Question for more knowledgeable B-Ball watchers about our Offense
Unlike in football, I do not follow the more technical details of how teams play offense and defense in basketball. So I've come across a lot of talk about how "switching screens" has been giving our offense problems all year, and after last night's game, there has been much talk coming from Bellein and others about how we have to evolve our offense. One quote:
“The way the game is going, Gonzaga switched every screen,” Beilein said. “These guys switched every screen, it’s the way it’s going. Isolation basketball. We have to look a great deal on creating your own leverage.”
Can someone explain in laymen's terms what this means, why we have trouble with it, and why we have to evolve? It seems to me that we just didn't have a go to guy this year that could make three's or create his own shot, and if we had that, like in past year's, we'd be fine. Or am I wrong about that?
March 29th, 2019 at 11:56 AM ^
The point of a screen is to delay the defender of the man you're screening for. "Switching screens" just means that the defense switches guarding assignments, so the screener's defender now guards the ball, and the on-ball defender now guards the screener.
When you run a play with a screen, you're relying on that delay to create the opening needed to get the open shot somewhere. For example, on a pick and roll, one option is that the ballhandler now has an open lane to the rim because his defender got caught in the screen. If the defense switches, the screener's man now has the responsibility of cutting off the driving lane.
Switching defenders allows the defense to disrupt whatever the intent of the screen was, because it keeps an offensive man defended at all times. The obvious downside is the offense can use it to create mismatches, which is what Beilein is talking about needing to exploit. If your center screens for your PG and the defense switches, now the opposing PG is guarding your center and vice versa. The defense will obviously try and switch back at the first opportunity, so Beilein is saying the offense needs to attack the mismatch immediately. That means the play has broken down and the offense is in pickup-ball mode, and you need to be good at that to take advantage of the mismatches, instead of retreating and restarting the play.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:01 PM ^
Better said (and in fewer words) than my post.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:08 PM ^
Great explanation. One point to add- not just the opposing PG guarding a C, but vise versa, so a guard should *theoretically* have the speed and individual handling to a) blow by for a shot at the rim which can be rebounded by your leveraged C, b) jab step and create enough separation for a clean look for himself, c) already have enough space from the C not wanting a or b on his face so he can pull up from range (Simpson did this multiple times this year and was effective), d) a combination of the previous options meant to draw help from another defender and create an open shot for someone else.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:19 PM ^
This is a good explanation.
Switching screens eliminates the space a screen was meant to provide. So switching allows a defense to keep a defender on each of the offensive players at all times (essentially).
So if screens and schemes aren't creating space for the offense, guys need to create their own space one-on-one.
Players need to create their own leverage. Beilein can't as easily scheme leverage in the new era of switch everything "positionless" basketball. At some point guys need to make plays and Michigan didn't have a great playmaker this year. So they struggled against elite defenses that could switch everything. A lot of teams do though.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:26 PM ^
Very good summary. Now. A significant issue both offensively and defensively is that, for the most part, it's a copycat world. I am beyond disappointed at the lack of options that are employed...across the college basketball world...especially with a shot clock in play. The only difference in the outcome of a game today is who has the best shooting night from three and how many "Zions" you have on your team.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:37 PM ^
Very well said, and I’m sure JB (great coach by the way) tried to correct some of this in practice I’m sure, but couldn’t, the best way to correct it is actually easy? Well easy if you can recruit better athletes to create their own shots! Which Michigan lacks, but that being said 30 wins not to bad it’s just that JB has raised the bar and I can’t thank him enough for what he has done for Michigan!
The problem with the center exploiting the guard switch is you really need an athletic center who can finish at the hoop. TT was able to play help defense and keep Michigan from having Teske go off. The few times M did exploit this matchup from the switch, they just followed Teske and he missed the free throws. A center that can’t shoot or isn’t a threat from outside is a major issue in Beilein’s offense. Not having another true three point threat that was consistent like Robinson last year means teams can sag in and not respect the three. Result, bad offense as we saw all year.
This is why I agree with Beilein's comments about needing to look at it schematically. The player's (and team's) skill sets will vary slightly from year to year so this isn't just about having better shooters at x,y,z position. It helps, but does not address the core issue. The type of spacing Beilein typically uses allows the defense to clog driving lanes because they don't get stuck on one side of the floor and often times are not forced to defend with their head turned from the action. Beilein typically runs action with three people on one half and the other two are equally spaced. This allows three defenders to guard with everything in front of them. It also allows the off defenders to be able to cheat to the play side as a back up if any of the three defenders gets beat or caught out of position. This is why teams were able to prevent Teske from truly taking advantage of the switching. There was always two defenders in the area.
