The unofficial online home for fans of the Old Dominion University Monarchs. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

So, I wanted to pull this discussion out of the recruiting thread, but if others are interested, I'd love to have it. In my heart of hearts, I'm a traditionalist. I learned the game of hoops with the 1,2,3,4,5 positions being clearly defined. We played man-to-man defense and ran the same flex motion offense run by teams for 50 years. But, now, I'm starting to have to adapt to the fact that the game has clearly evolved well beyond that.

I love watching a big shouldered behemoth catch the ball on the block with his back to the basket, get isolated, drop step and get himself an opportunity for a bucket from 4 feet. However, the game isn't played that way any more. Maybe it's because AAU ball has created players who want to get isolated on the wing and attack off the bounce. Maybe it's because And-1 tapes never include a 4-foot hook shot. I'm just not sure.

But, here is where the topic really divides us. Old school guys still believe the post-up shot is the easiest look you can get. However, the data tells a different story.

Here's a great article that was written before last year's tournament:
https://www.si.com/college-basketball/20...ilermakers

Here are some takeaways:

Quote:“Do you watch the NBA ever? You see those top three teams. Golden State—do they work it in? My brother [coach Mike D’Antoni] in Houston, the biggest turnaround in the league—do they work it in? You can go get any computer and run what the best shots are, and it will tell you the post-up is the worst shot in basketball.”

Quote:During 2015–16, under since-fired coach Travis Ford, Oklahoma State’s post rate was 11.9%. When his replacement, Brad Underwood, cut that to 2.4% this season, the Cowboys not only ranked No. 1 nationally in offensive efficiency but also made the NCAA tournament in defiance of preseason expectations. “I’m a big believer that there’s value in getting the ball to the rim,” says Underwood, who runs a spread offense. “We’re just going about it in different ways than ­posting—with cutters, dribble-drives and offensive rebounding.”

Quote:The coach who posts the least in Division I—just 0.7%—is LeVelle Moton at North Carolina Central. His Eagles finished 13–3 in the MEAC and made their second NCAA tournament in four seasons. Moton runs perimeter-based sets that flow into ball-screen motion; he’s not interested in schemes that require personnel he’ll never be able to recruit to a low-major. “A wise man once told me, ‘You can’t find five guys in America who can score with their back to the basket,’ ” Moton says. The sound, new-school thing to do is phase post-ups out of your offense.

The article goes on to talk about Purdue, Wisconsin, and Gonzaga being the exceptions to the rule (and pretty successful ones), but it's an interesting topic, if y'all want to discuss it.

Just to be clear, the game hasn't changed because of AAU, the game has changed because coaches realized that post ups were not efficient (neither are mid range jumpers). It is all about getting the most efficient shot possible on every trip down court.

If you have a guy that can score over 1 ppp on post ups, sure, toss the ball into the post. But, how many teams have that?

And to be clear, I'm not sure you can win playing like Marshall either. There has to be some balance in terms of offense and defense.

In my mind, Nova has the best coaching in the nation. They get in transition when its available, take great shots, and play solid defense.

Thank s for adding this thread coach. I'll throw in an opinion to maybe help the discussion get going. I , like you, am a traditionalist as well. I loved watching ODU in all the years we have had big men that could dominate. It started with Wilson Washington, Later Mark West and has carried on for many years with guys like Odell Hodge, Frank Hassell, etc. It was a great feeling as a fan to just watch pregame warmups and know you were going to match up pretty well in the post.
All that being said I agree the game has changed tremendously and I suppose it could be argued that the playing field is more level with the emphasis on the three pointer and dribble penetration by wing players. However, the big schools still get the 6'9" players that can do what our 6'5" players can so in my opinion the smaller schools are still at a disadvantage.
As far as the way it has changed the game, the one change that has been created that I don't like is that late in the game now the team that is behind is basically just trying to bully their way to the basket and draw a foul to stop the clock or to get an and 1. It seems to me we have now put the end of the game outcome clearly in the hands of the ref. No matter how good the defender is, it's almost impossible for a defender to stop an offensive player from getting to the rim.
But I understand the entertainment value of the faster paced, more athletic player. There are a ton of them out there in AAU ball and I only see it becoming more and more dribble drive and three point shooting. That being said, I still love college basketball and have adapted to the new game.

