Bryant

sedziobs said:

Bryant is a horrible offensive team. They've only put up more than a point per possession once this year, against #315 Boston University. A big part of the problem is personnel usage. Withers and Timberake are the only efficient scorers, but the other three starters all have much higher usage rates despite effective field goal percentages under 44%. The highest usage player, Sherif Gross-Bullock, puts up more than 8 threes a game at only 30%, and he only converts 44% at the rim. And to top it off they are one of the worst offensive rebounding teams in the country.

They're a pretty good defensive team, ranking in the top 15 nationally in opposing field goal percentage. But they're below average in rebounding, forcing turnovers, and keeping opponents off the free throw line. They held FAU to only 0.72 points per possession, including just 9 for 27 at the rim and 5 for 30 from three. How did they hold a top 20 team to 33% at the rim? They also held Rutgers under 50% at the rim, so something is working. I'm guessing with their positionless size they double everything in the lane.

Withers is their tallest player but he mostly just shoots threes, similar to Howard's Seth Towns. Our bigs need to be aware of that. Timberlake does most of his damage at the rim, so I'd rather have a big on him instead.

On offense I think looking for the dump off pass might be important when attacking the rim. If we do that and attack the glass we should be able to score even if the outside shots aren't falling.

Click to expand...

Queens_NYC said:

We went on a 31-5 run over the final 8:33.

Click to expand...

sedziobs said:

Bryant is a horrible offensive team. They've only put up more than a point per possession once this year, against #315 Boston University. A big part of the problem is personnel usage. Withers and Timberake are the only efficient scorers, but the other three starters all have much higher usage rates despite effective field goal percentages under 44%. The highest usage player, Sherif Gross-Bullock, puts up more than 8 threes a game at only 30%, and he only converts 44% at the rim. And to top it off they are one of the worst offensive rebounding teams in the country.

They're a pretty good defensive team, ranking in the top 15 nationally in opposing field goal percentage. But they're below average in rebounding, forcing turnovers, and keeping opponents off the free throw line. They held FAU to only 0.72 points per possession, including just 9 for 27 at the rim and 5 for 30 from three. How did they hold a top 20 team to 33% at the rim? They also held Rutgers under 50% at the rim, so something is working. I'm guessing with their positionless size they double everything in the lane.

Withers is their tallest player but he mostly just shoots threes, similar to Howard's Seth Towns. Our bigs need to be aware of that. Timberlake does most of his damage at the rim, so I'd rather have a big on him instead.

On offense I think looking for the dump off pass might be important when attacking the rim. If we do that and attack the glass we should be able to score even if the outside shots aren't falling.

Click to expand...

sedziobs said:

Much of this game went as expected. Despite Withers and Timberlake clearly being Bryant's best players, three other guys who went a combined 6 for 26 exceeded them in usage. Gross-Bullock attempted 7 threes and made 29% and went just 1-5 at the rim. We killed them on the glass, as their philosophy seems to be chuck up a three before any offensive rebounders are even down the court, and getting out in transition rather than securing the defensive board.

They held us to just 41% at the rim, which was probably more like 30% in the first half. They aggressively doubled everything in the paint. Pretty impressive that they are able to consistently do that against good teams, but they don't have the size to rebound like Houston.

Execution of my scouting report was terrible in the first half. We had guards on Timberlake and bigs on Withers, and they took advantage. Timberlake went 6 for 8 at the rim and Withers hit several threes. We weren't doing anything to counter the double teams early, running our standard offense through Vik in the post. He really struggled, going just 2 for 7 at the rim with 4 turnovers. I don't blame Vik if the coaching staff didn't prepare him for the defense.

During the first half I suggested we switch to a 5 out offense, and thankfully we did that at the under 12 timeout in the second half.

Click to expand...

Lefty said:

Great comments- will have to review your take on the Xavier game.
So, with what you have said & what I felt about our game plan vs X,
are we not scouting our opponents well ? Seems like we’re not !?

Click to expand...

sedziobs said:

Davis is actually not very efficient from the floor, with only a 46% effective field goal percentage. He takes a lot of midrange shots and is only 31% from three. But he gets to the free throw line 8 times per game where he shoots 87%. That gives him a 55% true shooting percentage. So the strategy should be to play off of Davis and let him shoot, but don't foul him or let him get into the paint where he will convert at 56% or dish out a 31 assist rate.

Click to expand...

sedziobs said:

We're doing the opposite of what I suggested. We're playing tight on Davis beyond the three point line, inviting him to drive. He's drawing contact and finding open shooters.

Click to expand...

sedziobs said:

Davis just wants to drive all the time. We've got to stop going over the top of screens and falling for pump fakes. Just back off and keep him out of the lane.

Click to expand...

sedziobs said:

Defensively we I thought we had the wrong gameplan against Davis. We played him as if he is a shooter, but he only scored 9 points from the field on 10 shots. But he scored 12 at the free throw line and had 6 assists (and probably a lot of hockey assists).

Click to expand...