3 Point Defense: The Jayhawks' Achilles Heel
by PenHawk on Feb 8, 2012 8:30 AM CST
in Kansas Jayhawk News and Notes
Email
Print
There are a lot of reasons Kansas lost to Missouri Saturday. Inept offense, poor clock management, referees incapable of grasping the concept that they are not participants in the game...the list can go on. These are all valid points. There is one reason I keep hearing that does give me pause. That's the notion that Missouri just got crazy hot and couldn't miss from beyond the three point line.
It's true, in a 46% 3 point performance, the Tigers hit some wild, contested threes they had no business making. But I'd be more inclined to write it off in the "luck" column if this problem didn't seem to come up so often. Looking at the numbers throughout the season, it actually becomes apparent that this is a real problem for Kansas.
Remember our close call against Texas A&M a couple weeks ago? They shot 58% from beyond the arc. The narrow win over Long Beach State featured a 42% performance by the 49ers. Kentucky hit 47%. Duke? 44%. Texas nearly took us out with a 42% performance and Iowa State hit 41% in the upset in Ames.
When you look at the whole season's body of work, it looks even worse. Kansas allows opponents to shoot 35.3% from behind the arc. That makes us dead last in the Big 12. It also earns us a staggering 227th ranking in Division 1 overall. Our Big 12 ranking in conference games is a bit improved in the 7th spot, but the number is still 36.4%, good for 231st in the nation.
What makes this so much more alarming is that since we're a team that has won the vast majority of our games, a lot of opponents end up firing off a bunch of threes late in the game against us. That means more attempts, and generally, a lower percentage. We can't keep throwing up our hands with a "what can you do?" attitude every time our opponents get hot from behind the arc. This is a trend, but no one seems to bring it up.
Granted, we're actually at the top of the Big 12 in defensive eFG%. That makes the lackluster 3 point D more tolerable. Still, as we approach March and start playing teams with their seasons on the line, we're going to have to defend some squads who are hoisting up a lot of threes. With this in mind, I think our perimeter defense needs to be added to our list of concerns headed down the stretch.
61 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
One point of contention...
I think our perimeter defense needs to be added to our list of concerns headed down the stretch
I think this is by design. Not to say that we’re trying to let teams shoot well from three, but we’re prioritizing. We’d rather take our chances with them being open at 21 feet, rather than 16. If I were you, I wouldn’t count on this changing any time soon.
I think that's part of it
But I think a bigger part is that outside of Releford we have no one I’d consider a strong perimeter defender. In fact, Teahan is downright bad due to his lack of lateral mobility.
Use the forks
by PenHawk on Feb 8, 2012 8:51 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
Teahan is my qualifier...
I consider Elijah, Tyshawn and Travis to be top tier perimeter defenders. But yes, Teahan is atrocious laterally, and his close out speed might be even worse.
by hiphopopotamus on Feb 8, 2012 11:05 AM CST up reply actions
the problem isn't the guards
well, other than teahan. the issue probably has more to do with the fact that 3 out of 4 bigs aren’t very good at hedging and switching on the perimeter. this fairly often puts us in situations where there is ball penetration and we have to collapse back with help, which we seem to be pretty good at doing but still puts us out of position on the perimeter. part of this can be cured with a little more judiciousness on the part of our guards on switching out of the rotations, but you have to consider the source first.
that said, i consider taylor and johnson to be over all high level defenders along with releford. i believe our defensive back court is superior to last year, and yet our 3 point % defense is considerably weaker. i think the difference is two part, 1) we’ve played a significantly stronger schedule this year that the raw numbers don’t capture and 2) we had had two more quick posts doing work on the perimeter last year.
next level performer
by Gippp on Feb 9, 2012 2:33 AM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Bill Self has always done that...
and I think he always will. But we do seem to lack a little effort on closing out on the perimeter when we aren’t focused.
Questions, Comments? email me at denverjhawk@hotmail.com
I still think it has more to do with protecting the bigs from foul trouble
than preventing open looks from 16 feet. A 16-footer is among the least efficient shots in basketball. We want the other team taking those if they will. I think our guards collapse down in order to spare Robinson (and Withey) from having to do too much 1 on 1 defense where they might pick up fouls.
I have to say though that it seems like we’re contesting far more shots on the perimeter now than we did in the non-conference season. I’m surprised the shooting percentage hasn’t dropped more.
