Yes, Doc, I think OR is, in fact, referring to the current and recent past johnnies.

if i were to second guess his opinion on this one, i might suggest that while the johnnies have, without a shadow of a doubt, won several big upset games per year due to the neckmo, it is possible that this upside has been evened out by some shocking losses that may have been caused by the unorthodox offense.

Bing seems to have had a TON of success in D3 with his Iowa teams with only two guys shooting the shots on offense and he runs flex. I kept a good field goal percentage with almost all of my distro in my PG in a triangle offense at Lane, but it seems now that team has a ton of seniors that they are a more balanced and have done very well. I wouldn't say my knowledge of the game comes close to billyg or OR or oldave, but I just thought I would throw those two observations out there.

Quote: Originally posted by gbous314 on 11/15/2009Bing seems to have had a TON of success in D3 with his Iowa teams with only two guys shooting the shots on offense and he runs flex.  I kept a good field goal percentage with almost all of my distro in my PG in a triangle offense at Lane, but it seems now that team has a ton of seniors that they are a more balanced and have done very well.  I wouldn't say my knowledge of the game comes close to billyg or OR or oldave, but I just thought I would throw those two observations out there.

bing's central team is a great example (teams, that is, his tark one may be more famous by now but he has/had one in rupp as well) - in my experience, the quintessential example. i'm not sure if bing is still playing them but anybody who hasn't taken a look should, assuming they are still intact

p.s. OR, did you ever take a look at them? (i think i sitemailed you about them a few months ago). the johnnies of which you speak are ran by a guy who was a long time member of Tark's ASC, a conference friendly to bing's central squad, and he is using "the bing model", which has been adopted by a few members of the ASC in an attempt to replicate bing's success (sadly, nobody has yet succeeded). in fact, my own strategy over the past year has been a shift towards "the bing model", after my 10 senior superclass team in rupp fell not once, but twice, to a team with approximately 1-2 players who were slightly better than my #10 man, in a stunning display of 2 guards taking every damn shot (luckily, we won our 4th game, in the final 4). at the time, bing was with 0 championships, but i took notice, and then i think he then racked up about 4 in about 4 months. his system is particularly remarkable in the potential era, i have yet to completely figure it out but that continues to be my top priority in my learning, which is saying a lot, considering most would be happy with their current model if they were me. the johnnies are another very, very interesting example, as i had concluded it was impossible with motion, but yet again, it shows just how little i know about this game. but that's what makes it great, no?

Quote: Originally posted by oldave on 11/15/2009Yes, Doc, I think OR is, in fact,  referring to the current and recent past johnnies.if i were to second guess his opinion on this one, i might suggest that while the johnnies have, without a shadow of a doubt, won several  big upset games per year due to the neckmo,  it is possible that this upside has been evened out by some shocking losses that may have been caused by the unorthodox offense. 

oldave, that has always been my concern, the downside of the volatility of, as you put it, such an unorthodox offense. this volatility is what has kept me from a 100% switch to the bing model. whenever i would watch him crush my should-be-superior orthodox team mercilessly, i would think, but couldn't he have just easily have lost? somehow, he got his team to outperform others, myself included, SO SEVERELY, that for a minute (about 5 seasons), the volatility couldn't even catch up to him, and he appeared unstoppable. i still have not managed to unlock that mystery, but i suspect it has something to do with the flex (he had 2 guards putting up about 60ppg between them taking almost all 3s, consistently around 45% on a tough schedule). or maybe its only possible in d3. also, i feel there is a weakness to the +3 to +5, that creates enough volatility to make a strategist like myself cry. still, every time i push my own strategy closer to bing's, the rewards are huge. i have been waiting for his strategy to sweep the nation so to speak, and revolutionize HD, but it has yet to happen... though im not sure why?

gil - I have gotten several sitemails about it, plus I see st johns run it, as well as a few conf mates in other worlds,

far as I can tell, noone has won a d1 title or a string of them using it, matter of fact, seems the most common d1 winners either are amped up teams that fcp on steriods, or pretty avg teams with great coaches who run by the book - unfortunately, none of my teams have cracked the barrier in a while, even though we are getting close

gil, that's another thing I was thinking about bing's strategy, whether it could actually achieve anything approaching that same sort of success at DI. My gut instinct is no, but as you say, there is a lot all of us don't quite understand about HD.

