5 seconds (or less) left, You are up 2, other team has to go full court....

[Powercat Posse]

What type of defense do you play in this situation?    For the topic, i said up 2 points because if you are up 3, you should always try and foul. 

 First off, i think the team that is ahead should call timeout and set up their defense. I feel you use a zone press, pick up at 3/4 court and use a 1-2-2 look.  Here is why.  I have seen a handful of times this year where teams play man to man, the offense runs a bunch of screens and they end up catching the ball around halfcourt.   That is too easy.

Isu let Texas burn all of 1.0 seconds to advance the ball past halfcourt and call a timeout. Too easy.   Michigan was trying to foul Wiscy this past weekend, but couldnt.  The Wisky player caught the ball about 4 feet from midcourt.   Now his 40 foot prayer was a lot of luck, but you cant let him catch the ball at midcourt on the run. 

Play a 1-2-2 where you pick up at 3/4 court.    The point on the press should play about 13-15 feet  in front of halfcourt.  The middle 2 should play about 5 feet in front of halfcourt.   The back 2 should be about halfway between the top of the key and halfcourt.   This would force the offense to throw the ball in and catch it a good 15-20 feet from halfcourt.   

The 3 guys in the front of the press just need to make it difficult for the ball to be dribbled or passed up the floor.   Against OU, Kstate almost did this by accident.   After the ball was thrown into Osby, Shane stayed close to halfcourt, as did Nino (who was guarding the in bounds guy). Now Angel was denying Grooms, but the point is we made it very difficult to get the ball across halfcourt, and OU got off an off-balance 30 footer.

I also said call timeout to set the defense up.  Earlier this season, St Marys gave up a hoop and was down 2 with a couple of seconds left.  Other team did not call timeout. I saw Dallavedova catch the in-bounds pass, it took only one dribble to get past halfcourt and he got off a 30 footer to win the game.  Now it was a tough shot, but no way should he have been 30 feet from the goal.   Vandy also failed to call timeout with under 5 seconds left and Marshall Henderson got a clean look at a 30 footer.   And he drilled it. 

Anyway.  That is my thoughts.   I am sure there can be arguments for playing man, but i just dont like it.

[MakeItRain]

I'd make the argument that defense is too easy for someone to get into the middle. If your lead guard/forward is skilled and or courageous enough to make a risky pass, this could easily turn into a 3 on 2 mini break. I'll defer to the statement I made in the kenpom thread. You spend your entire existence preparing to defend a certain way, I would be inclined to trust what I taught and not worry about a fluky outcome.

[kso_FAN]

Man defense, the guy guarding the inbounder plays center field near midcourt, switch every screen. Like they said last night, make them catch the ball going away from their basket.

BTW, UT's play to get the ball back to the inbounder for their tieing shot was really nice. Teams consistently lose the inbounder because they usually don't have someone guarding him on the inbound pass.

In the situation ISU was in there, especially with the ball at half court, I would use a 5 man zone around the 3 point arc. You don't need anyone in the lane, let them have a 2. With 5 guys around the perimeter you should easily be able to contest any 3PT attempt, even if they screen.

[sys]

imo, if you think you can deny a competent team the ability to advance the ball to within 30 feet and get off a contested shot w. 5 seconds, you're dreaming.

[michigancat]

Man to man

[_33]

_FAN nailed it. Play man to man, play behind/let them catch going away from the hoop, switch all screens.

[pissclams]

all 5 defenders lock arms at the mid court line to form a barrier.  shift from sideline to sideline, do not let anyone past them.  problem solved. coaching basketball is really pud.

[Cartierfor3]

BTW, UT's play to get the ball back to the inbounder for their tieing shot was really nice. Teams consistently lose the inbounder because they usually don't have someone guarding him on the inbound pass.

I recall us using a similar play at the end of this game: http://espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=250122306

[CNS]

all 5 defenders lock arms at the mid court line to form a barrier.  shift from sideline to sideline, do not let anyone past them.  problem solved. coaching basketball is really pud.

The Red Rover defense. 

[pissclams]

when i used to coach, we called that play "lockdown"  -it basically worked every single time.

[westcoast_emawer]

BTW, UT's play to get the ball back to the inbounder for their tieing shot was really nice. Teams consistently lose the inbounder because they usually don't have someone guarding him on the inbound pass.

ISU Could have still fouled the big that flashed to the elbow and passed it back to the in bounder. His back was to the basket and wasn't behind the 3 point line. It was almost like the ISU defender was worried about him going to the basketball. Bad bball IQ bad pre-play preperation.

