Weeell that was fun. Going to make this quick, I'm fightin' off the flu here and my thoughts are kinda muddled. Might update later if something makes no sense when I re-read it in a couple of days.
First off, the entire game I was alternating between two discrete states of mind--one, I thought we were clearly the superior team through all four quarters and kept expecting us to pull away at the start of every drive. Two, I was thinking this was Bowden-redux and we were going to lose a game we should have sealed up at the beginning of the second half as we tried and tried to give the game away. But then, in the fourth quarter, after we got the Hall pick/ridiculous break on the Hall fumble followed by the TD that put us up 27-21, I was suddenly locked into mind state #1. We started our next drive on our own 27 after an FSU punt. In the Spence/Bowden days (mindset #2, remember), a drive with about 7:00 minutes to go in the game while holding a 6 point lead in a big game meant we would call the most conservative plays possible. Three runs up the middle to take time off the clock before punting it back to other team. This had two side-effects: 1) ticking off the entire educated fanbase and 2) inoculating a generation of fans against the possibility of the run-away victory. Today we finally got that run-away victory in a big game, in large part because we took the same approach as we had the entire game on offense, driving 73 yards on 6 plays in 3:39 seconds for the touchdown to seal it.
Offense
Playcalling was generally fine. Against a team that gives up big plays, we looked for the big plays. I'm mildly surprised it took us 2 quarters to find Spiller on a wheel route for a touchdown, but hey, can't complain--nothing wrong with keeping something like that in your back pocket for when you might need it. Made some stupid mistakes (penalties inside the 5-inch line, the Parker fumble) early after we got it in close which kept us from piling up the first half points. I actually think this was a better game for Parker than the Miami game. Yes, he inexplicably threw behind a couple of guys, and there was the terrible, terrible interception when the route was just jumped and the insane fumble on the five-yard line. But for the most part, probably becuase he had loads of time from FSU's non-existent pass-rush, he looked comfortable, had good pocket presence, and even appeared to at least try and make reads of the defense and cycle through his receivers. He still made some bad decisions early on by forcing it into coverege deep when he had guys open underneath, but the lesson from today is that maybe Parker can develop into something--at least when he has time in the pocket.
O-line played very well, but it was against one of the worst defenses in the country, much less the league. Viewed in that light, the run-blocking was hit or miss early on, which is a little discouraging. But it was nice to see the line get some push in the red zone a couple of times and spring Spiller and Ellington with some nice holes.
Receivers are finally starting to catch the ball, the only drop I remember was Ford, and he's been the least of Clemson's problems to this point. I still don't see great route-running, and a team that plays tighter coverage is still going to knock the ball out but hey, small steps I guess. Some great individual efforts on throws underneath that got key first downs. Part of that can be attributed to FSU's horrible tackling, but at least we have the athleticism at WR to make plays occasionally.
Defense
Hats off to the secondary. If you would have told me that we would be without Butler and Chancellor for a significant part of the second half, I'd have thrown up my hands and waited for you to tell me how bad the final score was. The coaches made some fine adjustments: it looked like our CBs were instructed to back off a little, with instructions to keep the play in front of you but allow no yards after catch. McDaniel & co. delivered--I don't remember any receivers for FSU picking up yards after the catch after the first half. This extended drives and allowed the FSU to beat themselves, either through Ponder's baffling interceptions or through poor playcalling--the reverse that went for -14 yards. (Granted, if they don't muff the pitch there it might score a touchdown but it was still a risky call...)
Tackling watch: thought it was a pretty good effort, couple of times we looked bad going for the strip but still managed to limit the damage in those cases. Definitely a concerted upgrade over the Miami game despite facing the same caliber of talent.
Special Teams
Coverage has slackened a bit since the first few weeks, FSU's first punt return was ugly. Not sure what's going on here--they have sent more pressure recently but I don't think that was the case this time...have to check the tape on that one. Other than that, the announcers were talking ad nauseum about what we've been saying for the whole season--with a tandem like Ford and Spiller back to receive kicks, they don't have to kick it to you for good results. There just aren't that many punters at this level capable of hitting the coffin corners. Couple that with the rise in the rugby-style punt and you have a terrifying combination for Clemson opponents.
