Game 6: Belmont Bruins

[RF1]

Our defense is a fouling machine. We have not played a true road game yet, yet we have had multiple players foul out of games and I would bet that we have shot substantially less free throws then our opponents. How do you think this defense will fare on the road?

URI has actually shot a few more ft attempts than opponents. This was however with no games on an opponent's homecourt and with Rhody ahead at the end of five of the six games played to date. The ft stats thus far do not bode well for the road.


FT Stats through six games with four at home and two in a friendly neutral venue:

URI: 95-135 .704
OPP: 105-132 .795



Foul Stats through six games with four at home and two in a friendly neutral venue:

URI: 131
OPP: 117

[ATPTourFan]

We suck at defending foul shots!

[Seawrightspostgame]

No excuses. Gotta defend the foul shot.

[NYGFan_Section208]

No excuses. Gotta defend the foul shot.

Agree...so basic. Not going to get anywhere if you're just giving up free free throws. Letting the other team shoot almost 80%...might as well just be giving them free shots. Is this a recruiting gap? Or, just a plain coaching deficit?

[josephski]

It's not the foul shots that will hurt us, it's the fouls. Having Hassan, Iverson or Terrell in foul trouble hurts us more than our opponents shooting a slightly better free throw percentage.

Edit: For those wondering, right now we rank 270 out of 347 in fouls per game.

[NYGFan_Section208]

It's not the foul shots that will hurt us, it's the fouls. Having Hassan, Iverson or Terrell in foul trouble hurts us more than our opponents shooting a slightly better free throw percentage.

Edit: For those wondering, right now we rank 270 out of 347 in fouls per game.

But...probably top 50 in overall defense (if so, will take it)? Taken a while to get used to...but coming around to the idea that Hurls wants to play D in a way that doesn't let other teams get comfortable...means no zone and lots of scramble. The crazy-fying factor is when big men foul outside of the paint. I don't think Hassan (who didn't pick up his 1st until under 7 mins to go in the first half - nice job) should be fouling anyone if it isn't a direct, no-brainer basket-stopper.

[TruePoint]

Hassan has picked up several fouls on the offensive end trying to set the high on-ball screen. Those are the type of things that are killers. Id almost consider giving that responsibility to someone else if it happens anymore.

[josephski]

It's not the foul shots that will hurt us, it's the fouls. Having Hassan, Iverson or Terrell in foul trouble hurts us more than our opponents shooting a slightly better free throw percentage.

Edit: For those wondering, right now we rank 270 out of 347 in fouls per game.

But...probably top 50 in overall defense (if so, will take it)? Taken a while to get used to...but coming around to the idea that Hurls wants to play D in a way that doesn't let other teams get comfortable...means no zone and lots of scramble. The crazy-fying factor is when big men foul outside of the paint. I don't think Hassan (who didn't pick up his 1st until under 7 mins to go in the first half - nice job) should be fouling anyone if it isn't a direct, no-brainer basket-stopper.

130 in scoring defense. I expect that to go up but I don't think we'll end up in the top 25 like we were two years ago, top 50 is a good goal.

Agree on Hassan. It's the stupid fouls that really hurt us. Playing a very aggressive defense like we currently do means that our number of fouls probably will be higher on average so we really need to avoid dumb fouls.

Either way, playing good defense and not fouling often aren't mutually exclusive. Syracuse, Virginia and PC are all top 10 in scoring defense right now and top 20 in fouls per game. If we're going to foul as much as we currently do then we need to at least be playing better overall defense.

[ATPTourFan]

Josephski, what do you mean by 130 in scoring defense? Are you referring to simple unadjusted points against per game?

Right now we have a top 50 adjusted defense and elite defense of 3pt shots and blocking opponents.

[luke]

The switching on defense was not a coaching decision or coaching choice. The switching on defense was a result of players unable to fight through screens and therefore switching was necessary. I guess I am the only one who thought that Belmont played very well and very smart. E$C wasn't looking to score as much because they were helping on defense which enabled Jarvis to find more openings and open shots. we have to understand that opponents are so aware of EC that their number one goal kis to take him out at the expense of leaving Jarvis . And their second concern on offense isn't Hass, it is Terrell. so they keyed on him as well. Hass and Iverson were open because they were afraid to leave Terrell and EC open from three and they tried to help against their driving too. So the best opportunities to score fell to Garrett and Martin. I think there have been a lot of ticky tack fouls being called and the players are wary of picking up fouls fighting through screens, and maybe they are also a little gassed after six games in 14 days. Sure they got a little sloppy at the end of the game, otherwise I wasn't that disappointed at all. as for the bench, they did seem a little off, bobbling a lot of passes and some dumb passes. Both Dowtin and Langervine had their worst minutes. Langervine IMO has impressed in earlier games. I expect a tremendous effort out in Indiana on Tuesday. No tv at all or streaming either for that game ? C'mon. No TV or stream for Providence either for out of staters ?

