Can our turnaround this year be chalked up to one single area of improvement?

SpiderRico

SpiderRico

Well-Known Member
Last year, we gave up 37.6% from 3 point range....which ranked us 303 in the country (out of 351 teams).

This year, we have given up 31.5% from 3 point range.....which ranks us in the Top 50 (#49 out of 351 teams).

That's a huge turnaround. Given that the majority of the rest of our stats are relatively in line with last year's, I think it's safe to say that this one area of improvement probably has more to do with our turnaround from last year than any other.
 


Last year I talked ad naseum about playing big when everyone else was playing small. Fran had constructed a roster full of bigs and tried to play a few of them out of position. It didn’t work. When you have 4s playing the 3 and 5s playing the 4 you are susceptible to getting beat off the dribble. When you get beat you create a scramble situation that often ends in a wide open three for the opponent.

Fast forward to this year, Wagner transfers, Nunge agrees to redshirt, and Pemsl gets hurt. The rotation has been cleared up be becuse of that and guys are playing more in their natural spots. Baer has even been able to get more minutes at the 4. We have more footspeed on the court to recover when we get beat and contest three point shots. Wieskamp, Baer, Moss, and Dailey are all athletic enough wings to challenge shots. McCaffery has size and moves well.

So structurally our roster is set up to have a better chance to defend the three point shot, but it’s also worth noting that these guys have committed to playing harder on defense. Even so, they are still well below average as a defensive unit, due to some of their other shortcomings.
 


I would say the main difference is they got off to a good start and didn't give up on the season after their non conference tournament. They learned from last year that they cant just outscore everyone while giving up wide open layups and dunks.

The second reason is Wieskamp. Seems like since his back issues started, the team has struggled.
 


It's defense in general - when you make this kind of leap in #'s you're going to have a lot of drastic change. Iowa is now not great on D, but average to bad instead of horrible and historically bad. They are capable of playing good D in spurts. Even great defensive teams don't play great D ALL the time. More time then not good D teams play it more often, but everyone can be beaten.

From Ken Pom

..........Ranking..........
Last Year.....This Year
...242...............111..........Defensive Efficiency
...326...............179..........% Defensive Possessions Resulting in a TO
...307.................61..........Opponent 3 point percentage
 
Last edited:


We are making the critical plays that win close games. On both sides of the floor. You do that six or seven times of ten vs three times out of ten, everything else being relatively equal, and you are in the top half of your conference, in the top 25, and on track for a seed better than seven or eight.

It's a simple formula that has worked for every good coach that's come through this league formthe last forty plus years. Now we need to show some clutch play in the conference tournament and a five seed (or better) is a virtual certainty.
 


Northside Hawk said:
We are making the critical plays that win close games. On both sides of the floor. You do that six or seven times of ten vs three times out of ten, everything else being relatively equal, and you are in the top half of your conference, in the top 25, and on track for a seed better than seven or eight.

It's a simple formula that has worked for every good coach that's come through this league formthe last forty plus years. Now we need to show some clutch play in the conference tournament and a five seed (or better) is a virtual certainty.
Click to expand...

I was going to mention this until I remembered we weren't in very many close games last year. That and we haven't had issues with close games since Gesell's class graduated.
 


PCHawk said:
I would say the main difference is they got off to a good start and didn't give up on the season after their non conference tournament. They learned from last year that they cant just outscore everyone while giving up wide open layups and dunks.

The second reason is Wieskamp. Seems like since his back issues started, the team has struggled.
Click to expand...

The thing is, we're still giving up wide open layups and dunks....teams are shooting 52.8% from 2 point range, which is almost the exact same % as last year.

What's changed is we aren't giving teams the wide open 3's like last year. And that results in a decrease in eFG% of nearly 10%.....that's huge!
 


Sub 100 is still pretty bad for a P6 team, but given where we came from it’s admirable.

I’m hoping we can take another step forward next year. Nunge I think could be more of a rim protector than we currently have, and Joe T might provide more perimeter man to man than we currently have.
 


PCHawk said:
I was going to mention this until I remembered we weren't in very many close games last year. That and we haven't had issues with close games since Gesell's class graduated.
Click to expand...
Duly noted. We got whipped early and often in games last year.
 


SpiderRico said:
The thing is, we're still giving up wide open layups and dunks....teams are shooting 52.8% from 2 point range, which is almost the exact same % as last year.