We finally managed to down a punt inside the five despite multiple opportunities to this point, but with nobody watching the ball come down, we still barely managed to run it down from behind. Really, it should have been fair-caught by the FSU return man, no way that ball was first bouncing inside the ten.
Finally, the kicking game. Richard Jackson is going to miss kicks. I think the early season streak might have raised unreasonable expectations for him, I'm certainly guilty of hyping him up. I'd still say the combination of his leg strength and accuracy makes hime one of the best kickers Clemson has seen in a while, but he's going to have games like this. I didn't like the call to replace him with Benton for the one PAT attempt. This isn't the pros, where one missed PAT is grounds for dismissal--he's got to be allowed to work through his misses. Luckily, it didn't come back to bite us and hopefully we look back on this as a weird aberration that mirrors that bizarre FSU game from 2006. At least this time it was the kicker and not a Bowden-era problem with the kicks being blocked, which is the only thing more infuriating.
Major Coaching Decisions
Outside of the Benton PAT kick, fantastic job. Execution cures a lot of play-calling problems, and this is what has improved the most in my mind. We still get individuals making stupid mistakes, which reflects indirectly on the coaching staff, but with the exception of run-blocking and WR route-taking, most of the systematic problems have been lessened. Great news, obviously. Perhaps even better is this suggests that we have a coaching staff capable of objectively reviewing the team and implementing in-season coaching adjustments.
I'll wrap this up by saying NC State is a classic trap game, particularly if we don't have Butler and/or Chancellor back. Motivator-in-chief Swinney need to be at the top of his game this week...
Showing posts with label FSU. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FSU. Show all posts
Sunday, 8 November 2009
Friday, 6 November 2009
FSU Preview
FSU vs. Clemson, November 7th, 7:45pm, Death Valley
Tigermax:
As many have pointed out, the outcome of this game will hinge on whether Clemson's pass defense can slow FSU's pass attack. FSU has the same caliber of players in key skill positions as Miami and they will find the endzone, it's just a matter of limiting the total number of times. I'll be watching to see if Clemson's second level can improve their routes to the ball-carrier and to wrap-up when tackling. Keep in mind, though, this is a group of talented kids who are good at making people miss. Clemson needs to minimize the big plays, not completely eliminate them.
I would posit that Clemson's success will also rest on how disciplined the FSU defense plays. FSU's defense has talented individuals, but in the NC State game last Saturday (emblematic of most of the season for FSU) they constantly beat themselves with senseless penalties, poor tackling, and by pursuing the big play. All of these conspired time and again to turn small gains into huge plays. If Mickey Andrews rallies the troops in the wake of his retirement announcement, Clemson's offense could be in for a rougher-than-expected time. With that caveat aside, however, as I mentioned yesterday FSU is ranked #98 in defense efficiency by FEI--far and away the worst in the ACC (Duke clocks in next at #74). Normally I would be hopeful that we could use this to sustain long and productive drives, but since FSU's defense has the tendency to give up yardage in chunks I'll instead look for Clemson to keep using the big play to propel them to the scoreboard...
One thing to watch for this weekend: if you've seen FSU this season, you know they have a pretty good kicking game. FPA, or field position average, is a pretty good proxy for measuring special teams strength. Three teams in the ACC are heads and shoulders above the rest of the league: Clemson (10th in the country), Virginia Tech (13th), and FSU (16th). One thing Clemson probably won't be able to do is rely on the kicking/return game to get them superior field position; expect this to be about even.
Clemson is in the middle of a three game ACC stretch playing teams with similar general profiles--good to great offenses with average to below-average defenses (although you can argue Miami's defense is underrated). I just mention this to stress that just as Miami was the mild favorite against Clemson two Saturdays ago and wound up on the short end of a close loss, Clemson's slight edge against FSU going into the weekend could just as easily disappear on the strength of a last-second Christian Ponder touchdown toss.
Clemben:
I remember at the beginning of the season how FSU had lost all of its receivers and how this was going to hurt them on offense. Is Ponder just that good? Is Jimbo that good an OC? Man, whipping a bunch of no name WR's into shape is a skill I wish we would acquire and quickly. I cant shake the same feeling I had last year when we played FSU. Ponder is going to run all over us, we will put up a good fight but come up short. I still think we had superior talent to them last year but we lost. This year they have virtually the same offense but their secondary has stunk. They dont have the DE's like last year and this game is at home. Oh and we are slowly learning how to use Spiller (better late than never).
I like that the game is at home, and the place will be rocking. We need to neutralize some of Ponders audibles at the line. Man I hate that guy. We are at home so I say we win 34-30. But its all because of this...
Yes its the Clemson Surge but I thought we needed as 'Orange Surge' for the All In, All Orange game today!! And yes, I think the Clemson Surge, drawing upon a failed caffeinated beverage is absolutely pure genius...
Go Tigers!!
Tigermax:
As many have pointed out, the outcome of this game will hinge on whether Clemson's pass defense can slow FSU's pass attack. FSU has the same caliber of players in key skill positions as Miami and they will find the endzone, it's just a matter of limiting the total number of times. I'll be watching to see if Clemson's second level can improve their routes to the ball-carrier and to wrap-up when tackling. Keep in mind, though, this is a group of talented kids who are good at making people miss. Clemson needs to minimize the big plays, not completely eliminate them.
I would posit that Clemson's success will also rest on how disciplined the FSU defense plays. FSU's defense has talented individuals, but in the NC State game last Saturday (emblematic of most of the season for FSU) they constantly beat themselves with senseless penalties, poor tackling, and by pursuing the big play. All of these conspired time and again to turn small gains into huge plays. If Mickey Andrews rallies the troops in the wake of his retirement announcement, Clemson's offense could be in for a rougher-than-expected time. With that caveat aside, however, as I mentioned yesterday FSU is ranked #98 in defense efficiency by FEI--far and away the worst in the ACC (Duke clocks in next at #74). Normally I would be hopeful that we could use this to sustain long and productive drives, but since FSU's defense has the tendency to give up yardage in chunks I'll instead look for Clemson to keep using the big play to propel them to the scoreboard...
One thing to watch for this weekend: if you've seen FSU this season, you know they have a pretty good kicking game. FPA, or field position average, is a pretty good proxy for measuring special teams strength. Three teams in the ACC are heads and shoulders above the rest of the league: Clemson (10th in the country), Virginia Tech (13th), and FSU (16th). One thing Clemson probably won't be able to do is rely on the kicking/return game to get them superior field position; expect this to be about even.
Clemson is in the middle of a three game ACC stretch playing teams with similar general profiles--good to great offenses with average to below-average defenses (although you can argue Miami's defense is underrated). I just mention this to stress that just as Miami was the mild favorite against Clemson two Saturdays ago and wound up on the short end of a close loss, Clemson's slight edge against FSU going into the weekend could just as easily disappear on the strength of a last-second Christian Ponder touchdown toss.
Clemben:
I remember at the beginning of the season how FSU had lost all of its receivers and how this was going to hurt them on offense. Is Ponder just that good? Is Jimbo that good an OC? Man, whipping a bunch of no name WR's into shape is a skill I wish we would acquire and quickly. I cant shake the same feeling I had last year when we played FSU. Ponder is going to run all over us, we will put up a good fight but come up short. I still think we had superior talent to them last year but we lost. This year they have virtually the same offense but their secondary has stunk. They dont have the DE's like last year and this game is at home. Oh and we are slowly learning how to use Spiller (better late than never).
I like that the game is at home, and the place will be rocking. We need to neutralize some of Ponders audibles at the line. Man I hate that guy. We are at home so I say we win 34-30. But its all because of this...
Yes its the Clemson Surge but I thought we needed as 'Orange Surge' for the All In, All Orange game today!! And yes, I think the Clemson Surge, drawing upon a failed caffeinated beverage is absolutely pure genius...Go Tigers!!
Wednesday, 4 November 2009
FEI Week 9; ACC Outlook Update
Whooosh! That was the sound of the ACC dropping like a rock in this weeks FEI rankings. GT is the lone top 10 survivor (#8), but it looks like the combination of VT losing, GT giving up crazy points to a terrible Vandy offense, and Miami barely getting by WF managed to drag the entire conference down. Clemson, despite playing a Division II team and which is not included in the ranking calculations, dropped from #13 to #15, probably stemming from the drop in strength of schedule. FSU is still ranked at #18, probably because FEI gives them the third best offense in the country. Clemson's 6th best defense is going to have to be on its toes. Luckily, FSU is also ranked #98 in defense.
Here's the updated ACC outlook for the Tigers. Virginia improves following their loss at home against Duke. But I saw enough from both teams in the FSU-NC state game to leave them untouched:
With Virginia moving into "Lock", the projected wins are probably closer to 2.5-3 at this point. Even so, if we manage a victory against FSU on Saturday I still won't be breathing easy until the Tigers beat the Wolfpack in Raleigh.
Here's the updated ACC outlook for the Tigers. Virginia improves following their loss at home against Duke. But I saw enough from both teams in the FSU-NC state game to leave them untouched:
With Virginia moving into "Lock", the projected wins are probably closer to 2.5-3 at this point. Even so, if we manage a victory against FSU on Saturday I still won't be breathing easy until the Tigers beat the Wolfpack in Raleigh.
Wednesday, 21 October 2009
Reassessing Clemson's remaining ACC schedule
Last week, I went through Clemson's remaining schedule and based on their level of play at the time, I concluded Clemson was looking at a 6-6 or 5-7 overall finish. But, to essentially give myself some wiggle room to back out of that prediction, I ended the post with this:
Here's how I see it now:
Clemson finishes with between 2-4 wins, giving a 4-4 finish on the pessimistic side with a 6-2 finish on the optimistic side. The most likely scenario, however, is a 5-3 finish. Does this give us the division title? Probably not. Boston College has a very soft schedule (at Maryland, at Virginia, and home for North Carolina); I'd give them about 3:2 odds right now of winning out. Anyone else tired of BC and their illegitimate division titles?
Now, if somehow the coaching staff manages to straighten out some of the play-calling hijinks and we come out and with a strong performance driven by an improved offense to beat Wake, then the [schedule prediction] will need readjustment.While I'm not naive enough to think we've fixed all the problems on offense, I'm happy to admit I was overly pessimistic in the last assessment. By my reckoning, we have now played 11 competitive quarters against average to below average defenses, and we've played competent offense in 6 of those (2 for GT, 1 for Maryland, and 3 for Wake). I'm sure that's not the level of consistency Napier and Swinney are looking for and while the 3 ridiculous quarters in Maryland are still a giant red flag, it means we should be able to put something resembling a productive offense on the field at least half of the time against middling defenses. The good news: none of our final four ACC opponents are particularly known for solid defenses, and some have been downright bad. The possible exception here is Virginia, but they've carved out some goodwill for Al Groh by beating the following teams: North Carolina (has struggled on offense this year), Indiana, and Maryland. I'm not buying it until I see them hold down Miami or Georgia Tech in the coming weeks.
Here's how I see it now:
Clemson finishes with between 2-4 wins, giving a 4-4 finish on the pessimistic side with a 6-2 finish on the optimistic side. The most likely scenario, however, is a 5-3 finish. Does this give us the division title? Probably not. Boston College has a very soft schedule (at Maryland, at Virginia, and home for North Carolina); I'd give them about 3:2 odds right now of winning out. Anyone else tired of BC and their illegitimate division titles?
Thursday, 1 October 2009
FEI Week 4
Another pitiful week for the ACC. Clemson, arguably acquitting itself the best in out-of-conference excitement, only drops four slots to #15. We're now ranked as the second best team in the country with two losses! Only Florida State comes out better, ranked #11. Why, you ask? Their losses have come at the hands of #9 Miami and #14 South Florida. Why are Miami and South Florida ranked so high? I have absolutely no idea...Florida bias, maybe? TCU moves all the way up to #10.
These rankings are still looking strange, but it's not like the Very Serious Polls (AP/Coaches) are performing any better. I still hold out hope FEI stabilizes in a few weeks to something a little more believable. Something we can all agree on, though: Maryland ranked #90. It's time for a rout.
Ken Massey's aggregate rankings have Clemson falling from #26 to #29, with Maryland at #97. It's time for a rout.