I should clarify...
I didn’t mean 16 specifically – just that we have always tried to let teams catch it where they aren’t as dangerous. If they get it at 16, they’re not only closer for a jump shot, but it’s that much easier to get to the rim. If we force them to catch it at 22, they’ve got a tougher (even if amply rewarded) shot, and that much more space between them and a layup.
by hiphopopotamus on Feb 8, 2012 11:07 AM CST up reply actions
Was about to write exactly this
Most good teams seem to struggle against the 3. It’s because they concentrate on stopping higher percentage buckets. Fools gold happens.
Also
I don’t know the numbers but it certainly seems to me that officials have fallen in love with the 3 point foul call. Brush a 3 point shooter after the ball hits the rim and it seems they’re blowing the whistle. Which makes it more difficult/risky to close on the shooter.
Rebounding is also a concern
Seems to be more of an issue on offensive end, but if Baylor is going to launch 3s you can’t let them make multiple attempts on a possession.
This
My biggest concern right now is rebounding. I liked the 3-pt defense we (even Teahan) played against MU. Denmon made some guarded shots and some 26-footers, but I don’t think that’s likely to recur. However, our rebounding seems to have gone from a real strength to a significant weakness over the last month, and I don’t really understand it.
yeah
still 2nd best defensive in conference play, but it does seem like it has gotten worse and worse.
I write everywhere. You're probably better off following me on twitter
I have a hypothesis
Opposing players were shorter in non-conf. I may do some math to check this out when I get a chance. Doesn’t kpom have effective height (behind the pay-wall)?
I always drink the Kool-Aid
Going for #8 in a row!
Yeah rebounding is what this team has to do.
On offense it makes up for the turnovers and not-so-great shooting.
On defense it is the weak point of the defense, it’s the hole in the basket all the eggs are in.
I think our offensive rebounding has been more of a problem than defensive, lately.
so...
Our collective response to being the worst 3pt defense in the conference is collectively…
::fingers in ears:: NOT A PROBLEM! EVERYTHING IS FINE!
Use the forks
by PenHawk on Feb 8, 2012 11:57 AM CST via mobile reply actions
It's better in conference games than it was in the non-conference schedule
I think this is a product of Withey and Robinson being able to guard 1-on-1 more effectively without fouling.
I think we end up middle of the pack for the conference season. Combine that with good 2 pt defense and good defensive rebounding and we ought to be the best defense in the Big 12.
Actually 7th
in Big 12 play. #1 in the country in defensive efficiency so I would think we have bigger problems than defense.
3rd nationally defensively
1st in the big 12 season though.
I think it is pick your poison
You can’t stop everything. We do a good job of help defense, but that will sometimes leave some one open especially near the end of the shot clock.
I always drink the Kool-Aid
Going for #8 in a row!
I don't see the evidence that there's anything to really WORRY about
It seems that the team is taking the tradeoff of giving opponents better looks from 3 in order to bolster the overall defense. So far, it has worked pretty well: they’ve exceeded expectations and are playing great overall defense.
Even in the most recent example, MU hit some very difficult shots, which has less to do with defense, especially since the defense seemed pretty good on a few of the made 3s. If they miss one or two of those, all of a sudden it’s a comfortable win, the 3PT% from the game looks more reasonable, especially compared to MU’s 38% on the season (they miss one of those, and they’re within 3 % points of their season 3PT% average; they miss two, and they’re below it).
Would I prefer if the 3PT defense were better, sure. But should we be asking for change when the overall D is one of the best in the country? I want more evidence that MU and ISU weren’t just luck, then I want evidence that better 3PT D doesn’t actually have negative unintended consequences for the overall D.
(ISU shot 41% compared to 38.5% on the season. They miss one of those, and they’re below their season average. I’m not convinced that one or two shots against MU and one shot against ISU is enough proof that the apparent poor 3PT D is a big problem.)
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Feb 8, 2012 12:36 PM CST up reply actions
Part of it is that
and part of it is being used to breezing (relatively) to a conference title, conference tournament title and No. 1 or 2 seed in the tourney.
And this is a “rebuilding” year! Fans of most schools in the Big 12 and other BCS leagues would love to have our problems right now.
