PDA

View Full Version : Balanced Scoring vs. Go-to Guy



Hextall7388
02-07-2012, 10:57 AM
Would you rather have a team that relies on scoring by committee, or would you rather have 1 or 2 go-to guys?

The word inconsistent seems to be the best way to describe the Zags' play this year. The inconsistency is evident when we look at the number of players that have led the team in scoring:

Sacre: 3 times and tied 3 times
Pangos: 4 times and tied 2 times
Harris: 4 times and tied 1 time
Dower: 3 times and tied 1 time
Stockton: 1 time and tied 1 time
Bell: 2 times
Edi: 1 time

Don't get me wrong, I think a balanced scoring attack is a very good thing. However, when it comes to big games, like the game this Thursday, it sure would be comforting to know that we have 1 or 2 guys that we can count on to put the team on their shoulders. While I think most of the blame can be placed at the feet of the players for not stepping up, I think the coaching staff must shoulder some of the blame too. Going into each game I have no idea who is going to be the focus of the Zags' offensive game plan. While this may make the Zags a difficult team to game plan against, I think it also has the unintended result of causing confusion and a passive attitude amongst the players. When it comes time to step up in big moments it just seems like everyone is expecting someone else to take charge. In past years I could always identify who the primary shooter would be for any last second attempt...this year, flip a coin.

In addition to the leading scorer stats, a review of the stat sheets also points to how inconsistent the offensive game plans have been:

Harris: In the last 2 games he has attempted 8 shots...total! In the previous 4 games he averaged nearly 14 attempts per game.

Pangos: In his last 6 games a charting of his shot attempts would resemble a schizophrenic stock 6 attempts one game, then up to 11, then down to 5, then up to 13, then down to 6 and then up to 11). So, given the charting we should expect about 5 or 6 attempts on Thursday.

Sacre: In 4 games he has attempted 10+ shots. In 6 games he has attempted 5 or fewer shots.

I have to imagine that it is very difficult for the players to get into any kind of rythm when one game they are the focus of the offensive game plan, and then the next game they hardly touch the ball. For those hockey fans, I'll pull out a Gretzky quote, "you miss 100% of the shots you don't take". I am just hoping that the game plan for Thursday is to give the Gaels a heavy dose of Harris and Pangos...10-15 attempts each.

Looking at the Gaels, is there any doubt which players will be the focus of Randy Bennett's game plan? FYI in 19 of the 24 games the Gaels have played, Jones and/or Dellavedova have been the leading scorer.

Baldwinzag
02-07-2012, 11:04 AM
Good post.

Give me 1 or 2 go-to guys every day of the week...just seems better suited in big games(as you said), clutch moments, and NCAA Tournament success.

fwiw, we currently have "go-to" guys on this team, they just don't know it yet.

No doubt in my mind we have the talent on the roster this year, but to be honest, it probably won't be realized and/or ready until next year.

jim77
02-07-2012, 11:12 AM
The guy with the best shot should take it. If 1 guy gets hot from 3...then by all means feed him.

CDC84
02-07-2012, 11:15 AM
It is ideal to have what St. Mary's has....a couple of go to guys, but 3 or 4 other players who are capable of scoring in the high teens if you put too much defensive focus on one or both of the go to guys. As much as everyone wants to talk about needing a go to guy, a go to guy is worthless if the other guys can't score. All the opposing coach has to do is faceguard the go to guy to take him out of the game and you're stuck.

gamagin
02-07-2012, 11:21 AM
The guy with the best shot should take it. If 1 guy gets hot from 3...then by all means feed him.

Go for it. play the game. refuse to lose. See what happens.

zagfan24
02-07-2012, 11:22 AM
It is ideal to have what St. Mary's has....a couple of go to guys, but 3 or 4 other players who are capable of scoring in the high teens if you put too much defensive focus on one or both of the go to guys. As much as everyone wants to talk about needing a go to guy, a go to guy is worthless if the other guys can't score. All the opposing coach has to do is faceguard the go to guy to take him out of the game and you're stuck.

