I am not sure if this is really significant enough to be a post, so apologies upfront. But at least I hope I can initiate some conversations on what MU could do to improve the O. I have not used stats to prove my points, partly because some stats are not kept, e.g. number of dribble penetrations attempted per game or per player.
Here are some of my thoughts which echos what others have brought out in other posts:
1. More dribble penetration. This creates more variety in the attack: a) drive to the basket, b) dish off to a big man for a close range basket, c) kick back out for an open shot, or d) get fouled thus accumulating fouls. I think d) is really important because of the style we play. For an entire game, it is important to get the opposing team in foul trouble because very few teams can match our player depth. Maybe I am too much of a homer, but I get the feeling that Dixon, Paul, and probably all our guards have pretty quick first steps. I am pretty confident that they all have the physical abilitytake someone off the dribble in a one-on-one situation. On b), I am pretty sure that it rarely happens with us. I would love to see Ramsey get baskets that way.
2. Cut down on the poor shots, especially the NBA 3's (see 1c) above). I am sorry to call out Kimmie and Demnon, but they seem to be the most guilty. I am not saying that they don't have the NBA range, which I think they clearly do. But just because one is able to do some things, it doesn't mean that one has to. My assumption is that the accuracy will increase with a closer shot (e.g. college 3), so why not take an extra step and shoot closer.
3. Set better picks and/or use the picks better. a) High picks. It does not seem like we do much with the pick at the top of the key. Rarely does a shot result from it. The ZT game winning 3-pointer is an exception and not the rule. Again, I would like lo know how many of our 3's result from a high pick versus rotation of the ball to an open shooter. Ball movement is of course a good thing so I am not poopooing that. Also, I don't think our high picks are effective enough. There are too many occassions where the defender is able to fight through. We need to force them to switch and create an inbalance on the defense. This also relates to 4. b) Use picks to free up shooters. We have a ton of shooters, so any screen to free someone up will be great. I think Kimmie could really wear a defender down if someone had to chase him through screens. I remember, that they used to set double screens for Reggie Miller (BTW, not my favorate since I though he was cocky) at UCLA. The poor defender got knocked around by the screens, and Miller was lethal with space. c) Use guards to low pick and free up our bigs. Outside of Moore, I don't think anyone else really has a true low post game. Why not use our tough guards to free them up and take advantage of our bigs' mobility? An example of this is the old Jazz teams (which I hated) where Hornacek or Stockton would set screens to free Malone and other bigs. Those two were pretty tough as they paid the price for the screens.Since I taped the game tonight, I reviewed it just to see what the non-ball players were doing. It seems like we have really good player spacing and passing/rotating the ball, but I did not see effective picks.
4.Pick and roll. I loved the two-man game that we had with Kareem Rush and Arthur Johnson or Paulding and Johnson. I think our big men are mobile and could really do well in the pick and roll game. How about a Kimmie/Bowers tandem? I think it would be nightmare to guard.
Do you'all agree/disagree? Maybe the 40 minutes of hell system doesn't lend itself to these ideas?