In addition to the spacing issue, it also did not help that Simpson, Matthews, Iggy and Teske are all spot up shooters from deep. Only Poole could shoot off the dribble from deep (sometimes). There is a split second on a switch defense on a screen where you can get a good open shot, but you have to be able to pull up off the dribble. Not a strength of this year's personnel. That you have to live with, you can't always recruit the perfect players for each position.
I think Beilein's basic sets still work very well. He just needs to add additional cutting and screening action from the two off play players he typically uses to draw defenders away to fully take those defenders away and not let them cheat.
March 30th, 2019 at 12:30 AM ^
You’re right, but I think Simpson’s weakness as even a spot up shooter from deep is a bigger part of the problem. He struggles to get the ball to the 5 on the mismatch because his defender is able to play so far off him. If the ball doesn’t get there relatively quickly then it’s too easy for one of the two off defenders you mention to help.
Still, I’d think they ought to get the ball down there, even if it takes a bit of time, and force the help to come. I think Teske is a decent passer/decision maker, so give him a chance to make the right pass. I’m not sure he’s ever going to be a dominant post scorer, but I could see him becoming effective at punishing teams for sending help.
That means the play has broken down and the offense is in pickup-ball mode -
Bingo. This attitude seemed to be missing from Michigan's game yesterday. They kept trying to execute what they practiced even when the situation demanded something different.
See my post above, I don't think Michigan needs to suddenly implement street ball into their sets. They need to add additional action from all 5 players to open the lanes for driving and passing. Beilein will forever favor structure as an advantage.
When we had Walton and opponents switched screens he would just shoot (and usually make) a 3 over the sagging center, and if the center didn't sag he could go right by him. X can't make 3's so the opposing center can just sag and now X can't do anything but jack up a <1 ppp 3. Furthermore we're bad at post entries and Teske is bad at posting (because we never practice it because post offense is the least efficient offense there is....except when the guy guarding your center is 6') so there's no mismatch on the other side of the switch. What we should have done is run more pick and roll with Poole as he's our best option for an off the dribble 3 and taking a guy off the dribble to the basket...though he too often just took a stepback 3 instead. Also if we do that then whoever is guarding X could sag and play help defense.
Teams last year used screen switching to isolate Duncan Robinson on defense and take him off the dribble and it'd be hard to play him against teams that did that.
In the NBA a few years ago in the playoffs the Cavs did this to the Celtics to get Kyrie vs Isaiah and Isaiah had to sit a lot at the end of games or else be torched repeatedly by Kyrie.
March 29th, 2019 at 11:58 AM ^
That's why we need a big guy who can throw down inside when he has a munchkin on him. Teske is not a quick enough jumper to beat the help defense. He's weak in there.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:44 PM ^
Teske falls down. A lot.
I think he has sufficient athleticism, especially given his huge size (7'1"). He's just pretty raw in terms of post skills and needs to improve at finishing through contact. He often shoots layups from a low position, like he's shot-putting. He's got to keep the ball high. I expect him to be improved at this next season.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:00 PM ^
It means Beilein has no idea how to attack teams that switch 1-5 on defense. If his answer is ISO ball instead of running off ball stuff and crashing the offensive boards on switches we're in deep shit going forward. The offense didn't really fit the players on the roster this year and that's why I said Beilein did a bad job X and O's wise. If you aren't going to punish teams in the post for switching everything and you have no perimeter shooters than what can you do, oh wait we saw that last night.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:02 PM ^
Nice try, Shawn/Maizen. But you still don't know what you're talking about here.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:12 PM ^
Running "off ball stuff" beats teams that switch everything? So when Teske screens for Zavier and we end up with a 5 guarding Z and a 1 guarding Teske, your master plan is to....have Iggy screen Poole?
Someone get this man a whistle and clip board ASAP.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:38 PM ^
The funny part about about this post is that when that scenario above you described happened Beilein refused to throw the ball down low into the post. It's why Izzo beat him three times this year. Should someone get Beilein a whistle and a clip board asap too? FOH.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:47 PM ^
Maybe because Teske, while much improved and a defensive force, wasn't really up for finishing those looks?
So you think Teske can't finish over Cassius Winston two feet from the basket?
Keep the excuses coming it's what UM fans do best.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:57 PM ^
Dude you don't know what you are talking about. We lost to State b/c of State's guards getting hot: (1) Winston broke his slump and could go and get tough buckets 1 on 1 late in the game, and (2) McPoyle being lights out from 3. Dumping the ball down to Ward or Tillman in the post had nothing to do with that. Frankly, had Izzo employed your strategy and dumped it down to Ward and Tillman more we probably would've won those games.
We lost those games for several reasons but we cannot ignore the fact that when MSU switched, we completely ignored getting Teske the ball with Winston on him (at least consistently ignored it). That also contributed to the loss.
