CVilleBuff
Well-Known Member
Is it time to move Wes out and go small as has been thrown around here? If CSU is a ****show, would it be worth some thought as a test against UNC?
Last edited:
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Issues With Defensive Scheme
- Thread starter Goose
- Start date
He's also been handling the ball at the 3 point line on O. He's still getting his points, but looks out of position more than he ever has.
jgisland
Club Member
I'm not sure Wes is the problem, it's not like he's out there free lancing on D. He doesn't appear to be getting yelled at by the coaching staff so my assumption is that he's doing what the staff wants him to do, but as [MENTION=127]Goose[/MENTION] said to me yesterday - I don't have to agree with it, I just want to know "why". Which is a great point, we know Wes can play D, we saw it last year, why do they have him hedging? (XJ hedges some too and i also think they want Scott to hedge it's just his guy isn't out there as much and one time he just got there too late when he tried to hedge) Are they trying to keep guys off the 3 point line? If so it isn't working, only 11 teams are giving up more 3 point attemepts per FGA than CU. The hedging is creating huge issues in the defensive rotations and I think that's part of why we're seeing switches. After watching last night most of the switches aren't really switches, it's more guys are showing so long on the screen it becomes a switch.
I don't get any of it.......
who would be your starting 5 in this scenario
and I'm more of a fan of making other teams make changes to match us. Why try to beat them at their game?
CVilleBuff
Well-Known Member
I'm a huge Wes homer, so take what I say with a grain of salt, but I start him. I just stop having him show so much at the 3 pt line. He was our best defender last year (even better than healthy Spencer). He can guard the 2-5. Why are we messing with it?
Plus, another thing that gets lost - he has GREAT chemistry with Jelly. Those two seem to always be on the same page.
If anything, I bump XT for Fletch.
Plus, another thing that gets lost - he has GREAT chemistry with Jelly. Those two seem to always be on the same page.
If anything, I bump XT for Fletch.
CVilleBuff
Well-Known Member
I don't blame Wes for our D situation. Just thought I'd propose it as a way to get the offense going more and start to limit getting annihilated from 3.
Wasnt dufault always fouling after hedging on screens past the 3 pt line?
Maybe I'm thinking of Simba. I just remember a white guy inexplicably fouling over 20 feet from the basket.
That screams Simba.
At times last year we looked really good with XJ at the 4 now granted we had Spencer then so you have to take that with a grain of salt I suppose.
Who runs the point in your scenario? Dom or Ski?
wyobuff
Well-Known Member
I dont think the problem is individual defensive ability - they are probably being told to jerk around like that on the 3 point line, but the question is why. They've talked a lot about playing faster offensively. Could it be because of that - wanting to get into transition or some such thing?
I've been thinking about this a lot over the past couple days without posting.
Here's where I'm at:
The defensive numbers are really good, so "conceptually" I have to conclude that what Tad is doing this year with the defense is working... despite the fact that it hasn't gelled yet and the rotations are still a long way from being second nature.
So I'm going to preach patience on this conversion to a team that switches everything. It's working despite the growing pains we are witnessing. Once it matures, this is going to take CU's already vaunted defense to another level of domination.
It is a good adjustment to the defense that just needs a little time. (I'd say this about the offense, too, fwiw.)
Here's where I'm at:
The defensive numbers are really good, so "conceptually" I have to conclude that what Tad is doing this year with the defense is working... despite the fact that it hasn't gelled yet and the rotations are still a long way from being second nature.
So I'm going to preach patience on this conversion to a team that switches everything. It's working despite the growing pains we are witnessing. Once it matures, this is going to take CU's already vaunted defense to another level of domination.
It is a good adjustment to the defense that just needs a little time. (I'd say this about the offense, too, fwiw.)
sunshine pumper!