Dan Hurley hopeful UConn men’s basketball team will solve issues that have prevented the Huskies from closing out close games

[TheChamps990411]

Outline.com

outline.com

Perhaps the Huskies’ biggest problem has been the lack of ballhandlers outside of guard R.J. Cole. When Cole fouled out with 2:19 to go in overtime in the Seton Hall game, UConn’s offense committed multiple mistakes leading to either bad shots or turnovers.

“We are going to have to find a guy that can win one-on-one situations at the end of a big-time game. Be it R.J., obviously he had fouled out. We are going to have to find somebody else that can get the ball in their hands late that can just break down the defense and go make a play.”

He has that guy and his name is Ajax. Problem is when he beats his guy off the dribble he looks to pass or pulls up short for an ugly floater. He needs to attack the rim like it stole his mommas purse.

 

[Chasm64]

Somebody can say "I hope xxx happens" and also have a plan for increasing the odds of that thing happening.

The two are not mutually exclusive.

If you REALLY think Hurley and Co. are hanging their hats on hope exclusively, then you really haven't been paying attention these past few years.

You’ve got some nerve being reasonable

 

[auror]

Agree with this. We’re a good team, but we are not a good end-of-shot-clock 1-on-1 iso team.

So just keep playing for points and running a normal offense. Don’t play to the clock. There’s a reason we don’t just stand around holding the ball for 25 seconds on possessions before the end of games. It reduces the expected points value of the possession.

If you have a player like Kemba, 1-on-1 iso at the end of the clock doesn’t hurt the expected value of a possession, so it’s smart to run clock late with a lead. We don’t have that luxury. There’s no law that you need to hold the ball at the end games. A good shot at 15 on the shot clock is better than a doomed drive to the basket/TO/or prayer launched at 2 on the shot clock.

End of game strategy is NOT the same as every other possession though. It's one of a handful of offensive possessions in a game where you are not only optimizing for your own points, but also the opponents points. Going from 0.85 to 1.08 points per possession (a bad ppp to our average) is great in general, but if you give your opponent an additional possession worth 0.95 (our D ave) points per possession, you're losing a substantial amount of points by taking a "normal" shot and not optimizing to deprive the opponent of a shot.

 

[auror]

So I was curious and went through Hurley's results at UConn in close games. I used 2 possessions aka 6 points plus all OTs as the delineation of "close game".

We went 1-2 (home), 0-4 (away) in close games his 1st year. We were a substantially worse team and I didn't include it in the rest of the data because team quality is a confounding variable. The other 3 years have been relatively closer in quality.

Overall: 9-15 (3-6 in OT).
This year: 2-4 (H 0-1, A 0-2, N 2-1)

Splits
Home: 5-5 (1-3 in OT).
Road: 1-6 (0-2 in OT).
Neutral: 3-4 (2-1 in OT).

So what do the splits tell us? We've been a pretty good team, so you'd expect us to win more close games than we lose overall if the games were evenly distributed among the locations. 24 games is a decent sample, almost a full season of games. Looking at the location trend, we're a game or two underachieving of expectation in each subcategory, which to me does equal a signal. There's definitely a trend of close game suckiness.

We've been 300th+ in KenPom's "Luck" stat each of the last 3 years, which looks at your pythagorean expected record based on overall team strength and then actual W/L record and says if you've lost more than you should've. This stat would encapsulate both random bounce/shot variance, which there is plenty of, and also any actual close game signal. To be in the bottom 20th percentile 3 years in a row is also a signal.

The other side of the coin is that we tend to blow teams out if we're better and not let them hang around. I don't know how to research this, but I expect you'd see we kill teams and push them out of close range more often than other teams do. Think of the stretch last year with Bouk out. He was our closer and late clock shot creator. You'd expect us to struggle without him in close games. But we actually only played 1 close game in the 9 games he was out. We went 5-4 and none of the 5 wins had a margin under 7 points. Our margin of victory in our last 12 wins last year (all Big East games): 34, 16, 11, 18, 13, 12, 8, 12, 7, 12, 11, 21.

 

[HuskyHawk]

End of game strategy is NOT the same as every other possession though. It's one of a handful of offensive possessions in a game where you are not only optimizing for your own points, but also the opponents points. Going from 0.85 to 1.08 points per possession (a bad ppp to our average) is great in general, but if you give your opponent an additional possession worth 0.95 (our D ave) points per possession, you're losing a substantial amount of points by taking a "normal" shot and not optimizing to deprive the opponent of a shot.

To be somewhat contrarian, and considering your good analysis in the following post, our "luck" stinks for a reason. While you want to limit opposing possessions when you have a lead that can win you the game without further scoring (except via free throws), that doesn't hold up in truly close games. Tied or 2 point games are the same as the rest of the game, just get the best shot you can, as soon as you can and try to get a stop. I think the Huskies go to "end game" mode far too early, and do it without a sufficient cushion to justify it. Up 8, sure you want to limit total possessions.

I am a proponent of "just keep scoring" and ignore the clock until it's close to a one possession shot clock. UConn did that one time this year in what was a close game, OT vs VCU. Broke press for repeat fast break scores early in the shot clock. Love it. It broke their back.

 

[olehead]

Speaking of hopeful. Hopeful DH learns his lesson and can now bone up on the ways of the real world. We are not Duke nor should we be.

We should have no shame, going forward, vigorously combing the portal for talent. We Should Have been on the portal transfer JOB immediately after the Maryland game. To not address the Bouk gap is inexcusable. To presume the freshmen, or a freshman, or Ajax would rise up and get it done, well now we know. We are in need of a breakdown guy. Looking at Grady who went to UK to become a pro, instead he's relegated to the corner. Or a guy like De'Vion Harmon, who is not a fit for Oregon.

Hawkins will be a reliable go to next year.

 

[auror]

To be somewhat contrarian, and considering your good analysis in the following post, our "luck" stinks for a reason. While you want to limit opposing possessions when you have a lead that can win you the game without further scoring (except via free throws), that doesn't hold up in truly close games. Tied or 2 point games are the same as the rest of the game, just get the best shot you can, as soon as you can and try to get a stop. I think the Huskies go to "end game" mode far too early, and do it without a sufficient cushion to justify it. Up 8, sure you want to limit total possessions.

I am a proponent of "just keep scoring" and ignore the clock until it's close to a one possession shot clock. UConn did that one time this year in what was a close game, OT vs VCU. Broke press for repeat fast break scores early in the shot clock. Love it. It broke their back.

I'm definitely speaking more about the very last possession. You can shorten the game over a few possessions by milking clock but it's going to remove possessions from you as well as the opponent most of the time, so it's more of a wash. Less possessions does limit likelihood of opponent scoring much more than you, but a) there's no direct points saved (as opposed to very last possession when if they don't get a chance to shoot they absolutely can't score), and b) as the original poster mentioned, there have been studies that you do tend to have a late clock negative impact on your own offensive efficiency the further you go into shot clock.

But I don't think the way we've been playing at end of games has any special Hurley quirk to it. We play pretty similarly to most teams in late clock situations and to most UConn teams in the past.

 

[Bonamassa]

It's a long season.

 

[Kolumbo]

If not Cole, there is only one other play we can rely on.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I'm definitely speaking more about the very last possession. You can shorten the game over a few possessions by milking clock but it's going to remove possessions from you as well as the opponent most of the time, so it's more of a wash. Less possessions does limit likelihood of opponent scoring much more than you, but a) there's no direct points saved (as opposed to very last possession when if they don't get a chance to shoot they absolutely can't score), and b) as the original poster mentioned, there have been studies that you do tend to have a late clock negative impact on your own offensive efficiency the further you go into shot clock.

But I don't think the way we've been playing at end of games has any special Hurley quirk to it. We play pretty similarly to most teams in late clock situations and to most UConn teams in the past.

Ok, then I think we are agreed. As we saw last night, I'm not sure the last possession is the problem. Rather the way we play with a lead in the last five minutes of games. Whether by coach's decision or not, UConn tends to start to burn clock. The shots come late and are often low percentage looks. The aggressiveness seems to wane, while the opponent turns theirs up. It seems to be a consistent problem. Last night I think it was exacerbated by playing the same 5 guys too much without a rest. I really don't get why Hurley doesn't just rotate one guy out, instead of switching 2-3 at a time.

 

[elmcityboy]

i think it's pretty clear that hurley wants jackson to be this guy going forward. whether or not jackson is ready for the role right now could determine the outcome of our season. should be fun to watch.

also worth noting, for the diggins fans, that @RobDauster said on his latest pod that he had heard rumors that rahsool had his best week of practice this week. i think hurley is losing trust in gaff -- curious to see if he tries diggins at all during this softer stretch of games.

 

[Umami Zen]

i think it's pretty clear that hurley wants jackson to be this guy going forward. whether or not jackson is ready for the role right now could determine the outcome of our season. should be fun to watch.

also worth noting, for the diggins fans, that @RobDauster said on his latest pod that he had heard rumors that rahsool had his best week of practice this week. i think hurley is losing trust in gaff -- curious to see if he tries diggins at all during this softer stretch of games.

Every player should want to have a coach like DH re: loyalty--He has certainly given that to JG-- The schedule(for the next four games) lends itself to some experimentation at the PG.. If you want to back up your recruiting pitch for coming to UConn for PT.. Might be a good time to give the Kid some run.