Posted by aejones on 5/3/2012 2:19:00 AM (view original):
I agree with pretty much everything said. I ran uptempo when I had a deep bench and recruited for stamina. I rarely have more than 5 or 6 upperclassmen, so I might be at a disadvantage when I'm playing someone who has 7 or 8 upperclassmen and is running a high variance program to only be good 1 or 2 out of every 4 years. I also don't want to run uptempo against a press team. My 5 starters are often just ridiculously good.
Also, I've personally just had very poor success with uptempo. I don't know if it doesn't work well with motion (probably my offense of choice) or if my players rush their shots or what-- I just feel like I win more with slowdown or normal.
With work ethic, I don't remember saying I didn't take people under 50, I value 30+ about the same (obviously there is a sliding scale, and I'd prefer not to get someone with 31 WE who will won't get the PT necessary to up his WE). In fact, I just signed someone with 21 WE in phelan because he doesn't have a lot of places to improve and his cores are already quite good. This is an exception of course, and I actually valued him higher than a 32 WE PF who had more categories to improve and a worse GPA.
its not just you. i have 0 surprise you have bad uptempo experience. why? you play tough opponents, and most likely, you ONLY MEASURE SUCCESS IN TERMS OF SUCCESS AGAINST TOUGH OPPONENTS. that is key to having no success with uptempo. i was the same way, same conclusion. i would advise anyone looking at uptempo from the results of their games, to totally segregate your success against inferior teams, compared to comparable or superior teams. your results may be totally different - and also have to be careful of sample size (if you play 3 really good teams a year, and you are a really good team, you probably need to look at this over 10-20 seasons to get anything out of it).
in uptempo, you rush shots - when you rush shots, your fg% goes down, significantly. the "theory" posted by admins in past shows that this fg% roughly could stay the same. in fact, old admin repeatedly said, think of uptempo as really only affecting possessions. but its been shown statistically that is not true. it affects a LOT of things. what admin was saying is, in his simulation (of all kinds of teams playing each other, with potentially huge talent discrepencies averaged out with small ones), most of that stuff evened out. fg%, for example, evens out because the extra fast break points, which come from a very high % shot, off set a large number of half court shots that are maybe 4% less likely to go in.
however, play a great team - especially a great defensive team - and you have 0 chance, none, of on average, making up for your half court rushes with your extra fast break points. even against a press, you simply don't get past that D in the open court very much more, if at all. so, when good teams play, uptempo is generally quite bad. are there circumstances its worth using? maybe, but 98% of the time, no - just my opinion on that one though.
the reason so many coaches struggle with uptempo, IMO, is because they play all season, as high end teams (maybe say, 10th in the nation), playing on average, much less than 10th best teams. then id get to the elite 8, play one of these teams, and they don't figure you need a totally different strategy against tough or tougher than you teams, than you do against bad teams. they would go ahead and run uptempo into an extremely tough defense and just get killed. that uptempo, IMO, in elite 8 and later games, when i was the #1 team, cost my opponents at least a quarter, and often half, of their chance of winning (i.e. if they had 20%, now they have less than 15%, and often 10%) - even though it worked for them, generally speaking, all season. however, in their normal schedule, playing only maybe 3-4 teams who were in that same top tier group, and very often fewer teams - they get no indication of just how badly uptempo is going to hurt them in tough games.