UNCW Defensive Stats out of 353 D1 Teams

PPG Allowed #346 81.9
3pt Defense #328 37.9 %
Opponents TS% #339 56.8% (True Shooting)
Opponents Turnovers/Game #343 10.5
Steals #316 100

(01-27-2019 08:20 PM)HAWKING Wrote:  UNCW Defensive Stats out 353 D1 Teams

PPG Allowed #346 81.9
3pt Defense #328 37.9 %
Opponents TS% #339 56.8% (True Shooting)
Opponents Turnovers/Game #343 10.5
Steals #316 100

they are, who we thought they were

(01-27-2019 09:31 PM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(01-27-2019 08:20 PM)HAWKING Wrote:  UNCW Defensive Stats out 353 D1 Teams

PPG Allowed #346 81.9
3pt Defense #328 37.9 %
Opponents TS% #339 56.8% (True Shooting)
Opponents Turnovers/Game #343 10.5
Steals #316 100

they are, who we thought they were

Discouraging part is that these numbers have not really budged since October.

(01-27-2019 09:43 PM)HAWKING Wrote:  

(01-27-2019 09:31 PM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(01-27-2019 08:20 PM)HAWKING Wrote:  UNCW Defensive Stats out 353 D1 Teams

PPG Allowed #346 81.9
3pt Defense #328 37.9 %
Opponents TS% #339 56.8% (True Shooting)
Opponents Turnovers/Game #343 10.5
Steals #316 100

they are, who we thought they were

Discouraging part is that these numbers have not really budged since October.

All I know about what Coach McGrath is thinking is what I can glean from post game interviews, etc. But almost everything seems to add up to some version of 'we are still trying to get our players to learn to defend/execute our defensive scheme' - almost never any hint that the scheme itself is the wrong one.

I say 'almost never' because it seemed to me that when Coach famously said "we had to try something different" when commenting about going to a zone ("scary") it was a tacit admission that his defensive game plan was not going to get the job done.

I know The Mullet and others thought the Keatts's players knew nothing about how to play defense. But Keatts has been gone for a while now, and I don't remember (for example) player after player on opposing teams having 'career nights' shooting threes against Keatts's teams.

Is it possible that the team that has players that put out enough offensive 'energy' to lead the nation in double-doubles, be among the nation's leaders in assists, and to the lead the CAA in three point shooting suddenly lose their 'energy' when playing defense? Maybe. But my hunch is that for the stats to be as bad as they are the answer lies elsewhere.

(01-28-2019 06:53 AM)70shawk Wrote:  

(01-27-2019 09:43 PM)HAWKING Wrote:  

(01-27-2019 09:31 PM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(01-27-2019 08:20 PM)HAWKING Wrote:  UNCW Defensive Stats out 353 D1 Teams

PPG Allowed #346 81.9
3pt Defense #328 37.9 %
Opponents TS% #339 56.8% (True Shooting)
Opponents Turnovers/Game #343 10.5
Steals #316 100

they are, who we thought they were

Discouraging part is that these numbers have not really budged since October.

All I know about what Coach McGrath is thinking is what I can glean from post game interviews, etc. But almost everything seems to add up to some version of 'we are still trying to get our players to learn to defend/execute our defensive scheme' - almost never any hint that the scheme itself is the wrong one.

I say 'almost never' because it seemed to me that when Coach famously said "we had to try something different" when commenting about going to a zone ("scary") it was a tacit admission that his defensive game plan was not going to get the job done.

I know The Mullet and others thought the Keatts's players knew nothing about how to play defense. But Keatts has been gone for a while now, and I don't remember (for example) player after player on opposing teams having 'career nights' shooting threes against Keatts's teams.

Is it possible that the team that has players that put out enough offensive 'energy' to lead the nation in double-doubles, be among the nation's leaders in assists, and to the lead the CAA in three point shooting suddenly lose their 'energy' when playing defense? Maybe. But my hunch is that for the stats to be as bad as they are the answer lies elsewhere.

