MBB: NESCAC

Started by cameltime, April 27, 2005, 02:38:16 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

amh63

Madz.....Thanks for the info and clarification with regards to the TEAM effort.  Your points are well taken and explained.  Still not sure about "The System".  I mentioned in an earlier post about Hope College beat someone this season by over 95 points!.....118-20, I think.  Did not think Hope has taken up the "System"....rather a more traditional system.   Just scheduled a really poor team.
My question in this being a team goal, how does the rest of the team help prevent the opponent players from trying to stop the shots.....especially since most was from outside?...to stop Grinnell from reaching that team goal.

ECSUalum

I watched the Grinnell video!! :o :o :o
Seems like the Coach's "system" was:  well guys we are playing Faith Baptist Bible tonight... they give up an avg. of 100 ppg, (ie play little or no defense), ....we have Taylor, a pretty good outside 3 point shooter..... lets get some publicity and try to set a one game individual scoring record, and BTW, we should play little or no defense, (one of FBB players scored 70 points), so we can save time to get Taylor 108 looks, most of which, (71) will be outide 3 point range.

madzillagd

If anyone is truly interested in understanding The System I encourage them to read the book I linked above.  Simply put, you are not trying to keep the other team from scoring.  That's obviously why a lot of people have a big problem with it.

You play your initial trap defense but if they break that down you allow them to score in a fashion that is acceptable to you (giving up 2s and not 3s).  You're exploiting the 3 versus 2 advantage so it doesn't matter that if you give up 50 made layups if you counter that with 34 made 3 pointers.  It's all based on working the statistics, a Moneyball version of basketball. 

If you think about it the purpose of basketball is to outscore the opponent so it makes sense looking at it from that perspective.  It's just that everyone has been bred to believe that defending is the best/only/acceptable way to do that and The System challenges that idea.  Why defend if you can outscore?   The downside is when you play against the more talented teams they can typically do both and that's where Grinnell hasn't done much come playoff time. 

ECSUalum

Quote from: madzillagd on November 21, 2012, 06:04:53 PM
If anyone is truly interested in understanding The System I encourage them to read the book I linked above.  Simply put, you are not trying to keep the other team from scoring.  That's obviously why a lot of people have a big problem with it.

You play your initial trap defense but if they break that down you allow them to score in a fashion that is acceptable to you (giving up 2s and not 3s).  You're exploiting the 3 versus 2 advantage so it doesn't matter that if you give up 50 made layups if you counter that with 34 made 3 pointers.  It's all based on working the statistics, a Moneyball version of basketball. 

If you think about it the purpose of basketball is to outscore the opponent so it makes sense looking at it from that perspective.  It's just that everyone has been bred to believe that defending is the best/only/acceptable way to do that and The System challenges that idea.  Why defend if you can outscore?   The downside is when you play against the more talented teams they can typically do both and that's where Grinnell hasn't done much come playoff time.

Which Professional, DI, II, III, High School teams use this system other than Grinnell?

amh63

Thanks for the debate on this topic here.  Before I forget.....Happy Thanksgiving to All!
Bottom line for me...even if I can understand the basic premises...is I believe that the game of basketball has the application of defense in the execution of the game today.  The "System" does put forward the purpose of the founder of BB in Springfield Ma....getting exercise by putting an object thru a hung basket.  Little defensive effort is why I'm often turned off by the pro version of BB most of the time.  The WBB game improved when they allowed more than a few dribbles and allow the crossing of the mid court line.  I have been a follower of ACC MBB for over 5 decades.  I was even glad that rules changed after Dean Smith created and applied his 4-corner game/system at UNC...the time limits/shot clock, etc...a sort of the opposite of the "System", IMO.
Maybe I'm still feeling the blues over the movement of the U. of Maryland Terps to the Big Ten (or now the Big 14) and object to the Grinnell way of BB in part because the Head of UMD who led the movement away from the ACC....is a graduate of Grinnell.

old_hooper

The System is like bulimia, you binge on offense and throw up on defense.  The fact that coaches allow their team to exploit opponents of minimal talent for individual records is a sad agenda.  Grinnell is notorius for this. 

madzillagd

ECSU - I couldn't tell you. U of Redlands ran it when Gary was there and a few others I'm sure. He's worked with a couple high schools out here. Last year they did it at Davis High and were the 2nd highest scoring team in CA in their first season. They went from winning only a few games the year before to being a few games over .500 and having people in the stands. 

Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)


Redlands is the only squad that's run it for any length of time - although they've stopped now with the coaching change.

The Muhlenburg women were running it recently.  I know VMI was running it in D1 for a few years - not sure if either school is running it now.

