http://www.wisjournal.com/hd/GameResults/BoxScore.aspx?gid=6439238
I want to make very clear that this is not whining. I am just asking a question, and obviously I won the game, so I'm not complaining about that. And I am not going to pretend my center is anything defensively, and I run a man-to-man which may have exacerbated things.
But all that said, I ran a -5 defense in this game and the other team's center put up 25 points, all on 2-pt shots. With a -5 defense, I don't expect to magically take out the opponents entire low post game, but I sure don't expect a center to score 25, especially when that center has 12 speed. What could he have been doing to get himself all those points? All told, I would have expected him to maybe put up something in the teens given the defensive mismatch. But still, what would he have done if I put in a balanced offense? 50 points?
Meanwhile, while it's obviously a fairly small sample size, the other team only went 4-9 from 3-point land even though I told my defense to basically ignore the perimeter. This team isn't a very good 3-point shooting team to begin with, but still, Henson only went 2-6 from beyond the arc even with 70 perimeter? With my defenders ignoring the perimeter it should have been like shootaround practice for him. Their nine 3-point attempts is also barely higher than their per-game average, which is around 8. If a team is totally ignoring the perimeter, would a team really not significantly increase its 3-point attempts? If all 5 defenders are essentially crowding the post, why would you continue to take that many shots with your center while not giving a second thought to your guards? To make matters worse, he was running a flex, which should put more of an emphasis on perimeter shooting to begin with!
Thoughts? Has anyone else had the experience of defensive positioning playing this inconsequential a role in game planning? Is it even worthwhile to continue adjusting it?