My believe many teams are poorly coached because they do not practice late game situations daily in practice where they can go over "what if" situations like last night. Not a good coaching moment for the mayor.

And yes, I never post just watch this comedy everyday. Just thought I would chime in on this situation. Love the board! 

[MakeItRain]

BTW, UT's play to get the ball back to the inbounder for their tieing shot was really nice. Teams consistently lose the inbounder because they usually don't have someone guarding him on the inbound pass.

ISU Could have still fouled the big that flashed to the elbow and passed it back to the in bounder. His back was to the basket and wasn't behind the 3 point line. It was almost like the ISU defender was worried about him going to the basketball. Bad bball IQ bad pre-play preperation.

My believe many teams are poorly coached because they do not practice late game situations daily in practice where they can go over "what if" situations like last night. Not a good coaching moment for the mayor.

And yes, I never post just watch this comedy everyday. Just thought I would chime in on this situation. Love the board! 

He cut to the elbow and immediately made the pass back to the inbounder. He only had time to foul if he knew where the cutter was going and was quick enough to make the play.

Because everyone has played basketball on some level I don't think people give enough credit to the skill of these players and the plays they make. Way too much of "he should have done this" and "he should have done that."

[Powercat Posse]

_FAN nailed it. Play man to man, play behind/let them catch going away from the hoop, switch all screens.

Yes, this would work too and u think it would be a logical scheme. 

If u do play behind this defense, they can still run a guard from one side of the court to the other side, catching the ball on the run. Even if u switch on a screen, I think it could be easy to get across halfcourt very quickly.

The guy guarding the in bounds man, playing at halfcourt could be a key, since he is basicly playing a zone and can immediatly help on the person who recieved the ball. 


I said I liked the zone scheme but lining up in that 1-2-2 look, having the point in the zone pickup the ball carrier, and everyone else fall back and pickup a man.  One of the 2 guys at halfcourt could have responsibility for the in bounds man.

Whatever u play, I just think u have to make it as difficult as possible getting the ball across halfcourt. Guys catching the ball at halfcourt or taking one dribble and being across the midcourt stripe is just too easy.

[MakeItRain]

PP that would be fine if you didn't have a player who could apply adequate ball pressure to the guy bringing it up. IMO of course.

[westcoast_emawer]

He cut to the elbow and immediately made the pass back to the inbounder. He only had time to foul if he knew where the cutter was going and was quick enough to make the play.

Because everyone has played basketball on some level I don't think people give enough credit to the skill of these players and the plays they make. Way too much of "he should have done this" and "he should have done that."

Exactly my point. He wasn't prepared, didn't anticipate where his man would go. I mean, really was he worried about him getting behind him. Take the 2 points if you want. He should know his guy was going to have to go to the ball to retrieve a pass over 30 feet away. Dude got caught with his pants down and it cost his team.

[Powercat Posse]

FAN also mentioned if ur up 3 and the team has the ball  in the frontcourt, that playing a zone with 5 guys around the perimeter is an idea.  I kinda like that plan.

And on defense you have to have 5 guards/small forwards defending, yet I see teams have a big guy on the court when their team is up 3.  Stupid.

[MakeItRain]

He cut to the elbow and immediately made the pass back to the inbounder. He only had time to foul if he knew where the cutter was going and was quick enough to make the play.

Because everyone has played basketball on some level I don't think people give enough credit to the skill of these players and the plays they make. Way too much of "he should have done this" and "he should have done that."

Exactly my point. He wasn't prepared, didn't anticipate where his man would go. I mean, really was he worried about him getting behind him. Take the 2 points if you want. He should know his guy was going to have to go to the ball to retrieve a pass over 30 feet away. Dude got caught with his pants down and it cost his team.

wait, you're saying the defender should have known where the cutter was going to go?
wow, okay

[kso_FAN]

FAN also mentioned if ur up 3 and the team has the ball  in the frontcourt, that playing a zone with 5 guys around the perimeter is an idea.  I kinda like that plan.

And on defense you have to have 5 guards/small forwards defending, yet I see teams have a big guy on the court when their team is up 3.  Stupid.

True, but coaches have plans and probably use what they've practiced, thus they keep those guys in. It would seem you'd have a plan in place to get 5 smaller, quicker defenders on the floor for late game situations.

That's also probably why you don't see many coaches use a zone concept like you propose, because that would be the only time you'd use that type of zone. In most cases they go back to what they trust, and I'd guess for most that is some sort of man to man.

