Winning Hoops in Tourney is Fundamental?

I admittedly haven't spent hours upon hours watching the Tourney so far. From what I have seen though, is it me or does it seem the teams having success share a few things in common? Well, why don't we boil those 'things' down to a single something. It's a word that isn't sexy. It's an idea that often seems to have disappeared from the lexicon of coaches at the college level. Yes, Coach Dale, I'm talking about THE FUNDAMENTALS.

Sure, talent is the ultimate equalizer. To believe that a team is going to take on Kentucky and blow them out of the building because they can run a picture perfect pick-and-roll is obviously ridiculous. However, maybe the teams oozing with gifted athletes and individual superstars can take a few cues from early round action, and teams like Cornell, St. Mary's, Purdue, Northern Iowa, Washington, Syracuse and Ohio.

The talent level surely varies vastly even among these five teams. Yet, there are common threads. Unselfishness is an unmistakable theme. In all cases, so is defense. These also so happen to be squads where executing backdoor cuts, screening away from the ball and continually moving off the ball seem to take place with much greater consistency. It's probably not coincidence that the number of offensive rebounds, jump balls, floor burns and other "hustle" plays similarly seemed more prevalent in watching some of these schols compete.

It's a model teams like Georgetown and UTEP (yes, I realize they were a lower seed) might have benefited from following a bit closer. Villanova looks like it could learn a little as well. In this case, their opponent is providing a real-time first-person lesson.

A back screen may not be as scintillating as an alley oop, and an offensive rebound surely doesn't have the flair of a killer crossover. But maybe some of those stacked teams should have their stars stop looking to light it up themselves on every possession and instead see what a little ball movement can do. We're not demanding four passes before a shot here, but maybe two?


0 comments: