There are two kings, but where are the princes?
Duke and North Carolina are the high royalty of ACC basketball, the dominant forces that have won two titles each in the last decade and reside comfortably in this year's Top 10. At the moment, their control of the conference is unchallenged. The bona fides:
- One of the two schools has held at least a share of the ACC regular season title for the past eight seasons, and 13 of the last 15.
- They've won the past seven ACC conference tournament titles, and 14 of the last 15. (Interestingly enough, they faced each other in just four of those 14 title games. It's almost like the schools have a gentleman's agreement to bow out gracefully when it's the other's turn to win.)
Every year, pundits and fans wonder if a third team will emerge to challenge the duopoly, and every year the hope gets a bit weaker. But there was a time when hope wasn't necessary.
In 2001, Juan Dixon's Maryland team jumped out to a 22-point lead on Duke in the Final Four. Shane Battier led the Blue Devils to one of the largest comebacks in NCAA tournament history, and Duke would go on to win the title. But the Terrapins had established something, and they capitalized on the promise the following season by winning the ACC regular season title and the national championship. As of 2002, there was a legitimate third team in the ACC.
Then something happened to Maryland coach Gary Williams. He never lost his combustible sideline demeanor, but he did seem to lose his taste for the rigors of recruiting. Almost overnight, the Terrapins dropped off the map. And as they fell, so too did the idea of a third ACC powerhouse. The NCAA tournament record of the “others” since then is a narrative of diminishing returns, and there are precious few signs of a revival. At the moment, the hope of a third team in the ACC race is roughly as strong as the hope of a third party in the U.S. presidential race.
Here are the best results of ACC teams since 2002, Duke and Carolina excluded:
2003: Maryland loses in the Sweet 16
2004: Wake Forest loses in the Sweet 16 and Georgia Tech wins five nail-biters in a row to make the championship game in what I'm not afraid to call a total fluke.
2005: NC State loses the Sweet 16.
2006: Boston College loses in the Sweet 16.
2007: No team makes the Sweet 16.
2008: No team makes the Sweet 16.
2009: No team makes the Sweet 16.
2010: No team makes the Sweet 16.
2011: Florida State loses in the Sweet 16.
If you're looking for a conclusive statistic, it's this: in the past five seasons, only one ACC team other than Duke or North Carolina has made the Sweet 16.
That team, the Florida State Seminoles, looked as though they might be establishing themselves as a potential challenger to the throne. Leonard Hamilton has slowly built his program, and last season they had the country's best defense. They beat Duke in Tallahassee, and would have done the same to North Carolina if not for a last-second 3 by Harrison Barnes. In the tournament, they lost in the Sweet 16 to VCU, an eventual Final Four team.
But this year, the Seminoles haven't looked as strong. They're just 8-5 after navigating the “easy” part of the schedule, and though they still boast the 5th-best defense in the country, the offense, without Chris Singleton, has been mostly embarrassing. For the moment, at least, we can shove Florida State to the side.
Instead, the team that's emerged as the potential party-crasher is the surprising Virginia Cavaliers. Ranked 21st in the AP poll and 23rd in the ESPN/USA Today Coaches Poll, Tony Bennett's club is 13-1 heading into conference play. And until the problem of a third great team is solved by importing Syracuse from the Big East in 2013, the Cavaliers might be the last best hope.
If you're like me, your first instinct when seeing Tony Bennett's name is to make a bad joke about the singer. Believe me, I've made my share. Mostly alone, in front of the mirror, just before crying, because hey, we all have our ghosts. But Bennett is more than just an easy punch line. Did you know he's the career leader in NCAA 3-point shooting percentage? It's true; he compiled the insane 49.7 rate -- the closest any eligible player has ever come to the mythical 50 percent -- while playing for his dad at Wisconsin-Green Bay. He even won the Frances Pomeroy Naismith Award, which is given annually to the best player under 6 feet tall. Seriously.