These rankings are still looking strange, but it's not like the Very Serious Polls (AP/Coaches) are performing any better. I still hold out hope FEI stabilizes in a few weeks to something a little more believable. Something we can all agree on, though: Maryland ranked #90. It's time for a rout.
Ken Massey's aggregate rankings have Clemson falling from #26 to #29, with Maryland at #97. It's time for a rout.
Sunday, 1 March 2009
FLORIDA STATE RECAP II
Florida State 73, Clemson 66
(Chart from Statsheet. I can't find win probability charts, but this is pretty close. I assume they are using Bill James' formula to calculate safe leads, but I might be wrong.)
I don't have much to add to ClemBen's impassioned take below...just to say that today dashed any realistic hopes of a deep postseason run. I still think 10 wins gives us a shot at an ACC bye, but we lose the tiebreaker to FSU, and, moreover, beating Wake Forest in Winston-Salem is probably about twice as hard as beating FSU in Tallahassee. Even with the bye, though, chances are we meet up with FSU or WF at some point, and we've shown we can't beat these guys.
The only stat you have to look at for this game in three point attempts: 28. Right away, we know they weren't getting the ball inside, which was really the key to the game. Going 12/28 is a testament to the good shooters we have right now, 43% shooting from behind the arc when the inside game is non-existent means guys are knocking them down even with lots of pressure.
On defense, I said in the preview to watch FSU's 3 point shooting. They went 7/17, making them the fourth out of five average to middling 3-point shooting teams to hang a plus 40% on our defense. The only team that failed was Maryland, and it wasn't for lack of trying; they had many, many wide open threes that missed the mark. The book has gotten out on our defense, its time for the Clemson staff to make an adjustment...even if it means being a little more conservative with the press.
(Chart from Statsheet. I can't find win probability charts, but this is pretty close. I assume they are using Bill James' formula to calculate safe leads, but I might be wrong.)
I don't have much to add to ClemBen's impassioned take below...just to say that today dashed any realistic hopes of a deep postseason run. I still think 10 wins gives us a shot at an ACC bye, but we lose the tiebreaker to FSU, and, moreover, beating Wake Forest in Winston-Salem is probably about twice as hard as beating FSU in Tallahassee. Even with the bye, though, chances are we meet up with FSU or WF at some point, and we've shown we can't beat these guys.
The only stat you have to look at for this game in three point attempts: 28. Right away, we know they weren't getting the ball inside, which was really the key to the game. Going 12/28 is a testament to the good shooters we have right now, 43% shooting from behind the arc when the inside game is non-existent means guys are knocking them down even with lots of pressure.
On defense, I said in the preview to watch FSU's 3 point shooting. They went 7/17, making them the fourth out of five average to middling 3-point shooting teams to hang a plus 40% on our defense. The only team that failed was Maryland, and it wasn't for lack of trying; they had many, many wide open threes that missed the mark. The book has gotten out on our defense, its time for the Clemson staff to make an adjustment...even if it means being a little more conservative with the press.
Saturday, 28 February 2009
FLORIDA STATE PREVIEW II
(Tallahassee, 2/28, 2:00pm)
This is a big game, not just because a first-round bye in the ACC tournament is likely on the line, but it should be something of an indicator for post-season success. We've been talking about it on here for some time--Clemson's offense struggles against effectively tall good defenses. Our guards just don't have the height or court vision to move the ball inside and have a harder time shooting the three, and our big men get tend to get slowed down or become non-factors. Drives to the hoop also tend to be less than fruitful, as Stitt and sometimes Rivers seem to lack the skill to finish when there are exceptionally tall players on the defense. So here we go, the first of two last chances (WF is up next Sunday) for Clemson to show they can make significant adjustments and play with the tall, defense-oriented teams. If things go poorly, the chance of a bad matchup combined with weaknesses other teams have recently been exploiting will almost certainly spell early exit for the Tigers.