While I'm definitely old school (emphasis on old) and miss a big man with impeccable footwork, a soft hook with either hand and a laser outlet pass, today's game isn't the same one that I played. First, the realization the 40% 3-pt shooting can overwhelm tradtional offenses has led to the development of players that excel at shooting from all positions (though, regrettably, footwork and discipline are more likely deficient). Second, the size differential has changed as bigger players have deveoped much better ball handling skills. Old school- 6-11 center towering over 6-7 forwards towering over 6-2 guards. Today- 6-9 frontcourt players, 6-7 wings and 6-4 guards. It's not easy for a big in today's game to carve out space and get what were routine passes into the post follwed by 60% shots.

Exceptions will always exist (good, I like to watch a variety of styles), but if old-school post play produced champions, you would still be watching old-school post play today.

Odell Hodge was the classic, big-boy... back it in from 4 feet out and finish out. He was a points machine. I would’ve dropped 20 dimes a night if I were the pg.... just by feeling that man!

So, I think there is more to the data. I believe that the reason that post up efficiency is low is because there are very few good post players, and in the one and done age, they are all going to go to a few schools. I think if you were to track efficiency of true, talented, post players on teams that are committed to running the ball through the post philosophically, and remove the stats for post ups by guys who should not be posting (which is probably 80%+ of them at this point, you would find that the lack of efficiency has more to do with a lack of good traditional bigs, and systems that utilize them than it has to do with posting not being an effective way to attack the basket.

To me, so many of these advanced metrics have as much to do with confirmation bias as they do with actual information. If everyone thinks doing things a certain way is better, then everyone starts doing that, and starts recruiting and coaching players to do it that way. Next thing you know, all the metrics are confirmed because everyone is molding their system to the metrics. Its just a big cycle of confirmation. And to be clear, I am talking about college basketball. The NBA is a completely different game, and different rules apply, imo.

All that said, I think there is more than one way to skin a cat, and I prefer a 4 that can handle shoot and go coast to coast after getting a rebound, those guys are not a dime a dozen at our level, though. I also see 2s and 3s as interchangable.

Perfect world, I would like a pg with old school pg skills and a dead on 3 point shot when left open, 2/3s that can shoot and can slash a little, a 4 that can shoot and slash, and a 5 that you can dump the ball into.

To me, the 2015 Duke team was the perfect team. Three shooters around the perimeter, Ultra Versatile and smallish Winslow at the 4, and a true center in Okafor at the 5

I'll take guys like Wilson Washington, Mark West, Odell Hodge, Alex Laughton, Gerald Lee, or Frank Hassell to play center on my college team 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago ... or today.

Maybe some of that is relevant in terms of lack of post play. But I remember years ago Coach K asking why he would shoot 2s when he could shoot 40% from 3? You would need 60% from 2 to equal 40% from 3. Plus teams dont let guys post up freely, they crash down and get in passing lanes.

I cant find data on guys in past but even good post up guys nowadays are at 1.1

Tht was a good Duke team though. Teams could take advantage of Okafor on defense though, but their firepower on offense was difference.

KAT is the ideal center of today and the reason he went ahead of Okafor. You have to have big guys that can move on defense today.

(10-30-2017 12:19 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  So, I think there is more to the data. I believe that the reason that post up efficiency is low is because there are very few good post players, and in the one and done age, they are all going to go to a few schools. I think if you were to track efficiency of true, talented, post players on teams that are committed to running the ball through the post philosophically, and remove the stats for post ups by guys who should not be posting (which is probably 80%+ of them at this point, you would find that the lack of efficiency has more to do with a lack of good traditional bigs, and systems that utilize them than it has to do with posting not being an effective way to attack the basket.

To me, so many of these advanced metrics have as much to do with confirmation bias as they do with actual information. If everyone thinks doing things a certain way is better, then everyone starts doing that, and starts recruiting and coaching players to do it that way. Next thing you know, all the metrics are confirmed because everyone is molding their system to the metrics. Its just a big cycle of confirmation. And to be clear, I am talking about college basketball. The NBA is a completely different game, and different rules apply, imo.

All that said, I think there is more than one way to skin a cat, and I prefer a 4 that can handle shoot and go coast to coast after getting a rebound, those guys are not a dime a dozen at our level, though. I also see 2s and 3s as interchangable.