He started coaching with his dad at Wisconsin, stayed for the beginning of the Bo Ryan era, then moved to Washington State as an assistant in 2003. He became the head coach in 2006, and won basically every national coach of the year award in his first season. He moved to Virginia in 2009, and today, at age 42, the baby-faced Bennett in his third season with the Cavaliers. He took over a team that went 10-18 in 2008-09, and quickly began a turnaround. After last night's win over LSU, he has his best chance yet to make the NCAA tournament and contend for the top of the ACC table.
The Cavaliers are led by Mike Scott, the 6-foot-8 senior forward, and Joe Harris, a 6-foot-6 sophomore guard and Bennett's best recruit to date. But where the team really excels is defense. Per Ken Pomeroy, they're the 14th-most efficient defense in the country, and top 10 in defending the three and preventing offensive boards. They've won games by scores like 49-35 (Drexel) and suffered their only loss, to TCU, by a similar count of 57-55. Like Wisconsin, they play an absurdly slow tempo, averaging just 61.7 possessions per game. It's no coincidence that Bennett adheres to this style after serving under Ryan at Wisconsin; he's a protege of the slow-down guru.
Monday night's win followed formula. LSU, a team that averages almost 68 possessions per game, was held to 60. As you can see from the four factors chart from our friends at Statsheet, defense was the name of the game:
(The image wouldn't load but the rough stats of it were: FG%- UVA: 52%, LSU: 48%; Ball Handling TO%: UVA: 25%, LSU: 27%; Off. Rebounding %- UVA: 32%, LSU: 21%; FT Rate- UVA: 27, LSU: 9)
The shooting percentage and turnover rates are roughly a draw, but where Virginia really excelled was on the boards. The Cavaliers allowed LSU to grab an offensive rebound just 20.6 percent of the time, and, despite an aggressive man-to-man, rarely let the Tigers get to the line. The first stat is even more remarkable considering LSU is the 11th-tallest team in the country, and averages a 36.2 offensive rebound rate.
How do they do it? The Cavaliers aren't small, but they're not huge, either. Assane Sene, a senior, is a 7-foot giant, but he only plays about half the game. After that, Scott is the only player over 6-foot-6 who averages even 20 minutes of playing time. Let's take a look at a typical possession from last night to see how Virginia functions on defense.
Then the article goes on to discuss how we execute our extremely high hedges. Grantland uses some nice screen shot info that is definitely worth checking out, but basically it boils down to a couple of key principles.
-Ball awareness: The article talks a lot about how all 5 defenders are extremely aware of where the ball is, not just focusing in on their man. This is extremely important for the off ball help defenders. Without them, there is no way we could possibly execute such a high hedge. If our help defenders don't react to the hedge, and instead stick too closely to their men, then the pick & roll will work 99% of the time.
-Committing to the high hedge: Hedging a ball screen is often the most difficult thing for a big man to do. It's a high risk play, as he is leaving his man for a much quicker guard, so there is a great chance for a foul call. It's hard to teach bigs to really go out and stop the guard instead of merely slowing him down. Watching guys like Assane and Mike get so high on their hedges tells me that this is a thing Tony has beaten into their heads. They must spend hours making sure the post players stop the guard, instead of just slowing him. This breaks up the rhythm of the screen and makes in easier for our guard to get back on his man, instead of playing catch up.
The way we guard ball screens really sets us apart from other good defenses. If we execute our ball screen defense as we intend to, it really leaves no options for the offense and the screen was essentially a waste of time. It's really not something you can look at film and say, "Hey, that's where they're vulnerable". A lot of fans who don't know a ton about the game and our defense complain about how wide open the big man is rolling after setting a ball screen. While it seems that way, that is not the case. This is where our help defense comes into play. We essentially bait them to throw that pass by having our help anticipate it, staying between his man and the rolling screener. If he were really open, we would've gotten burned on it already. We haven't. The defense works.
No comments:
Post a Comment