[ram1980]

I worry about hass foul trouble when guards are penetrating and he is going for blocks. I don't think our guards have been great at stopping penetration or helping on boards
That needs to improve. Iverson is not a great defender. Think akele is much better if he could only contribute more offensively

[twisted3829]

luke it was 100% coaches decision

[DC_Rams]

I will just say I feel last night was a bad coaching night. When we were up 18, and they cut it to 12 off 2 successive 3's, Dan should've called a timeout. Instead, he let them ride that momentum to a 6 point deficit. I hate to see our guys start to "force" it. EC, Stan and Jared all started to "force" shots, and none of them looked good. Also, the lack of Christian Thompson and Akele last night was unusual. Those are fire starters when they get in....need to get them rolling and keep them encouraged. Keeping our reserves on the bench too long result in them playing "tight" when they actually get in the game.

All in all, we won, and we are going to have wtf games periodically, but all that matters in the W. Almost only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades after all.

[josephski]

Josephski, what do you mean by 130 in scoring defense? Are you referring to simple unadjusted points against per game?

Right now we have a top 50 adjusted defense and elite defense of 3pt shots and blocking opponents.

Points against us per game. http://www.ncaa.com/stats/basketball-me ... eam/146/p3

Also this site has us as 129th in defensive efficiency, not sure how they calculate it. https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-baske ... efficiency

I know we're very good at defending the 3 and getting blocks but I don't understand how those move us to top 50 for adjusted defense when we're outside the top 100 in steals, turnovers created, rebounding margin and opponent field goal percentage.

I'm assuming you're going with kenpom? In which case he has us ranked 38th overall so not as good as everyone here thinks we are.

Edit: I just did a little bit of research and if you are using the kenpom ranking then from what I've read he uses data from previous seasons to calculate things like defensive adjusted efficiency at least until later in the season. So if what I read is correct then the fact we were ranked 65 last year and 13 in 2015 would definitely inflate our current adjusted defense.

Also (assuming you're using kenpom) kenpom's explanation for his system says it's purely speculative and not rating the team based on how they've played so far this season. Assuming I'm understanding his site correctly he is predicting as of right now we'll finish 49th in adjusted defensive efficiency so most likely that's not where we're rated at this point of the season.

Even if we are ranked 49 in adjusted defensive efficiency right now then I still think the fouls are an issue. If being top 50 in defense means we're going to constantly have starters in foul trouble then at what point do you adjust the defense so your starters have a better chance of staying on the floor?

[ATPTourFan]

The biggest difference is that kenpom's defensive adjusted efficiency takes into consideration the quality of the team you were defending.

So a .700 vs a team #345 isn't given as much weight as a lesser raw defensive rating vs a better opponent.

[josephski]

I'd argue the biggest difference is being purely predictive. His rating is where we're predicted to be at the end of the season, not right now. So like I said, top 50 is a good goal and definitely achievable but based on the 6 games we've played I don't think we're a top 50 defense.

[Rhody83]

The "EC strategy not to score" is a little out there. I have been to most of the games this year. He shot poorly in the first half against Cincy, then was tentative the entire game against Duke and the entire game against Belmont. He lost confidence in his outside shot against Cincy in the first. I was sitting behind the bench - Hurly took him out, sat him down and told him to "relax". His shot was smoother in the second (at a quicker pace/not thinking about it). Against Duke he was passing up open outside shots. Twice in the first half he was open at 10 feet and passed it for two turnovers.

My guess is that he is hurting and has lost his confidence. Missing a high percentage of his outside shots and being afraid to shoot has nothing to do with the defense or the "strategy". He does seem a little slower on his drives.

[rambone 78]

Maybe I'm a little off base here, but I don't think the emphasis on defense is as strong as the last couple of seasons....

Of course it's still very important, but we're running more, plus our backups are for the most part young and inexperienced, save for SR.....

We need our backup bigs to develop and develop quickly......

Dan wants to go 10 quality deep, and we're not there yet......the defense will suffer until we do.....

[rambone 78]

My guess his knee is a little sore. Lot of games close together early on....we need him at closer to 100% these next couple of weeks....

[ATPTourFan]

I'd argue the biggest difference is being purely predictive. His rating is where we're predicted to be at the end of the season, not right now. So like I said, top 50 is a good goal and definitely achievable but based on the 6 games we've played I don't think we're a top 50 defense.

I disagree that his AdjD and AdjO are trying to determine today what each team will be at end of the season. Source on that?

[Rhody83]

URI played Duke Sunday and then Belmont Friday. I count that as four days off. Plenty of time for EC to rest. He disappeared in both games.

[josephski]

I'd argue the biggest difference is being purely predictive. His rating is where we're predicted to be at the end of the season, not right now. So like I said, top 50 is a good goal and definitely achievable but based on the 6 games we've played I don't think we're a top 50 defense.

I disagree that his AdjD and AdjO are trying to determine today what each team will be at end of the season. Source on that?