You are spot on. That has been my take for months now. I will not drink the Kool-Aid. The defensive scheme, specifically where to force the ball and the over reliance on weak side help causing late closeouts on 3s has hurt the team. Couple that with not being able to 'limit' 1 guy from beating you when he's hot (Clemons, Clay Mounce, Riller, Ithiel Horton, Siebring), even if it means doubling as the pass is in the air, or matching up with him in a zone, has been responsible for potential wins turning into same type losses.

If you lose the same way repetitively it causes players to 'think' they can't play defense which is simply not the case with this group. It's not a high IQ team but certainly not a team deserving of being ranked defensively in the bottom 5% of teams in the NCAA. When I watch the post game interviews I do not see a leader who can calmly respond to the moment. He 'looks' as if he has no answers and the mounting bad losses, statistics and lack of defensive progress bear that out.

After allowing 1.2 points per poss. to Elon on Sat., UNCW is 343rd in adjusted defensive efficiency. Seahawks allowing 1.16 ppp on season, making this the program's worst defensive team in KenPom Era. '08-09 squad under Moss allowed 1.14 ppp but also played Mason, VCU and ODU 2x. - Per Brian Mull via Twitter @BGMull

Just the man to shake up the staff and teach D is currently retired and living in the Wilmington area.... Jus sayin!

These stats and our record make it all the more perplexing why we don't make a radical change in our defense. When you are historically bad, what do you have to lose?

Hofstra, the team with the longest winning streak in the nation and undefeated in the CAA plays ZONE. They are #2 in the CAA in scoring defense, allowing 69.7 ppg to our 81.6 ppg. They are #1 in the CAA in opponents FG% at 43.5%. And they are #5 in opponents 3 pt. %, supposedly the weakness of playing zone(we're next to last). They are also ahead of UNCW in defensive rebounding(another supposed weakness).

Honestly, it seem like we are clinging to offensive rebounding by Cacok, and are afraid if we go zone we will lose that. But, there is no evidence it's true, and there is no evidence we would be worse than we already are in all aspects of playing defense.

The reason I didn't revive the ZONE/PRESS thread, is we are starting to press far more, but using it to run down the shot clock hasn't stopped our inability to stop the scoring. I'll give McGrath credit for instituting the press, but it obvioulsy isn't the solution to the problem. Since he was willing to make that change, why not make a radical change and try going zone almost exclusively against Towson? Their offense sucks and this is a great chance to try it on for size without much risk.

(01-28-2019 09:42 AM)82hawk Wrote:  These stats and our record make it all the more perplexing why we don't make a radical change in our defense. When you are historically bad, what do you have to lose?

Hofstra, the team with the longest winning streak in the nation and undefeated in the CAA plays ZONE. They are #2 in the CAA in scoring defense, allowing 69.7 ppg to our 81.6 ppg. They are #1 in the CAA in opponents FG% at 43.5%. And they are #5 in opponents 3 pt. %, supposedly the weakness of playing zone(we're next to last). They are also ahead of UNCW in defensive rebounding(another supposed weakness).

Honestly, it seem like we are clinging to offensive rebounding by Cacok, and are afraid if we go zone we will lose that. But, there is no evidence it's true, and there is no evidence we would be worse than we already are in all aspects of playing defense.

The reason I didn't revive the ZONE/PRESS thread, is we are starting to press far more, but using it to run down the shot clock hasn't stopped our inability to stop the scoring. I'll give McGrath credit for instituting the press, but it obvioulsy isn't the solution to the problem. Since he was willing to make that change, why not make a radical change and try going zone almost exclusively against Towson? Their offense sucks and this is a great chance to try it on for size without much risk.

It's also easier to fall into zone post press than it is M2M....

(01-28-2019 09:42 AM)82hawk Wrote:  These stats and our record make it all the more perplexing why we don't make a radical change in our defense. When you are historically bad, what do you have to lose?

