TJ: I love reading your posts; many are probably over my head as your analysis is often quite detailed. But I must disagree with your statement that are defense is stronger inside the arc. I hate the drop coverage played by Edey and others ALL THE TIME. Yes it keeps Edey out of foul trouble some, but at the expense of easy buckets. Edey has averaged 1.9 fouls per game to date. I would like to see him come out on that high pick and roll, especially at the end of games when we really need a stop, and he has 1 or 2 fouls. Furst is great at doubling that high ball screen; would like to see him even see him stay with it a second or two longer at times. And when Edey is dropping like that and retreating, it doesn't long like any man to man defense I have seen. Just my 2 cents. Thanks for posting. Keep them coming.
Thank you, I appreciate the kind words. I do end up with a bit more verbiage in trying to support my thoughts. First, I do not know which you reference, but believe I may not have been clear in what I typed. That said, I'm going to go off of what you wrote and see if I can express myself a bit clearer and if you still disagree...no problem as I'm sure I am not correct in all I write for all situations.
I'm guessing that my typing was how Matt and many other coaches view defense in general relative to the arc.
Matt likes to have his D defending the area where most baskets are made and so we do NOT see presses and traps extended all over the court (Gene and Knight two influences to Matt did the same thing). Rather than trying to get turnovers, Matt would rather protect the basket more.
Some coaches compromise that and try to do both and others are just opposite of Matt. I believe this is the area that may not have been as clear when I threw out inside the arc and outside the arc.
I should have stated more accurately that Matt doesn't extend his D out where baskets are less likely to be made whereas the reference, and a poor one by me, was using the arc instead.
Matt holds a position as do some other coaches that protecting the rim and defending the 3 ball are more important than long 2s with the idea that long 2s are less efficient. With that approach the in-between game is a spot that certain players can exploit very effectively since that area is NOT defended well. Braden does this well this year. With that ,depending on the players involved AND time and score Matt may play more of a drop as you say. FWIW, I do think Zach can challenge "MORE" in drop than he does and not pick up fouls. When Zach is in the drop he is essentially playing a one man zone and still becoming a bit of an obstacle at the rim and play across the lane. What happens some is that Zach is very vulnerable to a bounce pass inside the lane, much more than a lob. This is an attempt to work with Zach's height knowing his speed although better this year, is not Caleb speed as you stated.
I do think Zach can be more active in drop and challenge a bit more. There are times that Zach helping defend the high ball screen, but that is a function of the 5 man he is defending primarily . At the end of the game...especially where a single basket can make a difference you HAVE to defend out farther on EVERYONE and no doubt Matt will use Caleb "IF" he has a timeout to get Zach back in on offense.
Again depending on the players Caleb could hedge longer and drive the ball handler out farther. If that were to happen and the original player was a threat to shoot ...Caleb can't leave him for fear of that shot. While that happens their 5 man dives to the basket and is left with the original guard (Braden, maybe Lance) now picking up the 5 man down low with quite a disadvantage in height.
Anytime a team switches or gets in a position where it has to switch, the offense NOW has players the opposing coaches didn't want in that scenario. Ideally you never switch and have the people you want on the people you want, but switching is to keep quick coverage and to try to contain the drive. Ideally Zach never requires a player to double with him or dig at the ball on the 5 man that Zach is defending and thereby keeping a defender on ALL opposition players without increasing rotation problems. This is why you see teams trying to go to position less players where they can pressure and switch without issue, but you also lose the offense of Zach a dominant offensive player down low, but not able to defend as well in space. A match up zone attempts to put people into areas tehy can defend the best...just as switching does. Both have advantages and both have disadvantages since a Match-up is basically man. It is much more common than most realize for a coach to NOT defend all five players whether high school or college. Matt started doing the one man zone with AJ and particularly against IU when they had Yogi. Not long after Crean tried showing zone and going man as the shot clock was winding down and so that isn't new either.
What you actually wrote I find a LOT of agreement under the right scenario and hope I cleared out my poor use of the arc in trying to say Matt wanting to protect the basket rather than extend the D all over the court.