I know its not a staple of the offense but the best teams add those wrinkles, especially when they have a week to prepare for the game. Say we run that play only 2 possessions per quarter, that's 8 opportunities for a 7'1 guy against a 6'0 PG. What are the likely outcomes, say 3 dunks/lay ups, 2 Fouls against Winston, the rest say are complete misses. We sure as hell could of used those 6+ points and 2 fouls against.
What do those 8 possessions also do? Winston picks up early fouls, heads to the bench. MSU was shit when Winston was out. Now it forces MSU to change, which then opens up our offense as well.
We ran a ton of pick and roll in the Jordan Morgan era and also to some extent with Donnal. The current team just wasn't good at it for whatever reason. Post entry passes were an adventure. Hopefully that changes.
This post is dripping in irony.
Yes, your post is
Beilein didn't refuse to throw it in the post, his players failed to successfully do so because its harder than it looks, and until recently it was not something that was worth spending practice time on so they were neither good at it nor conditioned to do so. And then you have Poole who would rather just take a stepback 3.
Old98-the type that comes here posting with their hair on fire with magical opinion fixes. Internet smart guy who claims our record breaking coach "has no idea how to attack teams that switch 1-5 on defense." Go ahead and jump in there to show them.
It’s nice to have you back Maizen. And this is why you’re a troll. We have a 30 win season with one of the most quad 1 wins in the nation and you are silent. Then you wait until we get knocked out in the sweet 16 before you complain on every thread. What a sad, pathetic piece of shit you are old98. How you are able to troll this board for years even after Beilein has proved that he is one of the best coaches in the nation is beyond me. Fuck right off with your shitty hot takes
March 29th, 2019 at 12:00 PM ^
You're close. Michigan has been using pick-and-roll / ball screen concepts for a long time now, dating back to the Darius Morris days. That concept uses a player, often a power forward or a center, to set a "pick" and obstruct the defender of the ball-handler. The ball-handler then either tries to drive to the basket with the extra space created or take a shot. While the ball-handler does this, the "pick man" can either "pop" to the 3-point line to be available for a shot (that's what Moe Wagner usually did) or "roll" to the basket to try to receive a pass for a layup.
Defenders can defend this by either going "over" or "under" the screens. If they go over, they try to chase the ball-handler above the pick man, but that often leaves them "behind" the ball-handler a little bit. The alternative is to go "under" the screen, ducking below as the ball-handler dribbles above. This gives the ball-handler some space to pass or shoot, but it leaves the defender in a better position to defend against a drive.
The alternative is switching. Instead of the defender chasing the ball-handler, the defense switches defensive responsibilities. The defender of the pick man acquires the ball-handler on the other side of the pick, and the defender of the ball-handler picks up the defender and follows him.
This results in mismatches. You have a short guard assigned to guard a center, and a tall (and often slower) big man defending a guard.
These mismatches are best exploited by isolation. A 7-foot center defended by a 6'5 guard? That's a matchup the center should be able to take advantage of to get a basket. A fast guard against a center? He should be able to blow by the center to the basket for an easy basket with no shot-blocker waiting for him.
Michigan did not have the personnel to do these things this year. Michigan had trouble getting post entries to Teske, and Teske does not have a good post game where he beats defenders isolated on him. Simpson would get switched onto bigs but be unable to attack the lane for baskets reliably. No one else on the team is particularly good at attacking the basket and winning one-on-one.
So we are very vulnerable to switching. Switch-and-iso isn't very attractive basketball, but it is effective with the right people and is used to considerable success by teams like the Houston Rockets. Remember, Houston is coached by a great offensive mind in Mike D'Antoni--he's not doing it because he doesn't know how to run good offense, he's doing it because it is really effective.
Excellent explanation. I guess what bothers me the most is that I have read several quotes that seem to indicate that John Beilein is surprised that some teams are switching all the time against us. Next season, having had an entire off season to prepare, how do you believe that John Beilein will attack a switching defense?
With enthusiasm unknown to mankind
I’m not as optimistic about switch and ISO with Michigan’s roster. You right that D’Antonio, when he’s not coaching football, uses it to great effect. But he has an all time great isolation player running his offense in Harden. I’m not sure Michigan has anybody in that mold on the roster. Poole is the closest thing, but I don’t think anyone wants to run an ISO offense through him. JB could have done this if he wanted to by running at 2-5 pick as the main action (like Houston often does with Harden), but he didn’t trust Poole in that role.
People are dumping on the guy suggesting off ball action, but screening for the screener could help flummox the relevant switch. You can try slipping the screen too, but this only works if the center is quick getting to the rim and the pg is quick getting rid of the ball (i.e. not for Michigan).
I’d rather see them speed up their offense against teams that switch everything. Switching can get confusing, especially when quicker players are slipping (or even just rolling hard) toward the basket. When this happens fast you can get teams to blow the switch and leave someone open. We play at a leisurely pace and it hurts us against switching defenses.