Hofstra, the team with the longest winning streak in the nation and undefeated in the CAA plays ZONE. They are #2 in the CAA in scoring defense, allowing 69.7 ppg to our 81.6 ppg. They are #1 in the CAA in opponents FG% at 43.5%. And they are #5 in opponents 3 pt. %, supposedly the weakness of playing zone(we're next to last). They are also ahead of UNCW in defensive rebounding(another supposed weakness).

Honestly, it seem like we are clinging to offensive rebounding by Cacok, and are afraid if we go zone we will lose that. But, there is no evidence it's true, and there is no evidence we would be worse than we already are in all aspects of playing defense.

The reason I didn't revive the ZONE/PRESS thread, is we are starting to press far more, but using it to run down the shot clock hasn't stopped our inability to stop the scoring. I'll give McGrath credit for instituting the press, but it obvioulsy isn't the solution to the problem. Since he was willing to make that change, why not make a radical change and try going zone almost exclusively against Towson? Their offense sucks and this is a great chance to try it on for size without much risk.

According to Synergy Towson is equally poor vs M-M (0.819 PPP) as ZONE (0.863 PPP) In general terms, they are poor in transition offense, very poor at stopping the ball handler on picks but excellent at defending post ups.

(01-28-2019 09:41 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  Just the man to shake up the staff and teach D is currently retired and living in the Wilmington area.... Jus sayin!

And who might that be?

(01-28-2019 09:57 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 09:42 AM)82hawk Wrote:  These stats and our record make it all the more perplexing why we don't make a radical change in our defense. When you are historically bad, what do you have to lose?

Hofstra, the team with the longest winning streak in the nation and undefeated in the CAA plays ZONE. They are #2 in the CAA in scoring defense, allowing 69.7 ppg to our 81.6 ppg. They are #1 in the CAA in opponents FG% at 43.5%. And they are #5 in opponents 3 pt. %, supposedly the weakness of playing zone(we're next to last). They are also ahead of UNCW in defensive rebounding(another supposed weakness).

Honestly, it seem like we are clinging to offensive rebounding by Cacok, and are afraid if we go zone we will lose that. But, there is no evidence it's true, and there is no evidence we would be worse than we already are in all aspects of playing defense.

The reason I didn't revive the ZONE/PRESS thread, is we are starting to press far more, but using it to run down the shot clock hasn't stopped our inability to stop the scoring. I'll give McGrath credit for instituting the press, but it obvioulsy isn't the solution to the problem. Since he was willing to make that change, why not make a radical change and try going zone almost exclusively against Towson? Their offense sucks and this is a great chance to try it on for size without much risk.

It's also easier to fall into zone post press than it is M2M....

Depending on the type of press of course. Towson has faced a press 204 possessions this year scoring even less than normal at 0.712 PPP.

(01-28-2019 09:58 AM)HAWKING Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 09:42 AM)82hawk Wrote:  These stats and our record make it all the more perplexing why we don't make a radical change in our defense. When you are historically bad, what do you have to lose?

Hofstra, the team with the longest winning streak in the nation and undefeated in the CAA plays ZONE. They are #2 in the CAA in scoring defense, allowing 69.7 ppg to our 81.6 ppg. They are #1 in the CAA in opponents FG% at 43.5%. And they are #5 in opponents 3 pt. %, supposedly the weakness of playing zone(we're next to last). They are also ahead of UNCW in defensive rebounding(another supposed weakness).

Honestly, it seem like we are clinging to offensive rebounding by Cacok, and are afraid if we go zone we will lose that. But, there is no evidence it's true, and there is no evidence we would be worse than we already are in all aspects of playing defense.

The reason I didn't revive the ZONE/PRESS thread, is we are starting to press far more, but using it to run down the shot clock hasn't stopped our inability to stop the scoring. I'll give McGrath credit for instituting the press, but it obvioulsy isn't the solution to the problem. Since he was willing to make that change, why not make a radical change and try going zone almost exclusively against Towson? Their offense sucks and this is a great chance to try it on for size without much risk.

According to Synergy Towson is equally poor vs M-M (0.819 PPP) as ZONE (0.863 PPP) In general terms, they are poor in transition offense, very poor at stopping the ball handler on picks but excellent at defending post ups.

