Posted by jdno on 11/16/2014 1:04:00 AM (view original):
I agree that for FB, you still need high PE guys if you want to shoot a lot of 3's.
And it's interesting that you mention minimizing volatility, as I've observed with my own FB/FCP team that the best way to do this is to just pound it inside, get to the line, and get the other team into the PF/stamina death spiral. Whenever I open things up and shoot a bunch of 3's, this can backfire on my in 2 ways: 1) if we're cold from the outside and shoot in volume, we struggle to score points, and 2) this minimizes the chances of any death spiral happening for my opponent as I won't be drawing as many fouls.
Said another way, I'm usually quite efficient with a lower volatility by shooting tons of 2's rather than being more perimeter oriented. I just haven't been able to have it both ways, or maybe I didn't have as many gunners needed to really test the boundaries of high-volume 3-pt shooting. Usually I can't find an elite (ATH + SP + PE) guy I'd like, so I default to just (ATH + SP + DEF + ST) for the most part. Sometimes, esp. in exhibition, I'll shoot more 3's to test this concept and I'll have a game where I'm 4/18 and I fail to get the other team gassed and in foul trouble and I just back away from shooting so many 3's b/c I wonder if it's really worth it over the course of a season to have a poor shooting game like that (and/or failure to get the death spiral rolling) come up every so often that really costs me a game I should win (case in point: 2 nights ago with Montclair St. vs. Bethel when I was an 18-pt fave, got totally shut down on offense, shot more 3's than I normally do, and their 10-man roster didn't skip a beat all night long).
Thanks for your thoughts billy
well, because its you, i definitely want to add, much of my feeling on fb/fcp is theoretical, extrapolating experiences with similar situations and effects but not so much through personal fb/fcp experience. i have some personal experience, and definitely had teams outperform reasonable expectations with it, but i never won a title or was a title favorite or anything. my best fb/fcp accomplishment would be taking a d+ mid major to the elite 8 in 4 seasons, using half my budget on pure recruiting experimentation for the first 2 seasons. i only tried to do anything useful because i feel guilty if i totally crap up a team, to the... one or two other people in the conference :) as the case was there. but that is completely different - playing fb/fcp to outperform your talent, to get a team competing in the top 10 or top 25 who otherwise couldn't - that is nothing like playing fb/fcp to win it all. and playing in d1 is nothing like d3.
but, based on some pretty similar experiences that seem pretty relevant, i just want to quickly clarify a couple things that i personally feel hurt foul/fatigue based teams, when it comes to consistent NT performance, not average performance (volatility, but also, the NT is different that regular season). i think motion/press, uptempo or normal, and fb/press, can both result in VERY solid implementations of the foul/fatigue strategy, and these thoughts are really general to that kind of strategy, more than fb/fcp.
- as a champion favorite, the % of heavy - defenses you will face in the NT is pretty high. playing a - against a foul/fatigue based team is a huge ? mark, sometimes ist hugely inappropriate, sometimes its hugely appropriate. most coaches don't know why or how to decide that situation, its probably about the least well understood proposition in the entire game planning arena. but when you are the title favorite, the other guy is typically playing right, going with that -, if he had any chance at all in the first place - meaning his fatigue situation was solid (based on stamina, depth and off/def). a heavy - against a team shooting no 3s, that can cut hard, really hard, either way. it can jack up your fouls drawn and completely give you the game (that was already yours to start with, in this case), or it can really impact your fg% and kill your offensive efficiency. in this case, the gamble favors the underdog, as is usually the case.
- playing aggressive foul subbing is a pretty important and useful thing, especially for teams with depth inside and out, especially against foul drawing teams. its not talked about much, but i have to believe a lot of the other top coaches have figured this out, too. generally, im guessing those folks come from the same pool of coaches who are the guys with deep, well built teams that can stand up to moderate foul trouble - the teams most dangerous to you. you may assume your opponent is aggressively subbing foul wise, but most coaches probably don't, and if not, it definitely understates how well deep teams can stand up to the fatigue death spiral, deep teams that are built and coached right, that is. strategies that work better against teams that aren't the cream of the crop, i just never can really get behind, in situations where the main character is clearly going for championships first and foremost. i think foul/fatigue based teams fall in that group, because its so much about depth and the quality of that depth (having it in the right places), and how well the other coach adjusts, which are allthings you win big on against the general public (even just NT teams or top 25 teams), but im not sure if you win against the cream of the crop. maybe you do, i would guess not at least if you only look at really good opponents, but i very well could be wrong.
- the d2/d3 factor is interesting - d1, its way less viable, there are way fewer press teams to pick on. in d2/d3, there are a ton, but i always get the impression that top d2/d3 conferences (not sure you are in one) run more press than d2/d3 as a whole. seems to me that misrepresentation of opponents was directly responsible for much of the gap between NT and regular season performance, for at least 2 programs i observed (that weren't mine, they were conference mates).
despite all that, very possible the foul drawing fb/fcp is the way to go in d3. i just find fb so diverse, i guess i feel a hybrid strategy covers the territory better. if you had the 3 point shooting and could opt to use it, that could go a long way - i feel like against deep well built opponents, its the better strategy - and that is the case i optimize for myself, always have for title-centric teams. but the foul drawing strategy is so good against so many opponents, going either way would be awesome. i suppose in d2/d3 most teams are either 1) not that deep or 2) run press, so you cover the ground pretty well with the foul drawing strategy. i really don't know which side weighs heavier, seems there are really meaningful merits on both sides. im guessing you know better than me, sounds like you have more personal experience than i do!
11/16/2014 4:42 PM (edited)