APBRmetrics

[gabefarkas]

I'm watching it now on ESPN2, and so far it's pretty interesting.

to be honest, it's not nearly as frenetic as I had envisioned it. I just imagined the pace being even quicker than it is, and maybe better executed? I guess I thought it was more extreme than it's looking to be. I'm impressed with the line changes and the fact that everyone is willing to dive for loose balls and in general buy into the system.

For instance, I was expecting the team to show very little interest in halfcourt defense. On the contrary, they are going for blocks, fouling sometimes, and trying some sort of pressing zone. I guess the press is at the heart of their D.

Also, the announcers mentioned that the Grinnell gameplan is to shoot within the first 12 seconds, whereas in previous posts and discussions I thought it was within the first 5.

The announcers were also saying something along the lines of "if you're a fan who misses the run and gun style that you don't see in the NBA anymore, then you're going to love this game." Frankly, I don't think the system would ever work in the NBA...too many egos and guys whose skills are too specialized.

[gabefarkas]

Upon watching further, my take on it is that they play the entire game the way a team that is down by 4 with 1:30 to go would play.

Trapping D, quick shots, going for 3's, almost a panicked pace.

[Ryan Faerber]

I also thought it would be more frenetic, and was a little disappointed at the "low" score. Tim McCormick (color man) said that in each shift Grinnell likes to have two ball-handlers, two guys setting screens, and one "preferred" shooter. It seems like Grinnell actually passed up some scoring opportunities in order to get the ball to the preferred shooter. Beloit is probably aware of this after playing them so often and they did a pretty nice job of making Grinnell take more time to get a shot off than they would normally like to. I don't know how Grinnell decides who the preferred shooter is, because they didn't have anyone who was even an average outside shooter....lots of bad shooting form and LOTS of bricks.

Some other interesting notes from the announcers: Grinnell allows opponents to shoot 67% (not a typo--67%!!) from the field and also has more offensive rebounds than defensive rebounds(!!). Grinnell's style is kind of an interesting experiment testing the extremes of the four factors....how many turnovers do I have to force and/or how many offensive rebounds do I have to get to offset my opponent shooting 67% from the field....also in Grinnell's specific case, how many 3s do I have to hit?

One last thing: I appreciate Coach Arsenault's philosphy in Div III ball of allowing a lot of different kids to play and to play a fun style....but at the end of the game with a small lead doesn't it make sense NOT to force up quick shots and to abandon the full-court trap? I think in the last few minutes of a close game Grinnell has to dramatically alter their strategy.

[Kevin Pelton]

Like Ryan, the late-game strategy really surprised me. It wasn't until Beloit's final possession that Grinnell laid back at all defensively. If you don't work on that style of defense, however, it must be difficult to adjust.

The shooting form seemed unusual. It seems like they've been coached towards a somewhat unorthodox form, because it was fairly standard amongst many of the players.

What I found really strange about the defense was that Beloit was so successful at getting its star player (Grins?) shots. I would think that Grinnell's pressure style of defense would force opposing offenses to divide shots much more evenly than normal, in that it's fairly random which players will be open.

One thing I don't recall people mentioning about the strategy is that by rotating players in and out, they can foul without worry. I've seen a little of this on a much smaller scale with the Sonics front line.

I think, ultimately, I like the offense a lot better than the defense. Has anyone tried the three-heavy attack while playing a somewhat conventional defense? Obviously you're sacrificing defnesive ability to get guys who can shoot on the court, but I'd rather not give up the layups, frankly. Maybe something akin to the Celtics under O'Brien, where both teams took a ton of threes.

[kjb]

I played on a high school team that tried the 5-man line subs. We did ours with starters playing the first 5 minutes, bench guys playing the next 6 on the game clock, and starters playing the final 5 minutes. It didn't work very well, and we started the season 2-4. After that, the coach junked the experiment, went with a more standard sub pattern and the rest of the way we went 16-1.

I can see some pluses in Grinell's style of play, but I wonder whether the line subs every minute or so works against them. (I'm thinking, of course, in terms of winning games. Grinnell's line sub system is geared toward participation and having fun. On that basis, their system works quite well.) The trouble we had on my high school team was that it took a few possessions for us 2nd line guys to get into the flow of the game. The starters had the same problem when they re-entered the game. And we had the problem that if something one group was doing was working, the other unit might not be able to replicate it. Maybe if we'd stuck with the line subs, we would have gotten more used to it.

[Dan Rosenbaum]

Based upon the box score (http://www.grinnell.edu/athletics/mbasketball/includes/espnbcgc.htm), I calculate an offensive rating of 95.1 points per 100 possessions and a defensive rating of 96.2 points per 100 possessions. Since I don't know what is typical for Division III, I don't really know if those are high or low ratings. So it seems possible to me that the turnovers forced on defense are more than making up for the layups and easy shots given up. Thus, it seems a bit premature to be overly critical of their overall defensive strategy.

During the game the announcers mentioned that prior to instistuting this system, Grinnell had a long streak of losing seasons. It appears that since then, Grinnell has played .500 basketball. I suspect this approach makes Grinnell more attractive for a lot of Division III prospects, but less attractive for the best prospects. Given that they were probably not attracting those best prospects prior to instituting this system, they probably have improved largely due to being able to attract more medium-quality Division III prospects.

I watched the first half of this game with my mother-in-law. I had not seen her giggle so often in a long time, and I think she really had fun watching this game. (But she did turn it off after my wife and I left during the second half.) And having fun does matter, especially at the Division III level. Especially if this system also seems to turned Grinnell into a mediocre rather than terrible basketball program.

[Dan Rosenbaum]

[Kevin Pelton]

Dan, as far as the offense and defense goes, it appears that last night was fairly atypical.

To quote Ken Pomeroy:

[gabefarkas]

Kev -- hmmm, 3's, reasonable defense, blocks.

looks like you're talking about Eddie Griffin!

[kjb]

[HoopStudies]