Well, glad that at least works in our favor.

I like 82's point about significantly switching to zone and just take a look at the defense percentages change for better or worse and then assess where we should go from there. Considering we're not in the running for even a tourney bye at this point... it can't hurt. The one thing I'll go a step further in saying is that we should, IMO, give those zone defenses a more significant look against the better teams. Especially considering HAWKING's point above. If we play mostly zone vs them, they may struggle just as much as they would've if we play M-2-M. I'd like to see us play the zone against a more potent team... most notably as we've already played each team once so it's a great opportunity to measure the success/failure of our zone option.

(01-28-2019 09:58 AM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  [quote='Seahawkhoops' pid='15866192' dateline='1548686466']
Just the man to shake up the staff and teach D is currently retired and living in the Wilmington area.... Jus sayin!

And who might that be?
[/quote
The man who burst us onto the national scene, the man, the myth, the legend.........................
JERRY W!!

(01-28-2019 10:04 AM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 09:58 AM)HAWKING Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 09:42 AM)82hawk Wrote:  These stats and our record make it all the more perplexing why we don't make a radical change in our defense. When you are historically bad, what do you have to lose?

Hofstra, the team with the longest winning streak in the nation and undefeated in the CAA plays ZONE. They are #2 in the CAA in scoring defense, allowing 69.7 ppg to our 81.6 ppg. They are #1 in the CAA in opponents FG% at 43.5%. And they are #5 in opponents 3 pt. %, supposedly the weakness of playing zone(we're next to last). They are also ahead of UNCW in defensive rebounding(another supposed weakness).

Honestly, it seem like we are clinging to offensive rebounding by Cacok, and are afraid if we go zone we will lose that. But, there is no evidence it's true, and there is no evidence we would be worse than we already are in all aspects of playing defense.

The reason I didn't revive the ZONE/PRESS thread, is we are starting to press far more, but using it to run down the shot clock hasn't stopped our inability to stop the scoring. I'll give McGrath credit for instituting the press, but it obvioulsy isn't the solution to the problem. Since he was willing to make that change, why not make a radical change and try going zone almost exclusively against Towson? Their offense sucks and this is a great chance to try it on for size without much risk.

According to Synergy Towson is equally poor vs M-M (0.819 PPP) as ZONE (0.863 PPP) In general terms, they are poor in transition offense, very poor at stopping the ball handler on picks but excellent at defending post ups.

Well, glad that at least works in our favor.

I like 82's point about significantly switching to zone and just take a look at the defense percentages change for better or worse and then assess where we should go from there. Considering we're not in the running for even a tourney bye at this point... it can't hurt. The one thing I'll go a step further in saying is that we should, IMO, give those zone defenses a more significant look against the better teams. Especially considering HAWKING's point above. If we play mostly zone vs them, they may struggle just as much as they would've if we play M-2-M. I'd like to see us play the zone against a more potent team... most notably as we've already played each team once so it's a great opportunity to measure the success/failure of our zone option.

In the entire NCAA only the Savannah State Tigers, Detroit Titans and W & M give up more Points Per Possession than UNCW in M-M (0.987 PPP). Oh yeah I forgot, we lost to the Tribe. Also, a switch to Zone in the long run might be help put a finger in the leaking dam but in order to play effective zone you need to have solid M-M fundamentals. By the way, UNCW's Zone has given up even more PPP than man so far (1.11).

(01-28-2019 10:13 AM)HAWKING Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 10:04 AM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 09:58 AM)HAWKING Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 09:42 AM)82hawk Wrote:  These stats and our record make it all the more perplexing why we don't make a radical change in our defense. When you are historically bad, what do you have to lose?

Hofstra, the team with the longest winning streak in the nation and undefeated in the CAA plays ZONE. They are #2 in the CAA in scoring defense, allowing 69.7 ppg to our 81.6 ppg. They are #1 in the CAA in opponents FG% at 43.5%. And they are #5 in opponents 3 pt. %, supposedly the weakness of playing zone(we're next to last). They are also ahead of UNCW in defensive rebounding(another supposed weakness).

