Opinion: 'Nova's greatest weakness

Posted by Chris on February 12, 2009
Opinion
No Gravatar

I got to thinking today about Dwayne Anderson’s probable absence for Friday’s game at West Virginia, and what the consequences could be. On the surface, he’s not the #1, 2, 3 or even 4 scoring option, and his defense is good, but not anything the team can’t compensate for. But losing him means going to a 7-man rotation on the road in a tough place to play against a good team, which isn’t good, especially when he is considered a frontcourt player.

Will Anderson's absence expose 'Nova's depth issues?

Will Anderson's absence expose 'Nova's depth issues?

Then I started to think about what the greatest weakness for this team is. They’ve got the outstanding guards on offense, a legitimate offensive threat down low (for the first time in a while), and they have defended spectacularly well in the post despite the perceived lack of depth and size. They are killing it from outside right now and Corey Fisher has suddenly put it all together and has given Villanova a player that can get into the lane and cause havoc.

So really, what it comes down to in my mind is the depth issues, and the ability to defend the perimeter. Villanova’s lack of depth hasn’t reared its ugly head yet. In fact the only instance I can think of is Dante Cunningham’s foul troubles at UConn, forcing Frank Tchuisi into the game mid-1st half. But even then Villanova was taking it to the Huskies.

So in my opinion, Villanova’s greatest weakness has been perimeter defense. It’s been a struggle for a couple years now. Teams always seem to shoot well from beyond the arc against us, and the “star” guards just seem to have their way. For example, in 3 of Villanova’s 4 losses this year, they have been destroyed by the opposition’s backcourt.

  1. Texas — AJ Abrams had 26 points on 44% FG (44% 3 pt FG)
  2. Marquette — Jerel McNeal (26 points on 50% FG, 50% 3 pt FG), Wes Matthews (19 points on 83% FG (50% 3 pt FG), Dominic James (17 points on 37.5% FG (40% 3 pt FG)
  3. UConn — AJ Price (29 points on 77% FG (67% 3 pt FG), Jerome Dyson (19 points on 55% FG (0-1 3 pt FG)

That’s really ugly. Now, in fairness, Corey Fisher has been dynamite on defense lately, but even in the wins vs. Syracuse and Marquette, it felt more like Villanova just couldn’t be stopped rather then them shutting down the opposition. Jonny Flynn and the trio of Marquette guards still found sucess against Villanova.

So in my opinion, if Villanova is going to really continue moving forward, they are going to need to improve the perimeter defense. I know that they trap a lot and have to compenstate down low, but teams are having too much success with their guards.

What does everyone else think? Leave your comments below and we’ll talk about it.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

7 Comments to Opinion: 'Nova's greatest weakness

Stan
February 12, 2009

Chris,

A couple of observations about covering the perimeter.

1. Defenders may need to “stay at home”. Len Elmore mentioned it vs MQ on the tube. Somebody (probably James) beat his defender and turned into the paint. 4 of our guys collapsed on him. Mq guy just kicked it out diagonal and down went a 3. I think it’s certainly OK to help BUT recovery has to be quick AND we may need to “stay” at home more.

2. On weak side defense, the off ball defenders have to move to their defender when a pass is thrown and in the air to their opponent or the the O guy who will be 1 pass away from their guy. If they’re not moving when the ball is in the air, they’re probably going to be late. NOT GOOD.

3. But a great way to defend this is as your fellow blogger greyCat would say, is “lock down the lane” Preferably prevent those dribble drive penetrations, and subsequent kick-outs to an open shooter. Let them hold it, pound it and pass it.

Chris
February 12, 2009

Agreed on all 3 points, but your point #1 really hits home.

Scottie Reynolds and Corey Fisher, for all their talents, struggle to keep their opponent out of the lane. Fisher is actually getting better at it but it is always something Reynolds has struggled with.

His off the ball defense has usually been superb (he gets lots of steals by stepping into passing lanes), but his on the ball defense is less than stellar.

Gregg
February 12, 2009

What I also noticed about the perimeter defense is when MQ was open behind the line, there was no urgency to close out and contest shots. Even if the player closing out has no chance of blocking it, they still can distract and intimidate the shooter by doing this.

Peter Parker
February 12, 2009

Good points above, I’m not as familiar with basketball fundamentals so I don’t know the best way to improve the perimeter D but it sounds pretty logical about not having everyone collapse into the lane at once to help out. On a related note I thought it was bad luck at first, but considering several opposing guards have had either season-best or career-best point totals when playing us, it’s pretty clear the perimeter D needs to improve.

Seamus
February 12, 2009

I think it is ‘little man syndrome’, they think they have to protect the paint because for most of their college careers we haven’t really had a dominant shot blocking center (though I thought Will Sheridan was pretty decent). So they figure they have to collapse to help. With Dante, Shane, Pena, and Anderson we actually have some length and strength down low. You would assume at some point Jay would highlight this to avoid collapsing to the ball…Hell give up the contested duce versus the wide open 3 any day. Especially versus Uconn and Marq who were knocking them down like they were layups.

Publisher
February 12, 2009

Hello, Chris-

Very prolific posting today on your part – there were four articles – I’ve got them all linked in my Various Viewpoints post. Impressive.

On the questions you raise:

Certainly, Villanova’s lack of depth is the key weakness right now. Without Anderson, clearly there are only seven Wildcats whom JW feels comfortable putting into a meaningful game situation, and if there’s foul trouble or more injuries, we’re going to pay the price for that.

Since you raised the question of perimeter defense in the losses, I decided to take a look at the numbers from the Big East web site. In the four losses, the opponents shot from beyond the arc:

Texas – 6-15 (40%)
Marquette – 10-24 (41.7%)
Louisville – 3-25 (12%)
Connecticut – 4-12 (33.3%) (surprisingly)

Louisville, of course, being the glaring exception, although I think it’s interesting in that we could take the opponent’s perimeters shooters out of the game, completely – and still lose by one point.

Also, there have been some wins where the opponent shot very well from beyond the arc-

St. Joseph’s – 8-17 (47.1%)
Navy – 14-28 (50%)
Providence 17-40 (42.5%) (although that’s a little skewed b/c PC kept making those ridiculous threes at the end to nearly pull off a miraculous comeback)

and most recently, Marquette – 11-23 (47.8%)

So what does all of this mean? I’m not sure. Essentially, it appears that great perimeter defense doesn’t guarantee victory, nor does terrible perimeter defense guarantee defeat. But I still agree that it’s a significant weakness.

Reactions are welcome…

Chris
February 12, 2009

Well throw the Louisville loss out the window. That was just a poor offensive day for both teams. When I think back on that game, I don’t think of great defense, I think of poor offense.

As for UConn, they didn’t kill us with the 3 but we had no answer for Price and Dyson because we were so concerned with Adrien and Thabeet. They would get the ball outside, shot fake and just blow by us into the lane. That can’t happen.

Leave a comment

WP_Big_City