The Castleton State coach said he was trying a version of it last year.  I saw them in the NCAA tournament - it was a very bad impression of The System, but they might be at it again this year.

I prefer Nolan Richardson's 40 minutes of hell, if I'm the coach, but The System is really, really fun to watch and, I imagine, fun to play in or against (unless you're an opposing PG).  As a really terrible scorer, I'd love the opportunity to get 35 open layups in a game.
Lead Columnist for D3hoops.com
@ryanalanscott just about anywhere

7express

Castleton state trys to run it just not effectively, not as fast paced as Grinnell and they don't have the hockey-style line changes every 4 or 5 minutes.  But Castelon state routinely puts up 80 & 90 every night and likewise routetinely gives up 80 & 90.

Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)

Quote from: 7express on November 21, 2012, 10:58:12 PM
Castleton state trys to run it just not effectively, not as fast paced as Grinnell and they don't have the hockey-style line changes every 4 or 5 minutes.  But Castelon state routinely puts up 80 & 90 every night and likewise routetinely gives up 80 & 90.

They were subbing every minutes in the playoffs last year, but they did end up sticking with one main line-up when the game was actually close.  The System is really only going to work if you sell out to it - you can't go half-assed.
Lead Columnist for D3hoops.com
@ryanalanscott just about anywhere

grabtherim

The whole thing is shameful on so many levels.  Nothing to be celebrated.  More sideshow/ circus act than accomplishment. 

Old Guy

I feel like there are so many people that have a problem with the outcome of last night simply because they hate The System. Madzillaged

Castleton state trys to run it just not effectively 7express


Au contraire, mon frere - Castleton had great success with it. I saw them play three times last year. They won their league, qualifying for the NCAA tournament, beating more talented teams. If they had played their top five against others' top five, they lose, middle of the pack. And 15 kids got significant minutes.

Midd beat them because of the significant talent differential - mainly in the backcourt. We just didn't turn the ball over against their relentless pressure. We also beat RPI, 123-111, who ran a version of it, and Sharry scored 41, on 19-23 shooting, many uncontested layups on the back end of the press (NESCAC1 take note).

"The System" is the furthest thing from a "no defense" concept. Press, press, press. Wear 'em down. Beat 'em in the second half when they wilt. Quiz question: what NBA stalwart coach was the head coach at Castleton for three years (hint: he was an NBA head coach last year but is currently, temporarily, out of work)?

What has disappointed me most in the aftermath of Taylor's 138 point effort is the absence, especially on the sports networks, of any context-setting. How does a player get 100 shots! A 5'10 player at that. There has been very little discussion of the principles that underlie the concept. It has been seen as "More sideshow/ circus act than accomplishment (grabtherim)," which to me is unfair and unsophisticated.

"The System" is not my cup of tea, but it fascinates me, and I give all kinds of credit to Dave Arsenault (a NESCAC grad - Colby) at Grinnell for two decades who has brilliantly developed The System from its rudimentary beginnings (Westhead).

Brave and imaginative. More power to him. We are hidebound and traditional (me included, I'm "old guy"); we need outliers like Arsenault to show us what's possible.


madzillagd

Great post OG.  I completely agree with your comments on the system.  I don't think I'd use it if I coached at a school where I could draw talent, but I'd absolutely consider it (or something like it) if I was coaching at a lower lever college or high school with marginal talent because it can make games competitive and fun. 

I think the bottom line for me is, the purpose of the game is to outscore the opponent.  If you can do that within the rules without cheating or using aggressive tactics (cheap shots etc.) in my book you're welcome to try anything you want.  In my mind the system is no different than using a dribble drive offense, the princeton, triangle, set plays, you name it.  There is no right way to play basketball and wrong way to play basketball when it comes to systems.  (Teaching fundamentals is a whole different subject but that's individual skills versus team game plans).  I like the fact that coaches are willing to try new things because it will continue to push the game forward. 

People may not use the system now but I guarantee there will be concepts from it that will find their way into the transition game of 'traditional' programs in years to come.  A traditional program that may get 5-10 breaks in a game doesn't have a very large sample size to tweak what they do and make it better.  But a program that is running 50+ times a game does, and what they learn will filter down to those other teams eventually if it hasn't already. 

ECSUalum

madz,

Thanks for the background on this system, your posts have enlightened me and I am sure others.  As you say, if you can run the system and follow the rules, and your team is set up to play the system, then why not.  Just seems a bit bizarre to me

lefrakenstein

Any Amherst people know what the situation is with Barry and Buckner? Haven't seen either one in the box scores yet.