How do you defend the three?

[DC Muskie]

I've been thinking about this. How does a team effectively defend against the three point shot?

In M2M defense you can run under the screen. In zone you must close out on the wings.

Why are we so terrible at this? Is it because the pack line defense closes driving lines? Which leaves open spaces for such shots?

I need some thoughts here.

[D-West & PO-Z]

I've been thinking about this. How does a team effectively defend against the three point shot?

In M2M defense you can run under the screen. In zone you must close out on the wings.

Why are we so terrible at this? Is it because the pack line defense closes driving lines? Which leaves open spaces for such shots?

I need some thoughts here.

I think the packline sags some to close off the driving lanes.

And if you go under a screen in man to man that opens up the three point shot, but if you go over it opens up the drive. I think that is why we hedge so much.

[DC Muskie]

I think the packline sags some to close off the driving lanes.

And if you go under a screen in man to man that opens up the three point shot, but if you go over it opens up the drive. I think that is why we hedge so much.

You mean "over" the screen right?

[D-West & PO-Z]

You mean "over" the screen right?

We might be saying the same thing but have a different understanding of what over and under the screen means. To me if you go under a screen that means you are going behind the screener which you would want to do to if a guy wasnt a great shooter and you wanted to prevent him driving. TO go over a screen to me means going in front of the screener/fighting through it to prevent the guy with the ball from pulling up for three.

[XUFan09]

We might be saying the same thing but have a different understanding of what over and under the screen means. To me if you go under a screen that means you are going behind the screener which you would want to do to if a guy wasnt a great shooter and you wanted to prevent him driving. TO go over a screen to me means going in front of the screener/fighting through it to prevent the guy with the ball from pulling up for three.
That's the correct terminology.

[DC Muskie]

We might be saying the same thing but have a different understanding of what over and under the screen means. To me if you go under a screen that means you are going behind the screener which you would want to do to if a guy wasnt a great shooter and you wanted to prevent him driving. TO go over a screen to me means going in front of the screener/fighting through it to prevent the guy with the ball from pulling up for three.

No we are on same the page. I must have read wrong, my bad.

But why are we so bad at it?

[xu82]

But why are we so bad at it?

Ahh, there's the billion dollar question!

And I have no answer. And no billion dollars.

[xavierj]

Ahh, there's the billion dollar question!

And I have no answer. And no billion dollars.

Xavier has only allowed 32% last 4 so I guess thats promising.

[Masterofreality]

No we are on same the page. I must have read wrong, my bad.

But why are we so bad at it?


Ahh, there's the billion dollar question!

And I have no answer. And no billion dollars.

My belief is that because we hedge so much, other defenders- especially from the "off side"- have to sag in to guard the lane when we play a team with a primary ball screen offense. When we hedge, really good teams are able to pass and reverse the ball and that puts us in scramble mode. Because we are so "sagged" covering the paint, we can't get back out on the shooter. I have noticed that we have been doing much more switching on the ball screens lately. We certainly did it more in the Big East Tourney. The other alternative is more of a match-up zone which we apparently do not even have in our holster.

It is almost like our staff is convinced to take the chance that the opposition will miss the 3. Percentage wise, of course the three (NCAA average about 38%) is a lot lower than a 100% 2 point layup but it sure seems to hurt us comparatively more.

[markchal]

My belief is that because we hedge so much, other defenders- especially from the "off side"- have to sag in to guard the lane when we play a team with a primary ball screen offense. When we hedge, really good teams are able to pass and reverse the ball and that puts us in scramble mode. Because we are so "sagged" covering the paint, we can't get back out on the shooter. I have noticed that we have been doing much more switching on the ball screens lately. We certainly did it more in the Big East Tourney. The other alternative is more of a match-up zone which we apparently do not even have in our holster.

It is almost like our staff is convinced to take the chance that the opposition will miss the 3. Percentage wise, of course the three (NCAA average about 38%) is a lot lower than a 100% 2 point layup but it sure seems to hurt us comparatively more.

I think it's a combination of things but this is definitely in the mix. A lot of times our strategy seems to be to hope they miss wide open threes. I also think communication is an issue and younger guys getting lost/slacking at times is an issue. Also, Myles and Dee are on the small side and neither a great defender which factors into it as well.

[xavierj]

My belief is that because we hedge so much, other defenders- especially from the "off side"- have to sag in to guard the lane when we play a team with a primary ball screen offense. When we hedge, really good teams are able to pass and reverse the ball and that puts us in scramble mode. Because we are so "sagged" covering the paint, we can't get back out on the shooter. I have noticed that we have been doing much more switching on the ball screens lately. We certainly did it more in the Big East Tourney. The other alternative is more of a match-up zone which we apparently do not even have in our holster.

It is almost like our staff is convinced to take the chance that the opposition will miss the 3. Percentage wise, of course the three (NCAA average about 38%) is a lot lower than a 100% 2 point layup but it sure seems to hurt us comparatively more.

So what you are saying is that you don't like hedging?

[xu82]

So what you are saying is that you don't like hedging?

That part is rather ambiguous, I think you're reading too much into it. Maybe he wants more hedging?

[Xavier]

I was watching the Texas Xavier tournament game today and we were hedging. Am I wrong? Haven't the Muskies been doing that for years?

[markchal]

I was watching the Texas Xavier tournament game today and we were hedging. Am I wrong? Haven't the Muskies been doing that for years?

I thought it was a Matta thing, but definitely remember it more under Miller. Personnel exposes the shortcomings of the scheme more in some seasons than others.