Honestly, it seem like we are clinging to offensive rebounding by Cacok, and are afraid if we go zone we will lose that. But, there is no evidence it's true, and there is no evidence we would be worse than we already are in all aspects of playing defense.

The reason I didn't revive the ZONE/PRESS thread, is we are starting to press far more, but using it to run down the shot clock hasn't stopped our inability to stop the scoring. I'll give McGrath credit for instituting the press, but it obvioulsy isn't the solution to the problem. Since he was willing to make that change, why not make a radical change and try going zone almost exclusively against Towson? Their offense sucks and this is a great chance to try it on for size without much risk.

According to Synergy Towson is equally poor vs M-M (0.819 PPP) as ZONE (0.863 PPP) In general terms, they are poor in transition offense, very poor at stopping the ball handler on picks but excellent at defending post ups.

Well, glad that at least works in our favor.

I like 82's point about significantly switching to zone and just take a look at the defense percentages change for better or worse and then assess where we should go from there. Considering we're not in the running for even a tourney bye at this point... it can't hurt. The one thing I'll go a step further in saying is that we should, IMO, give those zone defenses a more significant look against the better teams. Especially considering HAWKING's point above. If we play mostly zone vs them, they may struggle just as much as they would've if we play M-2-M. I'd like to see us play the zone against a more potent team... most notably as we've already played each team once so it's a great opportunity to measure the success/failure of our zone option.

In the entire NCAA only the Savannah State Tigers, Detroit Titans and W & M give up more Points Per Possession than UNCW in M-M (0.987 PPP). Oh yeah I forgot, we lost to the Tribe. Also, a switch to Zone in the long run might be help put a finger in the leaking dam but in order to play effective zone you need to have solid M-M fundamentals. By the way, UNCW's Zone has given up even more PPP than man so far (1.11).

Last year?

(01-28-2019 10:15 AM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 10:13 AM)HAWKING Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 10:04 AM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 09:58 AM)HAWKING Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 09:42 AM)82hawk Wrote:  These stats and our record make it all the more perplexing why we don't make a radical change in our defense. When you are historically bad, what do you have to lose?

Hofstra, the team with the longest winning streak in the nation and undefeated in the CAA plays ZONE. They are #2 in the CAA in scoring defense, allowing 69.7 ppg to our 81.6 ppg. They are #1 in the CAA in opponents FG% at 43.5%. And they are #5 in opponents 3 pt. %, supposedly the weakness of playing zone(we're next to last). They are also ahead of UNCW in defensive rebounding(another supposed weakness).

Honestly, it seem like we are clinging to offensive rebounding by Cacok, and are afraid if we go zone we will lose that. But, there is no evidence it's true, and there is no evidence we would be worse than we already are in all aspects of playing defense.

The reason I didn't revive the ZONE/PRESS thread, is we are starting to press far more, but using it to run down the shot clock hasn't stopped our inability to stop the scoring. I'll give McGrath credit for instituting the press, but it obvioulsy isn't the solution to the problem. Since he was willing to make that change, why not make a radical change and try going zone almost exclusively against Towson? Their offense sucks and this is a great chance to try it on for size without much risk.

According to Synergy Towson is equally poor vs M-M (0.819 PPP) as ZONE (0.863 PPP) In general terms, they are poor in transition offense, very poor at stopping the ball handler on picks but excellent at defending post ups.

Well, glad that at least works in our favor.

I like 82's point about significantly switching to zone and just take a look at the defense percentages change for better or worse and then assess where we should go from there. Considering we're not in the running for even a tourney bye at this point... it can't hurt. The one thing I'll go a step further in saying is that we should, IMO, give those zone defenses a more significant look against the better teams. Especially considering HAWKING's point above. If we play mostly zone vs them, they may struggle just as much as they would've if we play M-2-M. I'd like to see us play the zone against a more potent team... most notably as we've already played each team once so it's a great opportunity to measure the success/failure of our zone option.