[Powercat Posse]

PP that would be fine if you didn't have a player who could apply adequate ball pressure to the guy bringing it up. IMO of course.

Im no expert on this type of game situation, so that's why i opened it up and enjoy hearing other thoughts on it.  There is probably a flaw in any type of defense you run.     My big thing is just dont let the other team throw a pass to halfcourt and let the guy catch it there. 
Grooms vs us down in Norman was trying to do us a favor IMO.  He tried to go catch the ball about 85 feet from the goal, but Angel was playing so close that the in bounds guy threw it to Osby instead.  It worked out great for us in the long run.

[MakeItRain]

PP that would be fine if you didn't have a player who could apply adequate ball pressure to the guy bringing it up. IMO of course.

Im no expert on this type of game situation, so that's why i opened it up and enjoy hearing other thoughts on it.  There is probably a flaw in any type of defense you run.     My big thing is just dont let the other team throw a pass to halfcourt and let the guy catch it there. 
Grooms vs us down in Norman was trying to do us a favor IMO.  He tried to go catch the ball about 85 feet from the goal, but Angel was playing so close that the in bounds guy threw it to Osby instead.  It worked out great for us in the long run.

Yeah, Angel should have let him catch and then picked up.

[westcoast_emawer]

He cut to the elbow and immediately made the pass back to the inbounder. He only had time to foul if he knew where the cutter was going and was quick enough to make the play.

Because everyone has played basketball on some level I don't think people give enough credit to the skill of these players and the plays they make. Way too much of "he should have done this" and "he should have done that."

Exactly my point. He wasn't prepared, didn't anticipate where his man would go. I mean, really was he worried about him getting behind him. Take the 2 points if you want. He should know his guy was going to have to go to the ball to retrieve a pass over 30 feet away. Dude got caught with his pants down and it cost his team.

wait, you're saying the defender should have known where the cutter was going to go?
wow, okay

Yeah. What, was the guy gonna run to the corner for 3? Someone was there, not going weak side of court for long pass. Also, I'm pretty sure that dude has never attempted a 3 in his life and last time I checked when your team is about to get a 5 count bigs usually flash to get the ball.

So yes only an LBBIQ player wouldn't be ready for that. Not one player from Duke would of let that guy get the ball or if he did at least attempt to foul.

[MakeItRain]

He could have cut to the top of the key or flared to the opposite FT line extended for a skip pass

[westcoast_emawer]

Yes he could. How is he going to get the ball 60 feet away from the goal?

Plus if they want to go to him why not let him catch that skip pass, he has no one to give the ball up to and he must shoot his first 3PA of the season. I think that is what you want to happen if your ISU have a Big shoot a clutch 3 to take a game to OT.

Always have to deny one pass away. Lack of discipline and awareness.

[Powercat Posse]

He cut to the elbow and immediately made the pass back to the inbounder. He only had time to foul if he knew where the cutter was going and was quick enough to make the play.

Because everyone has played basketball on some level I don't think people give enough credit to the skill of these players and the plays they make. Way too much of "he should have done this" and "he should have done that."

Exactly my point. He wasn't prepared, didn't anticipate where his man would go. I mean, really was he worried about him getting behind him. Take the 2 points if you want. He should know his guy was going to have to go to the ball to retrieve a pass over 30 feet away. Dude got caught with his pants down and it cost his team.

wait, you're saying the defender should have known where the cutter was going to go?
wow, okay

Yeah. What, was the guy gonna run to the corner for 3? Someone was there, not going weak side of court for long pass. Also, I'm pretty sure that dude has never attempted a 3 in his life and last time I checked when your team is about to get a 5 count bigs usually flash to get the ball.

So yes only an LBBIQ player wouldn't be ready for that. Not one player from Duke would of let that guy get the ball or if he did at least attempt to foul.

OK, maybe i am getting lost in this debate.... but Holmes was the one who caught the pass and threw it back to Papapetru.   

Earlier this year, Holmes hit a game tying 3 with under 3 seconds left vs Huggy to send the game into OT.

 

[westcoast_emawer]

Don't know the personnel on the floor just know it was a Texas big. I will say this, Holmes 3 vs West Virginia was not contested either like the one that guy hit last night.

Anyways, if Holmes was the guy then there is more reason for that idot from ISU to be denying him and anticipating him going out on the perimeter to catch the ball.  You have to deny one pass away if he flares to the weak side you have time to closeout and either contest or steal the skip pass.