KO played in the era when UConn was noted for running after opponent's made baskets. The Huskies
pressed much more often, and we are not talking about the soft press designed to take time off the shot clock. I don't think that UConn ever was a constant full court pressing team under Calhoun. The exception might be the 89-90 team. I think that was due to Nadav Henefeld on the roster. The man was really lethal in the passing lanes. That team was a poor jump shooting team, and they needed easy baskets more than most Calhoun teams.
It has been argued that the current UConn roster is designed for uptempo basketball. Perhaps suited is a better word than designed; we have insufficient information to know whether or not KO wants to have a roster best suited to uptempo basketball. JC coached teams for years which didn't have defensive anchors in the front court; then came Okafor. UConn led the nation in shotblocking for something like 8 consecutive years.
The advantages of committing to a very uptempo style are obvious with this group of players. First it gives the coaching staff to utilize nearly the full roster. It prevents key players running up incredible minutes; this will help in individual late game situations. It also will help these players remain fresher for the league and NCAA tournaments. It also will keep all the players involved and focused. This should help in giving individual players confidence, and it will help in building an even stronger esprit de corps.
Even assuming that the current roster has the requisite players to make this a highly successful option; there are a couple of big potential problems. Successful pressing teams almost always have a defensive anchor, Brimah can hopefully fill that role. Secondly, it is absolutely necessary to dramatically improve defensive rebounding. This will allow more breaks and easy baskets, and it will increase the cost for opponents in crashing the offensive glass.
The third area is the most problematic; UConn's roster should create turnovers at a high rate. UConn isn't magically going to become a typical UConn junk dogs rebounding team. That means
that even if rebounding improves; the plus/minus margin is likely to be small. Generating extra possessions is key to a running team. Your turnovers will increase; you count on your opponent's turnovers increasing more. The real unknown is how the rule changes will affect the game. Despite
very good depth; UConn is not in a position where they can adequately compensate for a lot of early fouls to Napier and Boatright. Actually I doubt any team is adequately prepared for such a contingency on a regular basis.
Ordinarily one could say that the coaching staff gets paid to instruct the players in how to defend aggressively within the new rule structure. There are a couple of problems with this; the staff hasn't seen the rules in action. I would have preferred a couple of scrimmages to begin the season rather than the exhibition games, particularly this year. The players have played under a different system their entire lives.
There is also the problem of interpretation by leagues and individual officials. If games degenerate into a procession from foul line to foul line; there will be widespread adjustments even if it is denied officially that they are taking place.
Pushed to making a guess, I believe that the staff would prefer uptempo basketball with frequent substitutions. How the games are called could effectively limit that option. While the clear intention of the rule changes was to give an advantage to the offensive player, it may result in more zone defenses and slower tempo on offense.
pressed much more often, and we are not talking about the soft press designed to take time off the shot clock. I don't think that UConn ever was a constant full court pressing team under Calhoun. The exception might be the 89-90 team. I think that was due to Nadav Henefeld on the roster. The man was really lethal in the passing lanes. That team was a poor jump shooting team, and they needed easy baskets more than most Calhoun teams.
It has been argued that the current UConn roster is designed for uptempo basketball. Perhaps suited is a better word than designed; we have insufficient information to know whether or not KO wants to have a roster best suited to uptempo basketball. JC coached teams for years which didn't have defensive anchors in the front court; then came Okafor. UConn led the nation in shotblocking for something like 8 consecutive years.
The advantages of committing to a very uptempo style are obvious with this group of players. First it gives the coaching staff to utilize nearly the full roster. It prevents key players running up incredible minutes; this will help in individual late game situations. It also will help these players remain fresher for the league and NCAA tournaments. It also will keep all the players involved and focused. This should help in giving individual players confidence, and it will help in building an even stronger esprit de corps.
Even assuming that the current roster has the requisite players to make this a highly successful option; there are a couple of big potential problems. Successful pressing teams almost always have a defensive anchor, Brimah can hopefully fill that role. Secondly, it is absolutely necessary to dramatically improve defensive rebounding. This will allow more breaks and easy baskets, and it will increase the cost for opponents in crashing the offensive glass.
The third area is the most problematic; UConn's roster should create turnovers at a high rate. UConn isn't magically going to become a typical UConn junk dogs rebounding team. That means
that even if rebounding improves; the plus/minus margin is likely to be small. Generating extra possessions is key to a running team. Your turnovers will increase; you count on your opponent's turnovers increasing more. The real unknown is how the rule changes will affect the game. Despite
very good depth; UConn is not in a position where they can adequately compensate for a lot of early fouls to Napier and Boatright. Actually I doubt any team is adequately prepared for such a contingency on a regular basis.
Ordinarily one could say that the coaching staff gets paid to instruct the players in how to defend aggressively within the new rule structure. There are a couple of problems with this; the staff hasn't seen the rules in action. I would have preferred a couple of scrimmages to begin the season rather than the exhibition games, particularly this year. The players have played under a different system their entire lives.
There is also the problem of interpretation by leagues and individual officials. If games degenerate into a procession from foul line to foul line; there will be widespread adjustments even if it is denied officially that they are taking place.
Pushed to making a guess, I believe that the staff would prefer uptempo basketball with frequent substitutions. How the games are called could effectively limit that option. While the clear intention of the rule changes was to give an advantage to the offensive player, it may result in more zone defenses and slower tempo on offense.