Good point CDC. When a team has a "go to guy", whether it's Morrison, Curry, Jimmer, etc., the real issue is how their teammates can hit open shots and keep the defense honest. With a more distributed, balanced attack like GU has, the issue becomes quickly identifying who is going to be that person on any given night...I think this has something to do with the slow starts the Zags are prone to.

FrahmFromDeep
02-07-2012, 11:26 AM
Good topic. If you've got a squad like Kentucky, it's great to have balanced scoring, because you've got several go to guys if need be..

In my opinion, this Gonzaga team is good, but lacks a go to guy. We are a balanced team, but I don't see anybody who can be the go to guy. At least night yet. Lots of youth.

Zag
02-07-2012, 11:26 AM
I think you have a "go-to" top scorer on a team for one of two reasons:

1) Your top scorer is head and shoulders more talented then the rest of the team.(ie. Michael Jordan circa mid-90's and Adam Morrison-GU years)

or

2) The rest of the team is so untalented that the top scorer is selected by default. (ie. Michael Jordan-Washinton Wizard years and Pepperdine circa every year)

GU this year scores by match-up for the most part, which just represents not having one guy who is head and shoulders better than the rest of the team.

hooter73
02-07-2012, 11:29 AM
It is ideal to have what St. Mary's has....a couple of go to guys, but 3 or 4 other players who are capable of scoring in the high teens if you put too much defensive focus on one or both of the go to guys. As much as everyone wants to talk about needing a go to guy, a go to guy is worthless if the other guys can't score. All the opposing coach has to do is faceguard the go to guy to take him out of the game and you're stuck.

Exactly. I like having a go to guy - preferably a guard - that everyone keys on, that way the other scorers can reek havok. It was Harris last year, Pangos after WSu, now it's Sacre all the time and its killing our points in the paint which is why I like having the go-to guy be a guard. Like with SMC, we keyed on Delle and Waldow killed us.

Zag
02-07-2012, 11:30 AM
Also...If you had to pick a go to guy on this GU team it would be Rob. This is his team. Senior. Team leader. Good free throw shooter. Just can't create his own shot like a guard.

#2 would be Stockton for me. Something about him tells me he isn't afraid to take the last shot. I can't explain why.

I guess that makes our go to play- post Rob and kick to Stockton out of the double team...for the win...Swoosh!

CDC84
02-07-2012, 11:45 AM
And how would you define a "go to guy"?

The guy on the team who is best able to hit a shot under severe game pressure?

The guy on the team who is best able to hit a difficult shot while being defended closely?

The guy on the team who is best able to break a defender down off the dribble?

hooter73
02-07-2012, 11:47 AM
Morrison.

Zag
02-07-2012, 11:49 AM
The two ultimate "go to" guys in basketball in my opinion are Michael Jordan and Robert Horry. Jordan was all of those things. Big shot Bob just always hit the clutch shot.

Zag
02-07-2012, 11:50 AM
Morrison was the closest GU has ever come to a "go to" guy. Dickau got the call, but didn't always hit the shot. Stepp was the same way. I though Meech was going to be the next one, but...well he hit that one shot and I'm still thankfull for it.

FrahmFromDeep
02-07-2012, 11:59 AM
And how would you define a "go to guy"?

The guy on the team who is best able to hit a shot under severe game pressure?

The guy on the team who is best able to hit a difficult shot while being defended closely?

The guy on the team who is best able to break a defender down off the dribble?

Pretty much all of the above. For the most part, you need a guy who can hit a tough shot but he's going to have to create that shot too. Somebody mentioned Robert Horry... but he wasn't a go to guy, he was a clutch shooter that took advantage of playing with go to guys who were willing to pass to him for a better look. That's another thing.

As a Celtics fan, I'll give you two examples. Paul Pierce is the go to guy 100% but he's also smart enough to pass the ball in those late game situations if a teammate has a better look. Enter Ray Allen. He'll hit game winning shots all day long, but he's usually not going to create them himself. Somewhat like Robert Horry. You can't just give the ball to a shooter late in the game and expect him to score. Too easy to defend. It takes that mobile go to guy who can get a look himself, and have the vision to make the best decision.

DixieZag
02-07-2012, 12:01 PM
On this team - we do have "go to" guys, but of the "four" it really depends upon the situation, what the score is, how many points we need, etc.

If we are tied or need one, I think the best option is for either Pangos or Bell to drive with the first option being to dish to Rob/Harris - Rob is great at drawing fouls and hitting FTs - Harris is great at finishing (LMU).

If we are down by 2, I do not want the ball into the big men's hands b/c hitting two FTs is harder. I still want the ball in Pangos or Bell's hands, I think that Bell is better at creating his own shot and is hitting 3s at a better rate than Pangos - but Pangos is better at spotting up for 3 and has that little floater.

I don't trust David's 3s - even if he is shooting a better % right now - problem is, David does trust David. Plus, he is notorious for missing his first FT - he is money on his second, weirdest thing I have ever seen.

Baldwinzag
02-07-2012, 12:06 PM
Plus, he is notorious for missing his first FT - he is money on his second, weirdest thing I have ever seen.

Interesting observation, as I've noticed this as well and actually mentioned it to my viewing buddies last game.

Verbatim: "Stocks will brick the first long, then make the second. Watch."

Unfortunately, Baldwin was right.

He's missed numerous 1-on-1's this season b/c of it. . .

Hextall7388
02-07-2012, 12:09 PM
And how would you define a "go to guy"?

The guy on the team who is best able to hit a shot under severe game pressure?

The guy on the team who is best able to hit a difficult shot while being defended closely?

The guy on the team who is best able to break a defender down off the dribble?

In my mind, a go to guy has all of these characteristics, but almost as important, he is consistent. Let's be real, Morrison type players who average 25-30 points per game are few and far between at the college level. What I am looking for is a guy who is going to show up regardless of who the opponent is. We have too many players on this team who have had breakout type games this year and then they disappear for 4 or 5 games. It seems that the focal point of the offense, to the extent that there has been one this year, seem to change as frequently as who is going to play the 3 position the last several games.

Angelo Roncalli
02-07-2012, 12:19 PM
Interesting observation, as I've noticed this as well and actually mentioned it to my viewing buddies last game.

Verbatim: "Stocks will brick the first long, then make the second. Watch."

Unfortunately, Baldwin was right.

He's missed numerous 1-on-1's this season b/c of it. . .

Absolutely right. Missing the front of 1-1 is IMHO worse than a turnover.

Zags11
02-07-2012, 01:41 PM
Stockton seems to have the confidence on shooting for "the win". I just dont have the confidence personally. Stockton is shooting 58.5% from the stripes as a guard....really? He started 11-18 from 3's, and since is 6-24. I am shocked that people think he could be or is the man. I understand shooting slumps hence pangos. Sacre I wouldnt trust to make the game winning shot, unless at ft line. I dont care for big men 50% fg at all. (This isnt a knock, this is replying to topic)

I would prefer harris, pangos, dower and maybe bell and maybe carter(proven jr yr) over anyone else on our team to shoot last shot.

Guys attempting 6 or more shots in a game record(just more a eh fact but interesting since topic is about a star)

Harris 17-3
Bell-10-3
mc-2-1
dower-11-2
Edi-4-0
monn-1-0(not enough games but still)
pangos-16-3
sacre-11-3
stockton-1-3

Zags11
02-07-2012, 01:54 PM
Edi when mpg above 15, zags are 7-0 and edi shooting 18-35 overall, 6-14 from 3's, 11-19 from line(needs to be better)

that is just a interesting fact.

hart 7-2 with 15mpg or more(vs better schools) but i think edi needs 22-24mpg vs smc=win an guarding delly

MDABE80
02-07-2012, 01:58 PM
We don't have one....agreed. We do have a "go to" defense though. Very few teams have the multiple go to kids. very few and they're in the top 15. Even then, there are few teams with multiple and reliable scorers.