I'll refer you to the last preview for an overview of the FSU team. If anything has changed since the last meeting, the stats say FSU's offense has gotten slightly worse while their defense appears to have gotten a little better. This is what I'll be watching early in this game to gauge Clemson's chances: Trevor Booker vs. Alabi and K.C. Rivers on offense and FSU three point-shooting on defense. In the second half of the last game, FSU left Alabi on Booker alone pretty much the entire time--calling off the double team. And he pretty much shut Booker down. This let the rest of the team focus on their assignments and increased pressure on the perimeter, which made it even harder to get the ball into Booker, kind of a positive feedback loop for FSU. Not many players have been able to individually shut down Booker this season, so hopefully this was something of a fluke. But that doesn't mean anything if he can't get his hands on the ball.
I think the key to countering this is K.C. Rivers. Rivers is really the only player who can create shots for himself (although I do think Oglesby is getting better at this) that don't involve suicide drives to the hoop (Potter and Stitt can handle this nicely). Rivers has to force FSU to defend the middle of the offense by hitting some open jumpers in space of his own making. That will keep the FSU's taller perimeter defense from cheating so much on the three, which will in turn hopefully open up Booker a few times underneath.
On defense, Clemson has to stop the bleeding from behind the arc. Easier said then done, since a lot of teams have started going to the open three in transition after breaking the press. We've been warning about this--eventually teams were going to wise up and see that we were too good at getting back and defending layups, but were leaving the long shot open. I think this really contributed to our untimely downfall earlier in the week vs. VT. Luckily, FSU is a pretty bad three point shooting team, but here's the problem: neither were VT or GT, and we know they were knocking them down in the last two games. An open shot from three point land is going to dramatically improve even the worst shooter (Hank Thorns says hello).
"Big game" is maybe not the right description for today--"fate-determining" might be a little closer.
This is a big game, not just because a first-round bye in the ACC tournament is likely on the line, but it should be something of an indicator for post-season success. We've been talking about it on here for some time--Clemson's offense struggles against effectively tall good defenses. Our guards just don't have the height or court vision to move the ball inside and have a harder time shooting the three, and our big men get tend to get slowed down or become non-factors. Drives to the hoop also tend to be less than fruitful, as Stitt and sometimes Rivers seem to lack the skill to finish when there are exceptionally tall players on the defense. So here we go, the first of two last chances (WF is up next Sunday) for Clemson to show they can make significant adjustments and play with the tall, defense-oriented teams. If things go poorly, the chance of a bad matchup combined with weaknesses other teams have recently been exploiting will almost certainly spell early exit for the Tigers.
I'll refer you to the last preview for an overview of the FSU team. If anything has changed since the last meeting, the stats say FSU's offense has gotten slightly worse while their defense appears to have gotten a little better. This is what I'll be watching early in this game to gauge Clemson's chances: Trevor Booker vs. Alabi and K.C. Rivers on offense and FSU three point-shooting on defense. In the second half of the last game, FSU left Alabi on Booker alone pretty much the entire time--calling off the double team. And he pretty much shut Booker down. This let the rest of the team focus on their assignments and increased pressure on the perimeter, which made it even harder to get the ball into Booker, kind of a positive feedback loop for FSU. Not many players have been able to individually shut down Booker this season, so hopefully this was something of a fluke. But that doesn't mean anything if he can't get his hands on the ball.
I think the key to countering this is K.C. Rivers. Rivers is really the only player who can create shots for himself (although I do think Oglesby is getting better at this) that don't involve suicide drives to the hoop (Potter and Stitt can handle this nicely). Rivers has to force FSU to defend the middle of the offense by hitting some open jumpers in space of his own making. That will keep the FSU's taller perimeter defense from cheating so much on the three, which will in turn hopefully open up Booker a few times underneath.
On defense, Clemson has to stop the bleeding from behind the arc. Easier said then done, since a lot of teams have started going to the open three in transition after breaking the press. We've been warning about this--eventually teams were going to wise up and see that we were too good at getting back and defending layups, but were leaving the long shot open. I think this really contributed to our untimely downfall earlier in the week vs. VT. Luckily, FSU is a pretty bad three point shooting team, but here's the problem: neither were VT or GT, and we know they were knocking them down in the last two games. An open shot from three point land is going to dramatically improve even the worst shooter (Hank Thorns says hello).
"Big game" is maybe not the right description for today--"fate-determining" might be a little closer.
