i watched parts of a few more games. usu is quite a bit better than i gave them credit for after my first look. but still, nothing near their kenpom/ap/etc numbers. 'grats to the committee for seeing through those sham metrics.
defensively, their 3-2 zone is pretty shitty. it looks good when they pack it in against teams with poor shooters, but when they spread out to try and contest against st. mary's, there were holes big enough to drive, or pass, a truck through. their wings don't recover that fast either. nmsu dropped a shooter down into the corner, and they never got to him. he had like 5-6 open looks in about a 10 minute span. i can't imagine they'll play much zone against ksu, but if they do, expect to pick shreds of it off the court.
their man is a lot better. they pack it in, help near the basket and are very physical. depending on how the game is called they could get in huge foul trouble, or kstate could build a wall of offensive inefficiency trying to drive into the middle of their help. individually, they're nothing special, including the wings that usufans like to talk up. newbold tries, which is important, and he's very persistent and aware off the ball. but meh. green is pretty bad. anyone except southwell should be able to take advantage of him if they try.
on ball screens, they did some of everything, switch, double, hard hedge, soft hedge, underneath, over the top. so who knows what they'll do against pullen. but pullen is really good at the ball screens. no matter what they do (other than double), i think he'll be better at attacking it than they are at defending it.
a lot has been made about their defensive rebounding. they're good, but a lot is a function of how packed in their defense is. if they have to spread out against kstate, as i would expect, there should be oboarding opportunities.
they don't appear as good offensively as defensively. the usufans talk up their scheme and execution, but the vids don't totally match their description. they screen away from the ball a lot, and are very physical, but they aren't out there running the clock to 2 and getting a good shot. when they scored effectively, it was usually off a bball move pretty early in the clock. when they had to go late in the clock, they were generally struggling. and even token pressure would slow them down to where they wouldn't even look at the basket till 25-20 on the shot clock. they also turn the ball over pretty easily. you can get beat up trying to defend them, but other than that, they don't appear particularly hard to guard.
wesley seems a little overrated in the post. but was really good on the drive or facing up from about 12-14 away. doesn't like to shoot, but will drive under control, even in a fairly crowded court. i still think you want to deny him, but his ability to score when he gets the ball that far out makes that harder. just have to good help when he moves to the basket.
their wings, again meh. they can hit an open shot, but that's about it. green is better than you'd think on the drive. pane is pullen if pullen couldn't shoot and was a little bit worse at everything pullen and pane both do. white samuels is exactly like samuels.
actually the guy that really impressed me was bendall. when they are struggling offensively, he seems like the guy that bails them out. good shooter, always seems to come open if someone else is doubled, can even put the ball on the floor a little (against other bigs). they also seem to run smoother when he's on the floor, regardless of whether he's with jardine or with wesley.
overall, i can imagine a lot of scenarios where kstate struggles to score (missing jump shots, turnovers trying to force the ball to the bigs or to cutters when they're packed in, trying to drive into their help, etc*). but other than via an outlandish ftrate, it's hard to imagine usu scoring efficiently against kstate's defense. their bigs are pretty solid, but their guards are markedly inferior to kstate's. nebraska is probably a pretty decent style comparison, but sadler wouldn't recognize the quality of bball they play. they're maybe somewhere near isu or ou. maybe not quite that good.
* - thanks to anyone who actually read this whole Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) essay. 76-61 cats, 8 point lead at the half, but feels like it should be 15. 15% chance of losing.