[Masterofreality]

See, here's the thing. Hedging ball screens is a legitimate defense .... But whatever defense you play has to fit your personnel or you'll get torched. My belief all year is that we've been playing a D that is ill suited to these players. Maybe next year with a more mobile Jalen at the 5, a taller Sumner in there and the other players with more experience, it might work, but I haven't liked it with this group.

[markchal]

See, here's the thing. Hedging ball screens is a legitimate defense .... But whatever defense you play has to fit your personnel or you'll get torched. My belief all year is that we've been playing a D that is ill suited to these players. Maybe next year with a more mobile Jalen at the 5, a taller Sumner in there and the other players with more experience, it might work, but I haven't liked it with this group.

I sort of agree with this and give Mack a lot of credit for the 1-3-1 but I'm not sure what d we should've used instead. The pack line helps overcome some of our m2m deficiencies.

[X Factor]

I was watching the Texas Xavier tournament game today and we were hedging. Am I wrong? Haven't the Muskies been doing that for years?

The beginning of that game is hilarious. Texas wins the opening tip and Rafftery does his traditional, "...and Xavier goes, man to man!" Except Xavier came out in a 2-3 zone. The exchange between Raff and Verne Lundquist is great.

[xu82]

See, here's the thing. Hedging ball screens is a legitimate defense .... But whatever defense you play has to fit your personnel or you'll get torched. My belief all year is that we've been playing a D that is ill suited to these players. Maybe next year with a more mobile Jalen at the 5, a taller Sumner in there and the other players with more experience, it might work, but I haven't liked it with this group.

A silly time for me to talk next year, but it's going to look very different. It always does, but we've been watching almost everything go through Dee and Stain. Replace Dee with a 6'5" PG (among others) and Stain with an athletic Jalen, bring Makinde off the bench and it's a very different look. Looking for it to just get better and better. Not without some bumps, but pretty exciting.

[Masterofreality]

I guess I can accept this. CMack knows what he has and he was willing to take his lumps this year with this young group to give them experience in this defense. He knows that with the full complement next year they'll be better.

I just wish the Staff would have taught a zone as an alternative defense earlier. We might have picked up 3 more wins.

[XUFan09]

I guess I can accept this. CMack knows what he has and he was willing to take his lumps this year with this young group to give them experience in this defense. He knows that with the full complement next year they'll be better.

I just wish the Staff would have taught a zone as an alternative defense earlier. We might have picked up 3 more wins.

I think that's a lot of it. Mack and the staff aren't just thinking about this year but the next few years too, especially with the impressive underclassmen on the roster. It would not shock me at all if the team is top 25 in both offensive efficiency and defensive efficiency in two years, maybe even next year, with the seasoning they have developed (plus the addition of some athletic pieces).

I suspect that they felt this team wasn't advanced enough at their primary defense to start teaching the zone earlier in the season. For as strong of offensive instincts as this team has, they really seem to suffer in terms of defensive instincts.

[LA Muskie]

A silly time for me to talk next year, but it's going to look very different. It always does, but we've been watching almost everything go through Dee and Stain. Replace Dee with a 6'5" PG (among others) and Stain with an athletic Jalen, bring Makinde off the bench and it's a very different look. Looking for it to just get better and better. Not without some bumps, but pretty exciting.

Different? Yes. More athletic? Yup. Better? Now that will remain to be seen... Eclipsing what Stain and Dee have done will not necessarily be an easy task, even if it didn't always look pretty.

[xu82]

Different? Yes. More athletic? Yup. Better? Now that will remain to be seen... Eclipsing what Stain and Dee have done will not necessarily be an easy task, even if it didn't always look pretty.

At the top of the things I'll miss the most is Matt passing out of the post. That opens a lot of things up, and I'm not sure how it's replaced.

Edit: I may change my mind if we can't get the ball up the floor and get the offense in gear.

[LA Muskie]

At the top of the things I'll miss the most is Matt passing out of the post. That opens a lot of things up, and I'm not sure how it's replaced.

Hopefully Reynolds, Farr, O'Mara and London have been taking copious notes!

[letskeepitreal]

Better figure it out by tomorrow. Pretty sick shooting from BYU

[Caveat]

See, here's the thing. Hedging ball screens is a legitimate defense .... But whatever defense you play has to fit your personnel or you'll get torched. My belief all year is that we've been playing a D that is ill suited to these players. Maybe next year with a more mobile Jalen at the 5, a taller Sumner in there and the other players with more experience, it might work, but I haven't liked it with this group.

Mack is absolutely a disciple of the basketball school that says "Thou shalt need no other defense than correctly run man-to-man" -- the fact that we've seen so much 1-3-1 this season is pretty telling. In fact, I can't remember a Xavier team under Mack going to zone with as much regularity as this one has since conference play started. I think that's tantamount to an admission from Mack that these guys aren't a great fit for the packline.

[X Factor]

Better figure it out by tomorrow. Pretty sick shooting from BYU

Or not.

[Retire33]

http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/3_point_defense_should_not_be_defined_by_opponents _3p

http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/one_last_post_on_3p_defense

It always been about not allowing the 3s to be taken, not about who is taking them. X needs to be better at mitigating three point shot attempts

[MADXSTER]

My belief is that because we hedge so much, other defenders- especially from the "off side"- have to sag in to guard the lane when we play a team with a primary ball screen offense. When we hedge, really good teams are able to pass and reverse the ball and that puts us in scramble mode. Because we are so "sagged" covering the paint, we can't get back out on the shooter.

Add in that Stain is not quick at getting back to his position after hedging(this does not mean he is not hustling), Xavier's defender has to wait longer in the paint before getting back into his normal position, thus leaving leaving a shooter open a tad longer. This leads to more open outside shots.