Sunday, 8 February 2009
FLORIDA STATE RECAP
Florida State 65, Clemson 61
I think there is a temptation to believe that Saturday's loss was the result of a post-Duke letdown, an inability to sustain the emotional high from Wednesday for 40 minutes. This is bound to lead to articles and editorials by local sportswriters about Clemson's lack of consistency this year. My feeling, however, is that there is an emerging, recurring problem here. If left unaddressed, the wrong matchup will send Clemson to an early exit in both post-season tourneys they will participate in.
By my reckoning, Clemson has now played three teams with top 10-caliber defenses that also rank in the top ten in average effective height. Effective average height is a statistic generated by Ken Pomeroy at Basketball Prospectus, and it essentially ranks teams by how much taller they are at each position relative to average height at each position. Those three teams? Wake Forest, Illinois, and Florida State. We have soundly beaten good defenses this year, but have struggled against good defenses that are tall across all positions.
Random thoughts:
Florida State 65, Clemson 61
I think there is a temptation to believe that Saturday's loss was the result of a post-Duke letdown, an inability to sustain the emotional high from Wednesday for 40 minutes. This is bound to lead to articles and editorials by local sportswriters about Clemson's lack of consistency this year. My feeling, however, is that there is an emerging, recurring problem here. If left unaddressed, the wrong matchup will send Clemson to an early exit in both post-season tourneys they will participate in.
By my reckoning, Clemson has now played three teams with top 10-caliber defenses that also rank in the top ten in average effective height. Effective average height is a statistic generated by Ken Pomeroy at Basketball Prospectus, and it essentially ranks teams by how much taller they are at each position relative to average height at each position. Those three teams? Wake Forest, Illinois, and Florida State. We have soundly beaten good defenses this year, but have struggled against good defenses that are tall across all positions.
Random thoughts:
- I think the coaching staff recognizes the problem. I saw more patience in the first half than I did in the WF game, as the guards looked for openings to drive the ball inside instead of shooting the three if the pass wasn't there. There was also what looked like set plays to free up perimeter players not necessarily for a shot, but for clean look inside. Unfortunately, a lot of these plays still ended in a turnover.
- Even though we were up by 19 in the second half, I never felt comfortable. I just didn't feel like the offense was getting the ball into the paint with any consistency, and too many of our points were coming from sloppy FSU play.
- I'm not sure what else to do if you are Clemson. You can't suddenly teach/train an extra 5 inches around the perimeter.
- Maybe more inside the arc jump-shots instead of always driving straight to the hoop? Could extend the interior of the defense instead of padding the other team's block totals.
- Yeah, Sykes hit a few baskets in the first half. Everyone's gonna hit a few with that much space.
- It will be interesting to see what adjustments the coaching staff comes up with for the rematch in Tallahassee on Feb. 28th, should serve as a preview for the final game at Wake.
Friday, 6 February 2009
FLORIDA STATE PREVIEW
(littlejohn, 02/07, 7:00pm)
Besides the finale against Wake, FSU scares me more than any other team left on the schedule. Florida State couples an average offense with a great defense--not just great for the ACC, but for all of division I. FSU has the tallest average height in division I this year (!), and are fourth tallest in average effective height. Sound like any other team we've played this year?
Yeah, a comparison to Wake is instructive, I think; I expect a pretty similar game plan. FSU will probably try using their size to pressure the three point shot and obstruct the passing lanes the same way Wake did. Then they use their remaining size underneath to try and slow Booker, while giving Sykes the opportunity to (not) beat them. Now, FSU hasn't been great against the three (certainly not as good as Wake) so hopefully this means they lack the quickness/athleticism of Wake and we can get some open looks.
Clemson I think can try and counter FSU's heighth by using Stitt to drive inside the arc or at least get the perimeter defense to overplay. Clemson had some success with Stitt and Potter driving against Wake, but Wake had enough quickness to keep the ball from moving past the perimeter most of the night. Here's hoping FSU is a little less disciplined on defense.
Luckily for Clemson, things get better on the other end of the court. FSU has a slightly better than division I average offense, but its pretty weak for the ACC. Digging in a little deeper care of Ken Pomeroy, we see that that they are pretty good at getting to the line, where they average ~71%. Also, they don't get their shots blocked very often (which plays against a Clemson strength), and they crash the offensive boards very well (which plays into a Clemson weakness).