My thought is that we look at this differently. SInce we don't have muliple kids, focus on take theirs out. Rob can defend Waldo if he stays around him and actually defends him. ELias/Hart did a nice job on Jones. Della needs a Guy Edi on him with support from Hart.
I would put Pangos on their little PG and Bell on Holt.

Focus on defense like Bennett does/did. I think (I might be wrong) we can do a lot of damage to SMC's high scoring machine. We match well...we need to focus and get the job done.

Now I'm only referring to SMC....but the logic might extend to other teams too as we finish this seemingly good season.

stevet75
02-07-2012, 03:14 PM
It is ideal to have what St. Mary's has....a couple of go to guys, but 3 or 4 other players who are capable of scoring in the high teens if you put too much defensive focus on one or both of the go to guys. As much as everyone wants to talk about needing a go to guy, a go to guy is worthless if the other guys can't score. All the opposing coach has to do is faceguard the go to guy to take him out of the game and you're stuck.

Last year we weren't able to stop Jimmer, and BYU didn't have anyone else that could hurt us.

FrahmFromDeep
02-07-2012, 03:19 PM
Edi when mpg above 15, zags are 7-0 and edi shooting 18-35 overall, 6-14 from 3's, 11-19 from line(needs to be better)

that is just a interesting fact.

hart 7-2 with 15mpg or more(vs better schools) but i think edi needs 22-24mpg vs smc=win an guarding delly

This goes back to a previous thread.. I posted under my brothers SN (Santangelo_for_3) before this one finally got approved, but let me make the point again.

It's easy for superior athletes like Edi to have good games against the lower tier WCC teams. No pressure, you're bigger, stronger, faster, have better teammates, and are better coached than your opponents. If Edi wants to get the confidence of his teammates/coaches, he needs to succeed in the games when we actually need him. SMC, BYU.

From what I've seen from Edi thus far, I just don't see him being able to succeed in those big games. I'd much rather see Hart because we know what we are going to get, and he doesn't get rattled in any situation. For me personally, Edi doesn't pass the "eye test" yet. Give me Mike Hart.

gamagin
02-07-2012, 03:42 PM
if SMC, or any other team, gets its way, it will attempt to force a Zag of their choice to shoot at critical periods. That's always been the case.

Therefore, we need to have five confident Zags on the floor, fully capable, alert, willing and ready -- eager even -- to take & make a shot -- or THE shot -- that has been offered up by an opponent counting on that Zag to pass it up, or miss.

It's the stuff of champions & legends. Most heroics come from just these kinds of potential crises that are turned in to opportunities by the athlete that steps up and delivers in spite of the alleged odds against him.

Zags11
02-07-2012, 03:52 PM
This goes back to a previous thread.. I posted under my brothers SN (Santangelo_for_3) before this one finally got approved, but let me make the point again.

It's easy for superior athletes like Edi to have good games against the lower tier WCC teams. No pressure, you're bigger, stronger, faster, have better teammates, and are better coached than your opponents. If Edi wants to get the confidence of his teammates/coaches, he needs to succeed in the games when we actually need him. SMC, BYU.

From what I've seen from Edi thus far, I just don't see him being able to succeed in those big games. I'd much rather see Hart because we know what we are going to get, and he doesn't get rattled in any situation. For me personally, Edi doesn't pass the "eye test" yet. Give me Mike Hart.

That is a fine discussion point right there. Edi in his defense has barely played in those 2 "big" games. What do you have to lose, beside putting edi on delly for 20mpg?

Zags11
02-07-2012, 03:53 PM
Mike hart is also a solid player too.

Zags11
02-07-2012, 03:54 PM
This topic was about a go to guy vs team scoring, and so I listed the teams records when each guy attempts 6 or more shots a game. Edi is 4-0, and lower tier teams, mid level that is fine but still at 4-0.