Until We Get
Some depth on the front line, our perimeter defenders will spend a lot of time in the paint. You make the best of what you have. Self is outstanding at this.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
It's not just a trend, it is history as well.....see VCU, Northern Iowa, etc.
If there was one criticism I have of Self it is he tends to play percentages too much.
In case you don’t know he is a big percentages guy. Even with his own golf game he ascribes to a theory of playing to ones handicap far more than besting it. He carries this over to the court. He has also done the math to know what percentage of opposing three’s can be allowed and still beat them with nothing but two’s. Case in point the 2008 team when they played Baylor during conference. Baylor made a number of three’s, Kansas did NOT hit even one. KU still got the win in a high scoring game. But it was the percentages that were tilted in his favor.
Yes it is KU’s achilles heel. But is is also the achilles heel for those teams that choose to jack them up by the baker’s dozen. Missouri will be just one little cold spell away from elimination come March.
by BCRavenJHawkfan on Feb 8, 2012 12:48 PM CST reply actions
This
Missouri will be just one little cold spell away from elimination come March.
Which applies to any 3-point dependent team. I’d much rather be dependent on playing good defense every game rather than needing 3-pointers to win.
by MichiganJayHawk on Feb 8, 2012 1:06 PM CST up reply actions
yet we always seem to get knocked out...
by a team that has to depend on the three to beat us.
Questions, Comments? email me at denverjhawk@hotmail.com
Not pretty.
Bucknell: 1-11 (.091) Lost by 1
Bradley: 7-18 (.389) Lost by 4
UNI: 6-23 (.261) Lost by 2
VCU: 2-21 (.091) Lost by 10
by MJR on Feb 8, 2012 1:57 PM CST up reply actions
And just for fun, or horror as the case may be, our opponents in those games.
Bucknell: 8-31 (.258)
Bradley: 11-24 (.524)
UNI: 9-26 (.346)
VCU: 12-25 (.480)
by MJR on Feb 8, 2012 2:03 PM CST up reply actions
Bucknell missed 23 3-pointers and beat us
I still don’t understand how we lost that game. That was the second toughest loss of my lifetime.
Of those four, it has to be the worst
Of course, the fact that I saw it in person also makes it bad.
vcu HAS to be second.
The Final Four was right there. Right. There. and it’s not like KU got outplayed, the shots just didn’t fall. I swear there were so many in and outs and other ridiculousness.
Supporter of Carlos Austin Boozer, and I don't want to see Dwight Howard in a Bulls uniform. Call me crazy.
by wrigleyrocker12 on Feb 8, 2012 2:56 PM CST up reply actions
That's been
the story in every one of our losses. Remember UCLA? Prob 10 layups that an average high school senior would make. Didn’t fall.
I didn’t think VCU was that bad a loss mainly because I didn’t think that team was Final Four worthy going in.
Of course that IS how every team gets upset and generally what makes the tournament so fun.
Um, weren't we the #1 overall seed
The name of that song played at KC Comets games in the '80's was Giorgio Moroder's "The Chase." Now you know.
Ohio State
but my point was that at the start of the year I didn’t think we were final four quality. Compared to some years (97 for instance) that were terribly frustrating because that team was so much better than the pack.
Ultimately
for all the crap some give Self for the Bucknell and Bradley losses, his tenure has been delightful in March compared to the heartbreak of the mid/late 90s. For my money there were at least 3 losses worse than anything I felt under Self.
Only against Glenn Robinson in 1994 did I really feel we were outclassed.
Junior Burroughs going off on us in 1995, John Wallace dominating us in 1996, and Tyson Wheeler and Cutino Mobely slicing us up in 1998. In all of those cases, I felt we were the better team just failing to impose our will.
The 1997 loss hurt worse than any other because I thought that team was going to be historic, but for the most part, I’d just come to expect bad losses by the late 90s.
It was kind of nice to be the underdog for a couple tournaments (against Kentucky in 99 and Duke in ’00) after that.
Me too!
I was screaming my freaking head off at the end. I’m sure the people I sat next to at that game thought I was completely insane. I thought there was some horrible reffing inthat game too, but it’s always harder to see that live than w/ replay.
I was hoarse for about 3 days after that game…. sheesh…. still gets my blood boiling.
by MichiganJayHawk on Feb 8, 2012 3:24 PM CST up reply actions
I really do think part of me died that night
I’ve never quite have been able to get caught up and lost in true euphoric fandom. Even in 2008 when we won the NC I didn’t really get THAT excited. I was much more excited about he OB.