Perfect world, I would like a pg with old school pg skills and a dead on 3 point shot when left open, 2/3s that can shoot and can slash a little, a 4 that can shoot and slash, and a 5 that you can dump the ball into.

To me, the 2015 Duke team was the perfect team. Three shooters around the perimeter, Ultra Versatile and smallish Winslow at the 4, and a true center in Okafor at the 5

From the first word to the last, I couldn't have said it any better. My feelings to a "T".

(10-30-2017 12:42 PM)Gilesfan Wrote:  Maybe some of that is relevant in terms of lack of post play. But I remember years ago Coach K asking why he would shoot 2s when he could shoot 40% from 3? You would need 60% from 2 to equal 40% from 3. Plus teams dont let guys post up freely, they crash down and get in passing lanes.

I cant find data on guys in past but even good post up guys nowadays are at 1.1

A couple of related things -

First is that Duke recruits the best of the best and can come up with a team of tall guys that can shoot over 40% from 3 and that can also do other things such as dribble, pass, and defend. When is the last time ODU has shot over 40% from 3 as a team, especially with that being their primary shot attempt? Also, Duke pretty much always has a big guy or two that they can dump the ball down in the post to for a close in basket when they need it so they have that base covered too.

Second is that by having a big man posting up, he can help to get open looks for the outside shooters by kicking the ball back out to one of them when the defense crashes down on the post player (as you indicated).

(10-30-2017 12:42 PM)Gilesfan Wrote:  Maybe some of that is relevant in terms of lack of post play. But I remember years ago Coach K asking why he would shoot 2s when he could shoot 40% from 3? You would need 60% from 2 to equal 40% from 3. Plus teams dont let guys post up freely, they crash down and get in passing lanes.

I cant find data on guys in past but even good post up guys nowadays are at 1.1

Tht was a good Duke team though. Teams could take advantage of Okafor on defense though, but their firepower on offense was difference.

KAT is the ideal center of today and the reason he went ahead of Okafor. You have to have big guys that can move on defense today.

I agree for the most part about shooting 3s, but the reason I like a 5 that can score in the post is that there are inevitably games when the shots are not falling from 3 and it is nice to have another option to get a big bucket when you really need one.

We all love that. It's a matter of the possibility of getting one that can score in the post and play defense in space.

(10-30-2017 01:33 PM)Gilesfan Wrote:  We all love that. It's a matter of the possibility of getting one that can score in the post and play defense in space.

I agree, but don't care as much about them playing defense in space. But even finding one who can score and rebound is tough at our level. I think a guy like Brandan is fine at the 5 for us if the other 4 positions are worked out, though.

(10-30-2017 01:37 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(10-30-2017 01:33 PM)Gilesfan Wrote:  We all love that. It's a matter of the possibility of getting one that can score in the post and play defense in space.

I agree, but don't care as much about them playing defense in space. But even finding one who can score and rebound is tough at our level. I think a guy like Brandan is fine at the 5 for us if the other 4 positions are worked out, though.

I can handle Brandan in the post as well. Teams cant really take advantage of him on defense and he's a threat on the offensive boards, in transition, and in pick and rolls. His problem last year were forced postups and throwing up wild shots.

(10-30-2017 10:51 AM)Gilesfan Wrote:  Just to be clear, the game hasn't changed because of AAU, the game has changed because coaches realized that post ups were not efficient (neither are mid range jumpers). It is all about getting the most efficient shot possible on every trip down court.

If you have a guy that can score over 1 ppp on post ups, sure, toss the ball into the post. But, how many teams have that?

The game has changed because of one thing.....athletes are much more versatile now. Once the 3 pt shot became a reality, players other than shooting guards had to become more versatile because the floor opened up.

(10-30-2017 01:49 PM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(10-30-2017 01:37 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(10-30-2017 01:33 PM)Gilesfan Wrote:  We all love that. It's a matter of the possibility of getting one that can score in the post and play defense in space.

I agree, but don't care as much about them playing defense in space. But even finding one who can score and rebound is tough at our level. I think a guy like Brandan is fine at the 5 for us if the other 4 positions are worked out, though.

I can handle Brandan in the post as well. Teams cant really take advantage of him on defense and he's a threat on the offensive boards, in transition, and in pick and rolls. His problem last year were forced postups and throwing up wild shots.

and foul trouble ..... That will be a huge issue this year.