In the entire NCAA only the Savannah State Tigers, Detroit Titans and W & M give up more Points Per Possession than UNCW in M-M (0.987 PPP). Oh yeah I forgot, we lost to the Tribe. Also, a switch to Zone in the long run might be help put a finger in the leaking dam but in order to play effective zone you need to have solid M-M fundamentals. By the way, UNCW's Zone has given up even more PPP than man so far (1.11).

Last year?

No, these are up to the day stats for 2018-19. (22 games)

(01-28-2019 10:10 AM)Seahawkhoops Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 09:58 AM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  [quote='Seahawkhoops' pid='15866192' dateline='1548686466']
Just the man to shake up the staff and teach D is currently retired and living in the Wilmington area.... Jus sayin!

And who might that be?
[/quote
The man who burst us onto the national scene, the man, the myth, the legend.........................
JERRY W!!

Jerry was great at UNCW. However, once he left... his career took a sharp decline. In his final 5 years coaching at DePaul, his teams overall were 59-80, and 20-51 (.282) in conference.

Sometimes it's best to keep the past in the past.

(01-28-2019 10:20 AM)HAWKING Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 10:15 AM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 10:13 AM)HAWKING Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 10:04 AM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 09:58 AM)HAWKING Wrote:  According to Synergy Towson is equally poor vs M-M (0.819 PPP) as ZONE (0.863 PPP) In general terms, they are poor in transition offense, very poor at stopping the ball handler on picks but excellent at defending post ups.

Well, glad that at least works in our favor.

I like 82's point about significantly switching to zone and just take a look at the defense percentages change for better or worse and then assess where we should go from there. Considering we're not in the running for even a tourney bye at this point... it can't hurt. The one thing I'll go a step further in saying is that we should, IMO, give those zone defenses a more significant look against the better teams. Especially considering HAWKING's point above. If we play mostly zone vs them, they may struggle just as much as they would've if we play M-2-M. I'd like to see us play the zone against a more potent team... most notably as we've already played each team once so it's a great opportunity to measure the success/failure of our zone option.

In the entire NCAA only the Savannah State Tigers, Detroit Titans and W & M give up more Points Per Possession than UNCW in M-M (0.987 PPP). Oh yeah I forgot, we lost to the Tribe. Also, a switch to Zone in the long run might be help put a finger in the leaking dam but in order to play effective zone you need to have solid M-M fundamentals. By the way, UNCW's Zone has given up even more PPP than man so far (1.11).

Last year?

No, these are up to the day stats for 2018-19. (22 games)

I was referring to the fact that we beat William and Mary.

(01-28-2019 10:20 AM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 10:20 AM)HAWKING Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 10:15 AM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 10:13 AM)HAWKING Wrote:  

(01-28-2019 10:04 AM)CG_Hawk06 Wrote:  Well, glad that at least works in our favor.

I like 82's point about significantly switching to zone and just take a look at the defense percentages change for better or worse and then assess where we should go from there. Considering we're not in the running for even a tourney bye at this point... it can't hurt. The one thing I'll go a step further in saying is that we should, IMO, give those zone defenses a more significant look against the better teams. Especially considering HAWKING's point above. If we play mostly zone vs them, they may struggle just as much as they would've if we play M-2-M. I'd like to see us play the zone against a more potent team... most notably as we've already played each team once so it's a great opportunity to measure the success/failure of our zone option.

In the entire NCAA only the Savannah State Tigers, Detroit Titans and W & M give up more Points Per Possession than UNCW in M-M (0.987 PPP). Oh yeah I forgot, we lost to the Tribe. Also, a switch to Zone in the long run might be help put a finger in the leaking dam but in order to play effective zone you need to have solid M-M fundamentals. By the way, UNCW's Zone has given up even more PPP than man so far (1.11).

Last year?

No, these are up to the day stats for 2018-19. (22 games)

I was referring to the fact that we beat William and Mary.

Pardon me. My mistake. I omitted the word 'almost'.