Posted by bhansalid00 on 2/10/2017 9:16:00 AM (view original):
Lost this game, and I'm trying to understand why so I can learn from it. Arizona has only 9 scholly players and played uptempo press against me (OSU). In fact, they only really played 8 guys in this game. Their team STA isn't great, but their starting SG, SF and PF are all above 90 STA. I played normal tempo M2M with 11 guys, and started +3 to counteract their reliance on 3PT. And sure enough, I held them to 10/35 on threes. But somehow I was in more fatigue trouble than they were, and lost by 7. Turned the ball over a ton, even compared to other games I've played vs FCP teams.

Should I have gone uptempo? Something else I missed?

Interesting read, I learn something new from MikeT today!

I'm not in Rupp so I can't see it, but is Herbert Reed leading the country in FGA's? He had 33 that game. His coaches goal is just to get him to win the scoring title. The team success is secondary.

Looking at this closer, I chalk this up to WIS's WTF games. There's no reason you should have lost this one. I think there are one or two of those games a season. Sometimes you can still win those games.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/10/2017 9:47:00 AM (view original):
OK, to follow up, if I'm the better shooting team, I play uptempo because I want more shots. Unless they're far superior rebounders.

Is this line of thinking correct?

Yes, that would be one consideration among others (eg. fatigue, quality depth, etc.).

Another question about uptempo . . . if a team is generally weak on passing, would uptempo help? (under the premise that fewer passes between shots = fewer opportunities for poor passing teams to commit turnovers)

No. It would hurt because more possessions would equal more turnovers

Thanks.

Posted by tecwrg on 2/11/2017 7:02:00 AM (view original):
Another question about uptempo . . . if a team is generally weak on passing, would uptempo help? (under the premise that fewer passes between shots = fewer opportunities for poor passing teams to commit turnovers)

More possessions but fewer passes per possession. I doubt anyone has looked at it closely enough to actually offer anything more than a guess.

Posted by tecwrg on 2/11/2017 7:02:00 AM (view original):
Another question about uptempo . . . if a team is generally weak on passing, would uptempo help? (under the premise that fewer passes between shots = fewer opportunities for poor passing teams to commit turnovers)

I wouldn't look at it this way. If the question is, can you build a team to go uptempo? The answer is of course you can. Fast break is obviously the best set for it, but I like motion as well. Passing isn't superfluous in that situation, but the fewer passes per possession your team needs to score, the less passing matters. So a team built for uptempo doesn't need *much* passing. It's still nice out of the guard positions, especially the pg. But it's not a core for that kind of team.

But using uptempo to mask an existing lack of passing is probably not going to work out very well. At best, it's probably a wash. Better to reconfigure your distribution and depth chart to get your best passers on the floor with your best scorers in a way that maximizes both.

Posted by CoachSpud on 2/11/2017 10:51:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 2/11/2017 7:02:00 AM (view original):
Another question about uptempo . . . if a team is generally weak on passing, would uptempo help? (under the premise that fewer passes between shots = fewer opportunities for poor passing teams to commit turnovers)

More possessions but fewer passes per possession. I doubt anyone has looked at it closely enough to actually offer anything more than a guess.

That's not how passing works.

The game makes decisions based on possessions, not passes.

In a nutshell, each position is an equation that decides if there is a:

shot
turnover
foul


Higher passing rating decreases the likelihood of turnover.

If decision turns out to be a shot, than passing helps influence the decision of if the shot goes in.

That's interesting, TJ. Do you have a citation for that or is it "forum common knowledge?"

It's in the NBA knowledge base. I sent in a ticket a while ago and they refered me to it saying that it basically worked the same way.

It's article #582 in the knowledge base