Good suggestion.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:33 PM ^
You are correct, Michigan has no body to create their own offense really this year consistently like a MAAR. I will also add a shooter to extend the defense like Duncan last year, and a big man like Mo who can get his own, and also hit the outside shot that Teske just can't consistently. This team was always going to struggle against athletic teams that switch like that. Because Simpson can't knock down the outside shot, other teams could switch with little to no risk, and the pick and pop that was so successful just wouldn't work with Teske.
Teske has improved a lot as well, but he struggles to score even on a smaller guy because his moves are slow and allows the defense to collapse and help. It is also not a big part of the offense to go inside, so you wouldn't get consistent production from Teske with his back to the basket even if he were better at it.
I don't think Beilein had a lot to work with offensively this year, which is not an excuse for him since he put this team together. It was pretty clear though after the first two Michigan State games that the auto switch would kill them, and because they couldn't ISO, there was no answer.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:40 PM ^
Livers had a better 3 point % this year than Duncan had last year. There were a lot of issues, but replacing Duncan was not one of them.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:48 PM ^
How many more shots did Robinson take last year than Livers this year?
Doesn't matter. Iggy also shot better than Robinson last year (40% to 38%).
The point is we had a floor spacing, good shooting player at the four, whether it was Iggy or Livers.
This guy is absolutely correct that losing Robinson wasn't really an issue.
Losing Wagner and MAAR, who both could somewhat reliably create efficient offense, and not having anyone step up as a creator was an issue.
Robinson took far more threes than Livers did this year and he definitely was a part of opposing teams' defensive gameplans - that was a big talking point here last year and the year before, how once Robinson made a name for himself as a shooter, he was being faceguarded and wasn't getting as many prime looks. He was taking a lot of NBA-range threes as a consequence. I think Livers can become a higher-volume shooter, but he was not that guy this year. Teams still left him alone on most of his looks.
It's true though that the lack of a guy like MAAR who could generate his own offense really hurt this year.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:51 PM ^
Sample size is much different. Livers took 122 and Duncan took 203, and most of Duncans were contested (and deeper) because everyone knew he was a knock down guy outside. Livers was getting a lot more wide open looks than Duncan was which is huge. There was a big difference for Livers over the last few games as teams were more up on him. Livers was a very good shooter though this year and I look forward to his future as he develops the other parts of his offense. He could be a real force the next two years.
Duncan was also mired in a shooting slump for like half the year.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:34 PM ^
Basically, the point guard needs to be able to shoot pull-up jumpers over a center or score over him, and Z is not good at that.
Simultaneously, it means the center needs to be good at post-up offense, and Teske is not good at that. Nor are our other players adept at feeding the post.
These players not only need to get better at these skills, they need to become really good at them. This is why it may even be the case that DeJulius and Castleton get a lot of minutes next season.
X doesn't shoot jumpers. He shoots set shots from his chin. I don't see him improving much at all.
He significantly improved as a FT shooter (from 51.6% to 66.7%). He can do the same on threes. I don't expect him to become a stepback shooter but he should be able to shoot a good percentage on uncontested threes. That alone would give defenses a lot more pause on our ball-screen action.
I disagree with this. It's not that the current players are fundamentally flawed at one of the most basic capabilities in basketball. They are D1 players after all.
You simply can't feed the post when the other team has two and sometimes three guys surrounding the center who can all get their hands on the pass.
Beilein is right on this, they need to make minor tweaks to their scheme to draw those extra defenders away to take advantage of the mis-matches.
How do you disagree when it is universally accepted by fans, analysts, and Beilein himself that they need to throw it to Teske and take advantage of the switches? At almost NO point has a team surrounded Teske in the post.
Your comment was they were deficient in the ability not the recognition. I disagreed with that. They often looked to pass it to Teske in the post, but there were seldom open looks to do so other than trying to lob it over the top which worked with middling success. The reason for the lack of direct entry passes wasn’t due to skill or capability is was due to a clean pass not being available.
March 30th, 2019 at 10:58 AM ^
But part of that is because the switching 5 is playing half way into the paint on Simpson, which is a result of his capabilities, i.e., poor shooting and slow release. Teams weren’t doubling or even dropping into the paint right after the switch; you mention help from weak side players above, but they, afaik, were helping once the ball got into the post, not right on the switch. Those two defenders don’t have much of an angle to get into the passing lane because of were they are on the court.
March 29th, 2019 at 12:48 PM ^
Another issue is teske had zero awareness or skills with his back to the basket. He gets pretty clumsy if the entry pass actually makes it to him (another issue). He basically falls down or gets fouled most the time. He has no face up post moves and zero foot work. It's great that he can sorta make a 3 but god damn pal... Work in the paint this summer .
March 29th, 2019 at 12:49 PM ^
Defenses have been switching for years. We don't have the creators and shooters to deal with it this year.