manner in which they lose games with inexplicable bench strategy amd on court execution (or lack thereof) is the cause for concern. Also, playing Kyky 12 minutes after his best shooting game of the year was also mind boggling. They know they can’t stop Creighton from scoring, and would need to score at least in the 70s to win, so they leave their best three point shooter on the bench, while Freemantle, Carter, and Marshall threw up 14 or so treys.

Our hopes of dancing aren’t completely gone, though the paddles are close to having to revive another dying season. Despite the growing contingent who want TS gone, I’m not in that camp. I still think he needs a seasoned X and Os guy on the bench though, and he better continue to recruit at a high level, because that is the one thing on his performance review he will get positive marks for in two consecutive years, unless the season turns a complete 180t. That “2%,” is now 20%, and will continue to balloon with the status quo. However, TS is a tireless worker and good guy, who has paid his dues, so I’m rooting for him.

Discalimer: the exact numbers of rebounds, shots, etc may be off by one or so, as I posted to from memory when I checked the box score last night. Regardless, it wouldn't have had any effect on the outcome.

The big line-up isn't the right answer against teams with shooters and quick guards. It can be used in short stretches and against other types of teams. Tandy was lost out there so I have no problem with his minimal minutes but I would have started him and possibly that would have yielded a different mindset and results.

Execution at a high level is the only way X will win against quality teams. That is unlikely given the current upper classmen. Creighton has players contributing in the huddle because they understand the game. X players are silent because they have no confidence in what they need to do to win. Effort was there but it didn't matter.

Sounds like Marshall may be iffy for tomorrow with his knee. They may be down to the 5 healthiest available. If Marshall doesn't go, this will likely be a long, long night. Not sure you can outscore Howard without him.