I've seen UMBC's historic win turn into something of a referendum on UVA's season/style of play. But I think that misses the bigger lessons that can be taken away from their win and Marshall's win over Wichita St.
The biggest thing about those wins are that spacing and 3-point shooting are a great equalizer. I know the latter isn't some newfound thing -- it's been favorite of Giant Killer formulas for years. But it's the way Marshall/UMBC spaced and got those shots that is notable
When it comes to college ball, recruiting is the biggest battlefront. Everyone wants the best players and if you get enough of them, you can overwhelm with raw talent even if your system has flaws (see: UNC or Real Madrid in soccer). Marshall under Dan D'Antoni is gonna test this
If you look past the exciting tactical parts of D'Antoni's system -- the pace, the 3's & the pick-&-rolls -- what you really see is that builds a platform for 1 or 2 players to elevate the level of an entire team. You don't need to to recruit three or four studs to win like that.
What Marshall did was take two players -- Peneva and Elmore -- and surround them with kids who have to be good at two fairly basic things (shooting and attacking closeouts). And then they drill the shit out of being great at those things. It's kind of a market inefficiency in CBB
On top of that, they simply embrace the analytics era that has been woven firmly into the fabric of today's NBA. It's amazing how many college coaches today still just mindlessly pound post ups or let their better players dance around with the dribble and shoot contested long 2s.
I hate to break it to those guys, but the revolution is over. Efficiency won. And given the shorter college 3-point line, every team should be building a system around taking a bajillion 3s. And everything from recruitment to development should be predicated on playing 4-out
If you're a mid major coach & still playing with bigs/wings that can't shoot, it's going to be impossible to find any type of consistent success. Marshall may not be in tournament every year, but they'll win 20+ games based off taking better shots than their opponents every game
And the fact that D'Antoni and Marshall are still kind of a unicorn in this regard is actually a reflection of how college basketball is covered. It's drastically different than the NBA. There is zero nuance. It's all very narrative driven with zero pushback on baffling trends
Thanks to writers like @ZachLowe_NBA , NBA fans/bloggers/etc are well versed in understanding lineup data, recognizing inefficiencies and being intensely critical of coaches who refuse to change with the times. Just look at how NBA Twitter is with Thibs & his old-school approach
@ZachLowe_NBA Gregg Marshall at Wichita St is kind of the embodiment of all that old-school stuff. Pound in the post, run "actions" instead of creating high-value shots and a classic effort over substance type. It was very fitting that D'Antoni -- who's 15 years old btw -- is more w/ the times
@ZachLowe_NBA Where UMBC fits into this is the process part. Taking 3's in a vacuum is way easier said than done. You obviously don't want offenses to devolve into kids just dribbling up and jacking terrible contested 3's possession after possession.
One way of doing that is through another undervalued concept -- ball movement. College coaches will talk all the time about the value of this mindless side-to-side shit but maybe a handful of college teams create good shots by extra passes within the flow of an action.
If you watch these games this weekend, take a look at how many times the ball gets swung out of a PNR or a post up and players are spaced properly/willing to move the ball all the way to the open player for a shot or drive. It happens less than a handful of times per game
In Europe and the NBA, "+1" passes are staples. And guess what? Teams drill that shit and emphasize it like crazy. Players in the NBA communicate that stuff to teammates ("one more", etc). It just doesn't happen in college hoops, which is why the play looks so shitty most times
UMBC, however, is awesome at this, partly because of how they're built but primarily because I can guarantee they drill that shit. They have to. Given how much college I've watch this year, I just refuse to believe Ryan Odom and his staff don't do drive and kick drills daily
For all his scoring plaudits, Jairus Lyles is actually phenomenal at moving the ball to open players on drive-&-kicks. He can read through the rotations and deliver on-target passes to their two shooters (Sherbourne and Lamar). That's a hugely important skill at any level.
In fact, with all the pro's we've worked with, I've maybe seen 1 or 2 guys that have we've been around that are better. One is in the NBA (Ish Smith) and the other (Tom Walkup) is probably one of the best passers outside the NBA. Both Lyles & Maura are around that level
Then the final part of UMBC that college coaches should take away is how their built. They have two guards that can both make shots, penetrate and, most importantly, are natural ball movers. Next time them are two versatile wings that are knockdown shooters. At center, a mobile 5
If you are designing a lineup in a vacuum to win at college basketball with lesser talent, that's the one right there. Shooting, ball moving guards and one big that draw attention rolling to the rim/finishing drop offs in the dunker spot. Those kids can be both found & developed
And that latter part is the final part of this thread. College coaches need to stop wasting their fucking time doing dumb shit. You don't need 50 plays, 30 OBs and 10 defenses. Run like 5 plays you can counter out of like clockwork and use the rest of that time for development
What was great about UMBC and Marshall winning was that they didn't run these crazy, complex sets. They basically spread the floor, ran PNRs, moved the ball and knocked down shots -- because their kids are good at those things. And as a result you had two massive upsets
Oh, I guess since I've lost my mind I'll make a quick point about UVA. Obviously, Tony Bennett has done a great job of turning that program into a powerhouse and even minus Hunter, the loss to UMBC was shocking. But cuz it happened, I'm hoping it pushes some change into the sport
Part of the reason UVA can dominate a college basketball season like they did is because not enough teams function the way smaller schools like UVA and Marshall do. What they do defensively isn't some super elaborate scheme that's unbeatable, it just counts on CBB to beat itself
Even really good offensive coaches like Mike Brey don't have the shooting/spacing concepts to beat a team like UVA. Then of course the UNCs of the world -- who have two kids that play over 10 minutes shooting above 36% from 3 -- fall right into the same trap.
The scheme that UVA runs is fairly beatable with a simple approach. Space the floor, drive and kick as you get their help defense stunting into gap and shoot over the top. UMBC was a little hot from 3 (12-of-24) but it wasn't like a crazy swing of variance given their looks
So the basic fact that UVA can play this style and win isn't a referendum on them, it's one for college basketball as a whole. There's nothing wrong with being a great defensive team, but one that plays like UVA does shouldn't go into the tournament 31-2.
So my hope is, and it's not like I'm overly optimistic about it, is that teams like Marshall and UMBC winning inspire more smaller schools to model systems after them. And if that happens, it'll finally push the bigger, more iconic coaches to change or suffer losses like Bennett
Alright, I apologize for those that had their Saturday morning ruined by me losing my mind.
(And for those tweeting about Michigan, yes, Beilein is definitely a big part of the solution.)
(And for those tweeting about Michigan, yes, Beilein is definitely a big part of the solution.)