are the bingballers not suceptible to double teaming and plus defenses, assuming they do it every single night?

interesting footnote here: remember-you cant DT specific players in the FCpress. this is one of the reasons why i went to a zone/press in tark.

seems kinda odd really, why cant you put specific emphasis on a certain player in the FCP? they say "you are DTing everyone" but that doesnt stop these bingballers from lighting it up.

oldave you are assuming that the FCP is a legit Defense, when in reality the way WIS describes its FCP, nobody IRL runs it that way. That is why you can't think about it the way that you are, yeah you are right you should be able to do something like that but since the FCP is not a realistic D (in terms of RL) it doesn't work that way.

FCP and FB should be addons to the main Ds/Os, not have their own identities.

good point, zee, good point.



but, in tthat case, is there a strategic reason why HDfcp is not allowed to DT? maybe to offset what some say is a superior defense?

heres another thing about bingballers and D3. at D3 there seems to be more zone, fewer plus defenses, and a whole lot of bad defenders (even on great teams).

that would, i think, make it easuer to get away with a one dimensional offense.

i think, in general, that great perimeter teams seem to be able to shoot a very high percentage on FG3s in D3. 45%+ is not uncommom. and I have even seen 50% on some ocassions.

In D1 , i dont recall seeing 45%+ on FG3s for a team that was shooting alot of them (18+ per game or so), at least not against a top50 schedule. am i right about that?

to the guys who play against bingballers regularly in D3.

are you DTing both of the SGs? are you playing a plus defense? are your SGs (if m2m) quick, athletic and good defenders? and does that stuff seem to have no effect? or just not enough?

just wondering.

heres another thing that just popped into my head. i have allways figured that a player with 12 dist will not tire more quickly than a player with 0dist. in fact i have recently told someone this. but, im not sure i KNOW this. (whereas i think most folks agree that a player with 20-30+ dist should tire faster.. i think we were told this? ... but how does that jive with the 50+dist that the bingball SGs are getting?)

what if... all these other guys with zero dist (other than the SGs) are staying really fresh? and as a result are playing way better defense than they otherwise would, and also rebounding better. has anyone ever felt that the bingballers play better defense and/or rebound better than they prolly should? ..

just brainstorming. probly not ture, but just throwing it out there.

Quote: Originally Posted By oldave on 11/16/2009
good point, zee, good point.



but, in tthat case, is there a strategic reason why HDfcp is not allowed to DT? maybe to offset what some say is a superior defense?

No, the reason is that the FCP already traps everyone that touches the ball (or tries to), that is the deffinition of the WIS FCP and that is why you really can't think about it in the reasoning that you are using, yes you are right it would make sense to be able to have the ability to tell your team who is more important to double team, but the D already does that.

No team IRL runs the HD FCP, that is why you really can't talk about it in the terms that you are using ole d.

hmmm, yeah, i guess.

i think we are not on the same page zeedude.

but, it dont really matter.

Name me a team that plays a FCP that in the halfcourt does not run either a man to man or zone? A team that only traps players the entire court.

IRL what you usually will see is a 3/4 FCP that traps up until the last 1/4, in which case you are right ole d you would have the option in that last 1/4 court to DT specific players, because you'd be running a man or zone type D. In HD there is no final stage of d where your team turns when in the last 1/4 court, its always a trap of the ball.

Bing has had terrific success like I mentioned before. But it is true that it might be more successful at D3 than at D2 or D1. Bing has had A+ prestige for a while and consistently pulls great SGs and then redshirts them so they are STUDS playing against a bunch of 4th graders most of the time. But Bing has done well against the best teams too, but I have seen him beaten by the good teams recently when they have gone +3 on him and have had good balance on their teams. But Bing has had tremendous success and it is intriguing and tough to discount. I have also moved towards the less is more in terms of which players I have shoot, mostly due to the two chucker model that Bing has set up.