I think I'm wrong about calculating it for the end of the season. Although I think it is more of a future ranking due to however he weights teams differently. What I read was here http://kenpom.com/blog/ratings-explanation/ . He never says specifically end of year but he makes note that he's not rating teams based on how the season has been so far. Looking at strength of schedule on his site it's obvious he doesn't calculate that for end of season.

I'll have to do some more reading into how he calculates AdjD and AdjO. Weighting the Duke game more heavily than Marist makes sense but without seeing how he calculates AdjD it's hard to tell if we aren't over adjusted due to that game.

[Running Ram]

Luke, I believe the PC game is on Fox Sports Network.

[luke]

Switching was a coach's decision ? If you want to say it was a coach's decision to over play the perimeter to prevent threes I would agree because Hurley said that it was. However, the switching is up to the players as help defense when a defender is screened out of the play. If the defender is able to fight through the screen there is no need to switch. I am certain Hurley did not want Jarvis to have to switch to defend a big man, but it was a result of another man being screened off his offensive player responsibility.

[reef]

We are running more now so we are scoring more and as a result giving up more points too. I expect the Valpo total will be in the low 150s as they can score too

As far as EC these last two games are concerning. If he doesn't get double figs vs Valpo I will be upset as we need his scoring

[Da_Process_Survivor]

Switching was a coach's decision ? If you want to say it was a coach's decision to over play the perimeter to prevent threes I would agree because Hurley said that it was. However, the switching is up to the players as help defense when a defender is screened out of the play. If the defender is able to fight through the screen there is no need to switch. I am certain Hurley did not want Jarvis to have to switch to defend a big man, but it was a result of another man being screened off his offensive player responsibility.

He said the switching was part of the game plan. He said they did it to ensure no shooters got free knowing they would give up points in the paint because of it. A guard ending up on a big was the plan

He said his reasoning was they couldn't beat us just by making 2s.

[Dre3000]

Switching was a coach's decision ? If you want to say it was a coach's decision to over play the perimeter to prevent threes I would agree because Hurley said that it was. However, the switching is up to the players as help defense when a defender is screened out of the play. If the defender is able to fight through the screen there is no need to switch. I am certain Hurley did not want Jarvis to have to switch to defend a big man, but it was a result of another man being screened off his offensive player responsibility.

He said the switching was part of the game plan. He said they did it to ensure no shooters got free knowing they would give up points in the paint because of it. A guard ending up on a big was the plan

He said his reasoning was they couldn't beat us just by making 2s.

Yea switching is completely a coach's call. It all has to do with ball screen coverage and when you don't want to give up threes then yes switching is probably better. The reason is if our bigs hedge hard on the ball screen then someone is going to have to protect the rim. Meaning they will be in a help position and no longer close to their man until the hedging big can get back. We tried to hedge the ball screens hard early but without the rim protector they were getting wide open looks at the rim, that's when they changed the defense to switch everything. And while some may feel it wasn't smart, we won. Belmont went on a run and brought the game close with 2 big threes taking the lead from 12 to 6. That team can get hot quick and threes could have beat us.

[twisted3829]

Switching was a coach's decision ? If you want to say it was a coach's decision to over play the perimeter to prevent threes I would agree because Hurley said that it was. However, the switching is up to the players as help defense when a defender is screened out of the play. If the defender is able to fight through the screen there is no need to switch. I am certain Hurley did not want Jarvis to have to switch to defend a big man, but it was a result of another man being screened off his offensive player responsibility.

He said the switching was part of the game plan. He said they did it to ensure no shooters got free knowing they would give up points in the paint because of it. A guard ending up on a big was the plan

He said his reasoning was they couldn't beat us just by making 2s.

Yea switching is completely a coach's call. It all has to do with ball screen coverage and when you don't want to give up threes then yes switching is probably better. The reason is if our bigs hedge hard on the ball screen then someone is going to have to protect the rim. Meaning they will be in a help position and no longer close to their man until the hedging big can get back. We tried to hedge the ball screens hard early but without the rim protector they were getting wide open looks at the rim, that's when they changed the defense to switch everything. And while some may feel it wasn't smart, we won. Belmont went on a run and brought the game close with 2 big threes taking the lead from 12 to 6. That team can get hot quick and threes could have beat us.

Think of it this way too, if it wasn't coaches decision Hurley would have been all over his guys and would have put a stop to it

[Rhody83]

On the switching it was all Hurley. If you go back and watch the game again, they didn't fight thru the screen once. Nit even one time. Also, Hurley was yelling switch.

[ATPTourFan]

And they held the team who was making 40% of their 30+ attempted 3s per game shoot 18%. This has been covered earlier in the thread and you can hear Dan say as much in the post game presser.

[luke]

The Providence game is not on TV in the Philadelphia South Jersey market.

[reef]

Isn't it on nationally FS 1 ???

[PeterRamTime]

Isn't it on nationally FS 1 ???

It'll only be on regional fox sports channels...
Baylor vs West Virginia is the spotlight game :/