In its three losses this season, Indiana has given up at least 85 points in each game, and an average of nearly 88 per contest.
So to say the defense has been an area of concern this season would be an understatement.
Indiana has played six games against high major competition this season, and they’ve allowed an average of 1.12 points per possession in those contests. Is that a lot? A year ago the Hoosiers lost all 11 games where they allowed that many points per trip. Let’s just say it’s a difficult amount to overcome.
It’s important to focus on Indiana’s game against high major competition. There’s obviously a significant talent gap between those teams and the rest of IU’s schedule to this point. And some interesting — some might say disturbing — data emerges when examining Indiana’s defense against high majors.
The headline data point might just be Indiana’s two-point field goal defense. High majors are shooting 56.3% from two against the Hoosiers. Last year for the season opponents shot 47.4% from two against IU. And top-100 opponents a year ago still shot just 48.1%.
So Indiana’s defense inside-the-arc has seen a major year-over-year decline. And the Hoosiers weren’t that good defensively a year ago.
Indiana’s block percentage against top-100s is actually better this year than last, so losing a good rim protector like Kel’el Ware doesn’t seem to explain it either.
So what accounts for the drop-off?
One area of concern has been the inability to stay in front of the basketball. For example, Louisville guard Chucky Hepburn was 5-of-6 from two against IU, Gonzaga guard Khalif Battle was 5-of-9 from two, Providence guard Corey Floyd was 4-of-6 from two, and Nebraska wing Brice Williams was 8-of-12 from two.
Indiana starts multiple players who appear to not be playing their optimal position on the defensive end. Mackenzie Mgbako is probably better suited playing the four, and Malik Reneau the five. And Trey Galloway’s defensive box score plus/minus numbers have been negative this season, and well below his norms to this point. Perhaps that relates in part to his conditioning as he returns from knee surgery.
Finding and isolating good matchups for the dribble drive against Indiana has been an effective weapon for opponents to this point in the season. In the case of Williams on Friday, IU coach Mike Woodson said his team’s struggle was allowing him to get downhill. It seemed Woodson could have cycled through his entire roster without finding someone who could stop the Nebraska wing.
A year ago when Woodson’s defense encountered problems staying in front of the ball, he made an in-game adjustment against Louisville in New York. That adjustment — a zone defense — probably won that game a year ago against the Cardinals, and Woodson appears ready to experiment with a zone once again.
Following the Friday evening loss at Nebraska, Indiana has just one game over a two-week span. So the Hoosiers have time to implement significant changes. And a zone defense is part of the equation.
“We’ve got a lot of time to practice this week, and we have played some zone in the past,” Woodson told Don Fischer on his radio show Monday evening, acknowledging his team is working on zone defense. “We’re going to need it to slow teams down when they get on runs. I’ve always been a man-to-man guy, and we’ve still got to get our man-to-man defense where I think it should be.”
Against Louisville a year ago Woodson utilized a 2-2-1 zone that dropped to a 2-3.
Don’t expect Indiana to turn into Syracuse under Jim Boeheim overnight. To play zone like his best teams you have to recruit specific players and drill the principles during the offseason.
But as a change-of-pace in games when a player like Williams is going off?
That might not be a bad idea based on the early returns this season.
For complete coverage of IU basketball, GO HERE.
The Daily Hoosier –“Where Indiana fans assemble when they’re not at Assembly”
- You can follow us on Twitter: @daily_hoosier
- Find us on Facebook and Instagram
- Seven ways to support completely free IU coverage at no cost to you.
