Tweet
A Dummy’s Observations on WLU at Davis and Elkins 12/2/23 WLU 91-85
DE Game Plan
DE has a great coach, who has transformed DE basketball. They are getting better each game and have already beaten Fairmont State. Across the roster, DE has size, speed, strong rebounders and great athletic ability, with many players from FL and some solid Euro players. This year DE added Preston Boswell as an assistant coach, who is very familiar with the WLU style. They are a very strong defensive team and a very good 3-point shooting team. They have many players who can finish at the rim, especially PG Sam Rolle IV.
Their game plan was to play tight half-court defense to make WLU work hard to score. They especially wanted to take away the WLU 3-pt. shot. On offense, they will spread the floor, and attack the rim off the dribble or take the open three. If they break the press, they will attack the rim to score or draw fouls in transition. In an attempt to remove the fatigue factor, and unique for this game, DE will use 2 platoons, subbing in sync with WLU’s platoon changes.
First Half
At the initial platoon change at 17:07, WLU led 9-4. Bravo platoon forced 2 turnovers in 2 minutes against the DE 2nd platoon, with the lead 16-5 at the 15:05 media timeout. When the Bravo platoon shift ended, WLU led 20-7. The platoon strategy was a tradeoff, but overall, it helped DE mitigate the effects of fatigue.
WLU maintained the lead throughout the first half. However, WLU was missing some shots that they normally make and taking some contested shots around the rim that did not fall. DE was successful in attacking the basket, which allowed DE to close the gap to 36-29 at the 6:17 mark.
WLU regrouped and extended the lead in about 3 minutes to 48-31 at the 3:04 mark. The DE platoon strategy allowed DE to have fresh legs to respond, with the half ending with WLU leading by 8, 50-42 DE had committed 11 turnovers, on 5 WLU steals.
Second Half
It was apparent from the first half that DE had the coaches, athletes, depth and defensive prowess to compete with WLU and prevent a blowout. Even though DE’s 2nd platoon was not as strong as their starting five, they were effective in removing fatigue as a factor.
Early in the half, WLU was moving well, and getting back cuts to the rim and open threes. DE’s scoring on fast breaks in transition was keeping them in the game. WLU was also taking and missing too many difficult inside shots.
WLU big men were in foul trouble with 12 minutes left, creating size mismatches, which helped DE.
The second half saw ebb and flow of scoring with WLU keeping an 8 to 16-point lead until the 7:29 mark. WLU only had 3 steals while DE had 4 steals. DE had limited their turnovers to just six.
At the 7:29 mark, WLU led by six at 73-67. DE was threatening as they had fresh legs to play defense and run their offense late in the game and they had some great 1-on-1 players.
The deficit closed to 3 at 82-79 at 3:57. WLU took off their full court press and went to half court man to man.
WLU responded with a mini-run, growing the lead to 88-79 with 2:24 remaining, putting DE in catchup mode. They were able to close to 4 at the 0:13 mark.
The final score was 91-85.
Keys to the game:
WLU did not panic when DE made runs.
WLU attacked the offensive glass and got critical putbacks.
Despite being out-rebounded and held below their average FG %, WLU used motion offense to get open looks and score inside.
WLU limited DE to 16% 3-pt. shooting, far below their average.
WLU executed their offense much better than DE in the last 4 minutes, making critical shots and FTs.
WLU Bravo platoon was stronger than the DE second platoon
WLU played good half-court defense.
Unnecessary fouls by WLU helped DE stay in game – moving screens. hand checks, pushes etc. WLU might also benefit from more assist-based points, rather than contested dribble drive.
Quality depth – WLU bench points outscored DE’s bench 37 to 22.
WLU got 28 points from turnovers to14 for DE.
Four players scored in double figures for WLU, with 6 players scoring 8 or more points. Nine players saw at least 13 minutes of action, with only 2 players at 25 or more minutes (max of 30 minutes). The foul woes disrupted the normal platoon rotations.
WLU offensive rating was 106, which was much below typical season average of 125. Credit DE defense, as well as some poor shot selection by WLU. In addition, they held DE to 97, which is good defense.
The effective FG % as a team was 49.3%. DE was 49.2%, aided by their run outs and fast breaks.
WLU had 6 players with >= 50% effective fg %, led by Montague 81%, shuler 75%, Hinds 69%, Woodward 62% and D'Augustino 60%.
Lessons learned
This game was needed, as WLU had been winning by 39 points. Key takeaways:
When an opponent has the right players and strategy to compete, it requires discipline by WLU to execute the offense to get wide open looks to maximize points per possession and have constant situational awareness on defense to reduce transition baskets.
WLU must eliminate senseless fouls to avoid mismatches late in the game due to WLU players sitting on the bench in foul trouble.
WLU must get back faster to avoid run outs, when opponent has strong finishers who will attack the rim in transition or throw alley-oops in 2 on 1 scenarios.
Shot selection becomes critical on a bad shooting night. Difficult, turnaround, falling away shots are to be avoided, even if close to the rim.
Comment