So, where's the good news? First, they shoot poorly from behind the arc. But then so does Wake Forest, if you recall. I would focus more on their poor 2P%. While a 5% difference 2-point field goal percentage between Wake and FSU might not seem like much, if we figure around 40 2-point shots in one game, we're looking on average of 4 points less than Wake Forest would score with the same number of shots against a division I-average defense. Since Clemson is well above average defense, the effect is mitigated somewhat; maybe dropping a half or full point off of that difference. Three and half points can obviously be the difference in a game, but its also nothing to hang your hat on. No, the really good news for Clemson is FSU's abysmal turnover percentage. 23.9% of all FSU possessions end in a turnover--just awful. Nearly one in four possessions end in FSU giving the ball back to other team. I guess FSU can blame inexperience, but still, that's quite an accomplishment. I mean, Clemson is running out there at an 18.9% turnover rate which is higher than I would like to see, but wow. And yes, to continue needlessly driving home this point, FSU currently sports the 307th best turnover percentage rate out of 344 teams in division 1. Ouch.
Oh, and Clemson happens to be pretty good at forcing turnovers.
Its a game Clemson should win, but probably not easily. If FSU has some success running their big men at our 3-point shooters, and potential turnovers don't bounce the Tigers' way, it will end up a close, low-scoring affair.
(littlejohn, 02/07, 7:00pm)
Besides the finale against Wake, FSU scares me more than any other team left on the schedule. Florida State couples an average offense with a great defense--not just great for the ACC, but for all of division I. FSU has the tallest average height in division I this year (!), and are fourth tallest in average effective height. Sound like any other team we've played this year?
Yeah, a comparison to Wake is instructive, I think; I expect a pretty similar game plan. FSU will probably try using their size to pressure the three point shot and obstruct the passing lanes the same way Wake did. Then they use their remaining size underneath to try and slow Booker, while giving Sykes the opportunity to (not) beat them. Now, FSU hasn't been great against the three (certainly not as good as Wake) so hopefully this means they lack the quickness/athleticism of Wake and we can get some open looks.
Clemson I think can try and counter FSU's heighth by using Stitt to drive inside the arc or at least get the perimeter defense to overplay. Clemson had some success with Stitt and Potter driving against Wake, but Wake had enough quickness to keep the ball from moving past the perimeter most of the night. Here's hoping FSU is a little less disciplined on defense.
Luckily for Clemson, things get better on the other end of the court. FSU has a slightly better than division I average offense, but its pretty weak for the ACC. Digging in a little deeper care of Ken Pomeroy, we see that that they are pretty good at getting to the line, where they average ~71%. Also, they don't get their shots blocked very often (which plays against a Clemson strength), and they crash the offensive boards very well (which plays into a Clemson weakness).
So, where's the good news? First, they shoot poorly from behind the arc. But then so does Wake Forest, if you recall. I would focus more on their poor 2P%. While a 5% difference 2-point field goal percentage between Wake and FSU might not seem like much, if we figure around 40 2-point shots in one game, we're looking on average of 4 points less than Wake Forest would score with the same number of shots against a division I-average defense. Since Clemson is well above average defense, the effect is mitigated somewhat; maybe dropping a half or full point off of that difference. Three and half points can obviously be the difference in a game, but its also nothing to hang your hat on. No, the really good news for Clemson is FSU's abysmal turnover percentage. 23.9% of all FSU possessions end in a turnover--just awful. Nearly one in four possessions end in FSU giving the ball back to other team. I guess FSU can blame inexperience, but still, that's quite an accomplishment. I mean, Clemson is running out there at an 18.9% turnover rate which is higher than I would like to see, but wow. And yes, to continue needlessly driving home this point, FSU currently sports the 307th best turnover percentage rate out of 344 teams in division 1. Ouch.
Oh, and Clemson happens to be pretty good at forcing turnovers.
Its a game Clemson should win, but probably not easily. If FSU has some success running their big men at our 3-point shooters, and potential turnovers don't bounce the Tigers' way, it will end up a close, low-scoring affair.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)