A real debate question—which is better playing two bigs or staying with the spread offense

[IDUNK4HEELS]

I cannot be the only one thinking about this especially when Carolina is constantly losing rebounds allowing opponents to have numerous opportunities to score.

Personally I prefer the two big approach where year in and year out UNC was one of the leaders in rebounding nationally compared to this year where they are close to the bottom in rebounding.

The spread offense with four shooters and one big has worked recently with Baylor and Miami as they both got to the final four because they had Big Athletic elite shooters but Carolina does not have that luxury of elite shooters.

Maybe it is just me but I would rather have closer shots to the basket from the bigs with a chance of getting a rebound than a barrage of shots from Franklin street. Carolina has enough brick layers so why may things more difficult than it needs to be…

 

[Mrs.Jeans15]

2 Bigs.

But if it's the same offense it really doesn't matter

 

[NathanFielder]

No one style is superior to another. It's about getting the right players for the scheme. And making coaching adjustments to get players to perform at their best. Ideally you have a schemer and not just a scheme from the sidelines. That or you recruit unconditionally to the system that you believe in.

UNC lost in the Elite 8 to a Princeton Offense when Georgetown beat UNC. As you said Baylor won a National Championship with 4 guards. UConn won back-to-back National Championships playing a snail tempo (in the 300s). And UNC has obviously won multiple National Championships playing the opposite of those systems.

Every team in the NCAA Tournament that won National Championships could execute in the half court. So you can play as fast or slow as you want, but it will always come down to executing in the half court if you want to win it all.

My preferred system is to play fast, but not intentionally as fast as humanly possible like UNC does. And the vast majority of Final Four teams do not play an extreme tempo either way. And those that do, in fact play slower, not faster. So I prefer about 70 possessions/game as opposed to UNC that often times is 73 possessions plus.

What I prefer is a head coach who can adapt his system to the personnel he has.

And to say this team just jacks up a ton of 3s is a bit of a myth. They rank 244th in the country in 3PT rate. They shoot more 2s than the average team in the country and they're good at shooting 2s (53rd in 2PT%). I think it seems that UNC takes a lot of 3s because RJ takes a lot of 3s and he's missed just about all of them this season. Apart from RJ, this is a pretty low volume 3PT shooting team. And it's a reason they're no good.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Can I get Hansbrough as a junior and Zeller as a senior?

I'm thinking we could figure out how to fit them in.

 

[al would]

Can I get Hansbrough as a junior and Zeller as a senior?

I'm thinking we could figure out how to fit them in.

Doubt it. They would have to come off bench to get their 12 mpg. This version of UNC does not know how to use bigs unless they can set screens.

 

[gberry78]

2 Bigs but it seemed like Roy’s last few years it was becoming harder & harder to recruits bigs that actually wanted to play in the post with their back to the basket cause the NBA becoming almost exclusively perimeter oriented

 

[gary-7]

I cannot be the only one thinking about this especially when Carolina is constantly losing rebounds allowing opponents to have numerous opportunities to score.

Personally I prefer the two big approach where year in and year out UNC was one of the leaders in rebounding nationally compared to this year where they are close to the bottom in rebounding.

The spread offense with four shooters and one big has worked recently with Baylor and Miami as they both got to the final four because they had Big Athletic elite shooters but Carolina does not have that luxury of elite shooters.

Maybe it is just me but I would rather have closer shots to the basket from the bigs with a chance of getting a rebound than a barrage of shots from Franklin street. Carolina has enough brick layers so why may things more difficult than it needs to be…

It is neither a legitimate debate nor even a dichotomy. You don't need two Bigs to play inside-out and vertical, and 5-out is unsound YMCA garbage.

 

[Bubspub88]

This roster is just a bad mix. If you put Washington, Lubin, Powell, Jackson and Trimble on the floor you have a more traditional UNC line-up but where is the offense if Jackson is off. Plus you have your best pg and biggest scoring threat on the bench.

My preference is a true, physical post presence with a 4 who can play bigger than he is (George Lynch, Harrison Ingram). Even a guy like PJ Hairston can be a 4 in today's game if you want to play small. UNC's problem is they have a really small backcourt with RJ and Cadeau but lack a physical frontcourt presence.

Had Tyson been ready for this level we are not having these problems as much. He would have brought some size and was supposed to take the heat off RJ as a a deep threat. Generally the UNC line-up has at least 4 if not 5 players at a size disadvantage, recipe for disaster against teams playing bully-ball. Small ball works if you have multiple guys who can take an opponent with the dribble or hit from deep. If you don't force the opponent to guard the whole floor they get to clog the lane and take full advantage of the size disparity.

 

[DSouthr]

I will go with 2 hall o f fame coaches for a thousand? LOL Why do I, well has a lot to do with my not thinking i know more than Dean Smith or Roy Williams about basketball.

What I do know is no matter what you prefer you must bring in players that fit which ever tack you pick. If you elect to small ball and 5 out fine but you better bring in a bunch of knock down shooters. If you elect for the 2 big man approach then you better have the quality big men to make it work. Does this UNC team have either? No, at least in my opinion we don't and that places us dead in the middle of no man's land and that is where good programs go to die a slow death.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

I will go with 2 hall o f fame coaches for a thousand? LOL Why do I, well has a lot to do with my not thinking i know more than Dean Smith or Roy Williams about basketball.

Here's my new theory....

Dean Smith had a big toolbox. Lots of tools (options), including many he built himself.

Subsequent coaches have mostly picked what they liked from Dean's toolbox. Mainly just using a subset. Occasionally adding a tool of their own devising, or a tool that fits the changing game better - but mostly shrinking the toolbox. Run. Avoid zone. Mainly freelance.

I think the toolbox has gotten too small and maybe the current coaches either don't know how to use the tools that well, or don't know how to make their own.

Just a theory.

 

[DSouthr]

Here's my new theory....

Dean Smith had a big toolbox. Lots of tools (options), including many he built himself.

Subsequent coaches have mostly picked what they liked from Dean's toolbox. Mainly just using a subset. Occasionally adding a tool of their own devising, or a tool that fits the changing game better - but mostly shrinking the toolbox. Run. Avoid zone. Mainly freelance.

I think the toolbox has gotten too small and maybe the current coaches either don't know how to use the tools that well, or don't know how to make their own.

Just a theory.

Oh how I wish we would go back to the free lance motion offense rather than this fad 4 and 5 out crap. And this auto switch nonsense is just cheap, it rewards for less effort? You should NEVER switch until it becomes the very last option. And this ghost screen stuff, how can you call something a screen when you don't touch or divert a defender? I have actually watched repeatedly our 5 man go set was is supposed to be a screen but fall back before the guy he was suppose to screen even got to the screener?