Perimeter defenders spend more time guarding the opponent in non scoring positions then they should. As a result they get beat off the dribble more than they should and now with the new rules they get called for bad fouls more than they should. If the guy can't make it from 30' don't guard him out there.
Ball pressure continuing to hurt Purdue
- Thread starter hamcoboiler
- Start date
I'm not watching the game, but I can imagine what you are seeing. MP likes to have his guards disrupt the opponent's offense, not just defend man-to-man. Pressure your man and don't let him make a good pass. But if it isn't working because your man is driving by you to score, then I agree... fix it.
THIS is what drove me crazy when VCU torched that ball-pressure style D in the 2011 NCAA game. They basically held a clinic on how to break down and beat Purdue/Painter's extended ball-pressure man-to-man defense. I agree, if they keep getting beat off the dribble, they need to back off and pick them up just outside the 3PT line instead.
I think that this team would have handled VCU's ball screens fine by switching them.
And we are much better at defending the paint than we were then. That team wasn't that big. Johnson was tall, but was rail thin.
I know another aspect not mentioned in that 2011 VCU game is that they shot very well from 3PT range, but the ball pressure (or full-court pickup) man still is an issue if the opposing team continually beats it with the dribble and does things such as use high-ball screens to knock those perimeter defenders out of the play. I remember Joey Rodriguez and company just driving full-throttle and VCU rubbing our defenders out of the plays with those screens. At any rate, we can't afford CMP to be stubborn when the situation calls for an adjustment or tweak.
Isn't that what pretty much IU and Illinois tried to do twice last season? I think that Painter has adjusted the defense significantly since 2011.
Actually, I think Purdue has backed off the pressure some in the last two years. Purdue is NOT quick on the perimeter and I expect as teams are better scouted more refinement in defending certain players. FWIW, I noticed what I'm guessing (haven't seen any stats and hope they were not distorted the last couple of minutes) that Purdue had 50% less fouls tonight than against Vermont. Part of that is different refs. Only the PG picks up very far out.
Although the score was bad, this team left Purdue with some film to review. Word, had a lot of open looks and missed them...others might not? Word ran a 1-4 high offense (ft line extended) that is made for back doors and quickness driving the ball...things that Purdue will need to face as I expect good teams if personnel allows to drive the ball on the 4's and 5's. Sometimes Word had all 5 players out on the 3 line, but most it was 4 out and 1 in running the baseline with quick posts. I think this game leaves some good film for Matt to work on down the road...as IU will hit them as well as any other perimeter shooting team
I'll add that Purdue also had 22 TO's. You cut that in half and you potentially have a difference of 20-30 more points in the scoreboard. If that was the case, I don't think we would be complaining too much about a potential 110-40 thrashing. As some have said, there are some good aspects that the staff can use in this film to dissect and improve the team which is what was really needed. On to the ODU this weekend.
I'm not sure that any of those turnovers were forced through good D. Actually, with those turnovers Purdue could have easily went for 110 since they had 70+ with about 10 minutes to go. It just appeared to me that some were not tuned in as much as before. Vince got off to a great start...something he usually is slow to do and Isaac...who was that guy? A little quicker all around and knocking down the FT's which could also be huge for this team. Still, as you say that is a lot of turnovers!
Turnovers stood out the most to me. 22 is entirely too many and a lot came from sloppy play it seemed like.