But I was MUCH more excited about beating Duke to get to the Final Four in 03.
I don’t know, I just don’t feel things as deeply anymore since Bucknell…
The name of that song played at KC Comets games in the '80's was Giorgio Moroder's "The Chase." Now you know.
I'm so glad to hear somebody else say this
I don’t think I’ve experienced any tournament game as fully since the Bucknell game. I left the No. Iowa and VCU games early because I can’t handle being fully engaged any more. It makes the losses a little easier to take, but it means the wins aren’t as sweet.
Almost every game in the great 2002 and 2003 runs (Arizona, Illinois, Duke, Marquette) were more joyous for me than the 2008 game.
This is so strange to me...
Why does the Bucknell loss hurt everyone so badly? Was it because it was the first time we went out in the first round? That team was on life support heading into the tournament and had next to no chance of doing anything special.
by hiphopopotamus on Feb 9, 2012 2:34 PM CST up reply actions
I never considered that we could lose that game
I don’t know if that team was going to win the National Championship, but KU they were a very good team with a core of players that had been a shot away from the final four the year before. And KU hadn’t lost in the first round in my lifetime. And Bucknell didn’t have giant-killer characteristics.
UNI was the worst loss for me. And it's not even close.
Glad I came, just wish I hadn't stayed so long.
Rock Chalk Talk
There were multiple chances to beat Bucknell
Including the shot Wayne missed at the buzzer. The others seemed out of reach and seemed to follow the same pattern.
UNI was bad, but there was a realization that it wasn’t going to go our way by halftime.
Ugh
Summerville
The name of that song played at KC Comets games in the '80's was Giorgio Moroder's "The Chase." Now you know.
It is a cruel irony...
But I’d still rather take my chances with a probability, rather than a possibility.
by hiphopopotamus on Feb 8, 2012 1:30 PM CST up reply actions
It's not like there are a lot of low seeds with great interior games
Almost every high seed that gets upset played against a low seed that got hot from 3-pt range. There’s not a lot you can do about it.
MU will be an unusual high seed in that they’re heavily dependent on 3-pointers themselves. Usually it’s hard to be consistent enough over a season to win with that approach. However, that means that they could be vulnerable to upset against a much weaker team that doesn’t even have a particularly good shooting day. All that needs to happen is MU going cold from the field.
They remind me
of a nice Villanova team. Good but I’m not picking them to go far on my bracket.
That strikes me as a very good comparison.
I hadn’t thought of it, but they’re very much in the mold of Villanova teams of late.
As long as we don’t ever have a game against them like we had at the Wachovia Center in January 2005. That game was maybe my worst regular-season experience ever as a Jayhawk fan. We played one of the worst games I’ve ever seen. Philadelphia fans lived up to every negative stereotype of them. And then the city was completely shut down by a giant blizzard.
that's how it happens with every early round upset though
I write everywhere. You're probably better off following me on twitter
i totally missed your comment too
i am having a good reading week!
I write everywhere. You're probably better off following me on twitter
Solution:
Kila's slash for Apr 20 to May 4, 2011, right before he was sent down: .276 / .344 / .448
by SagehenMacGyver47 on Feb 8, 2012 8:04 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Some of the high
percentages is caused by those who normally don’t shoot them and for some reason make them especially at home. The scouting report says don’t gurard them out there. I remeber the UNI game when the bald headed center who had shot maybe 10 all year and made 2 comes out of the gate firing going 2 for 3. I knew it was going to be a difficult game at the point. And it happens every game where a team makes 13 3’s in one game and in the next can’t buy one. Unfortunately it seems to be KU in tourney time that some jackasses(VCU) who have no business shooting them let alone make them are going off. It’s the great equalizer for the lesser teams.
I haven't looked at it yet
But I think there’s a piece by Kevin Pelton (on ESPN or Basketball Prospectus) today saying that 3-pt defense is no more meaningful than free throw defense. I saw Ken Pomeroy talking about it on his twitter feed.
It would be interesting to see what it implies for the Jayhawks.
there is
i dont have insider, but i have kind of suspected that for awhile, so it’s nice to see smart people confirming that.
I write everywhere. You're probably better off following me on twitter
This may be it
For any basketball prospectus subscribers:
http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2049
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