What's changed is we aren't giving teams the wide open 3's like last year. And that results in a decrease in eFG% of nearly 10%.....that's huge!
Click to expand...

It sure seams to me we are giving them up less often this year. Maybe it's a "time heals all wounds" thing tho.
 


SpiderRico said:
The thing is, we're still giving up wide open layups and dunks....teams are shooting 52.8% from 2 point range, which is almost the exact same % as last year.

What's changed is we aren't giving teams the wide open 3's like last year. And that results in a decrease in eFG% of nearly 10%.....that's huge!
Click to expand...
I recently brought up how vicious cycles work in basketball. Fewer made baskets for opposition = more tansition opportunities against a defense in transition = more made baskets = more chances to get your defense set against a team that has to inbound the ball = less of a chance for the other team to make baskets. Turn the vicious cycle. More made baskets for the opposition spins the reverse vicious cycle. Getting offensive rebounds, and preventing the opposition from doing likewise, turns another vicious cycle. Rinse and repeat.
 


SpiderRico said:
The thing is, we're still giving up wide open layups and dunks....teams are shooting 52.8% from 2 point range, which is almost the exact same % as last year.

What's changed is we aren't giving teams the wide open 3's like last year. And that results in a decrease in eFG% of nearly 10%.....that's huge!
Click to expand...
Good find(s). I think there are two obvious reasons for this:

1. Zone defense

2. Effort — hustle
 


DDThompson said:
Good find(s). I think there are two obvious reasons for this:

1. Zone defense

2. Effort — hustle
Click to expand...

The "zone defense", though, was god awful last year. Teams would just stick a big at the top of the key and screen the top guy in the 3-2 and there'd be no help or rotation....it's like they thought a zone was just about standing around and waving your hands if the ball came to your area.

The one thing I've noticed is that we are rotating so much better in our zone at the 3 point line....especially in the short corner where we also used to just get murdered. We're also doing so much better sliding the guard down to the post on ball side to take away the easy dump down that used to come.

So yes, the commitment to zone for an, at best, average team athletically is good....but the fact we're playing it so much better has been the difference....
 


SpiderRico said:
Last year, we gave up 37.6% from 3 point range....which ranked us 303 in the country (out of 351 teams).

This year, we have given up 31.5% from 3 point range.....which ranks us in the Top 50 (#49 out of 351 teams).

That's a huge turnaround. Given that the majority of the rest of our stats are relatively in line with last year's, I think it's safe to say that this one area of improvement probably has more to do with our turnaround from last year than any other.
Click to expand...
The math in your data is SPOT ON!
When you look at our average point-margin of victory vs what 6% fewer made 3-balls equates to, you're right on that our improved perimeter D has gotta be the main reason for us being at 21 wins so far.
The subjective part of it is what I'm interested in hearing everyone's thoughts on...
Winning, just like losing is contagious. Experience matters.
Every person on the floor and on the bench believing that despite being down with the clock winding down, "We can still pull this win out"!!
That stuff matters and it can't be measured numerically.
Winning teams believe in themselves, their teammates and their coaches.
This Iowa team has learned how to win, learned how to never give up. If they play like they're capable of and they catch a break or two, I truly believe they can make the Sweet 16 next month!
 




Two players.

1) Wieskamp - Guy is just a baller wiht a great shot and pretty good defense that was badly needed. Also don't lose a thing with the half court press with him in there. Plays like a junior.
2) Connor - As much as I hate saying or seeing him get as many minutes as he does, often times at the expense of Isiah Moss's minutes, I do think it takes pressure off Jo Bo to both take care of the ball and to look to score. He can not play off guard quite a bit.
 


It's mainly on the defensive end, but we also seem to be a lot better at feeding the post this year.
 


SpiderRico said:
The "zone defense", though, was god awful last year. Teams would just stick a big at the top of the key and screen the top guy in the 3-2 and there'd be no help or rotation....it's like they thought a zone was just about standing around and waving your hands if the ball came to your area.

The one thing I've noticed is that we are rotating so much better in our zone at the 3 point line....especially in the short corner where we also used to just get murdered. We're also doing so much better sliding the guard down to the post on ball side to take away the easy dump down that used to come.

So yes, the commitment to zone for an, at best, average team athletically is good....but the fact we're playing it so much better has been the difference....
Click to expand...
True points all.

My point is that the zone defense this season is not a gimmick like last season.

There’s heart to it.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.


Latest posts

Share this page






Top