Illinois's Game-Winning Play Versus Indiana

Used this in high school and it didn't work the defense just stayed near the basket. Only works if they are playing tight defense.

Like

I'm sure that they would have had an option for that scenario...... but scouting probably told Illinois that they would be playing m2m.

Sometimes it pays to think out of the box.

Like

what if Indiana was not defending in a man defense?

Like

Looking at the video, at first I thought that it wasn't drawn up that way either, particularly as the guy who scores the layup seems to be trying to get free towards the sideline and them wanders in to the open space to the basket for a 'gimme'.

However, if you look at the indounder he seems to be looking at the lane to the basket all the time and doesn't even react to any of the fake cuts making me think that that was the intended area for the pass for the play all the time. Perhaps an Illinois coach noticed Indiana had been leaving this area unguarded earlier in the game and it came back to haunt them.

I think that the defender (#4) guarding the inbound pass should have been guarding the lane towards the basket a bit better. He's just flapping his arms around and not concentrating on actively blocking the inbound pass and hardly reacts when the ball is inbounded. Perhaps it was just fortuitous that the man cutting to the basket did so just as the defender dropped into a defensive stance to block the pass and this allowed the inbound pass to come in cleanly without any pressure on the inbounder.

The two Illinois players almost screen each others' defender by coming in together and when the two Indiana players end up defending the same man it gets messy. They become tied up trying to guard the player cutting around O5's screen toward the inbounder and this gives O3 the chance to cut to the basket. D5 also lost focus at the crucial moment when his player was double teamed by the other defenders while setting his screen.

All in all, a good play with a well executed cut and reaction from the inbounder. The 'buzzer beater' gave the basket to win but the game was probably won by many other factors and plays throughout the match rather than this 1/2 second at the end.

Like

I really don''''t think it was drawn up that way. I think it was a fluke, broken play

Like

Every coach has a philosophy about how he defends inbounds plays... mine was m2m also... but we also played a match up zone, knowing that I would want them to be taking a longer shot, I would have used that... part of MY philosophy..... Pick your own poison.... IF you think about it, it wasn't that they were playing m2m.... it was about HOW they EXECUTED it at that point of the game.

IF they would have played zone and some kid knocked down a jumper..... everyone would be saying that he should have played m2m. IF they would have executed in that situation and stopped the play.... got the W..... he would have been a genius. JMO

As coaches, we make a lot of decisions... some come out right, others ... NOT so good.
Most of the time its all about the players executing in that situation.

Like

I read all the comments and they were all right on but the real problem is the defense should have been zone not man to man in this situation.

Like

Great play, but everyone here dissing Zeller should put yourself in Zeller's shoes. 0.9 seconds on the clock, only have time for a catch and shot, if he plays complete helpside, that pass can be made to his man for a pretty open shot. Offensively, I think it would be a great decision to put your best or second best shooter in that spot (probably second best), so if they are in man, the defender has no choice but to stay on you. Kind of like what Zeller did, but even more so. And I completely understand the thought of making them beat you with a terrific shot, but in D1 basketball, everyone can make a shot if not contested well enough. Personally, I think defensively they did the best thing. My only thought is possibly take the man defending the ball out of bounds and drop him on the ball side block to prevent a lob/bounce pass lay-up.

Like

Ouch... Great play. But definitely a let down on defense. The defender on the inbounder definitely should have been protecting that passing lane toward the basket. And the defender on 1 should have been closer to the key, help side. What a way to stun the #1 team.

Like

I'd like to thank Breakthrough for a GREAT opportunity. This is a terrific breakdown of the play. I agree that there should be default coverage on the basket, but it was a well designed play... let's face it, everyone thought the ball would be going to Richardson.

Like

Great play and what helps is the person doing the inbounds also does a couple of ball fakes and the pickers and cutters sell themselves that they are the ones doing the picks or asking for the ball.

Like

All the comments have an element that coaches should consider, but no one was thinking Griffy. Man total deny defense, help side paint from D1, game over

Like

I think the inbounder''s man should have been off him and towards the lane to help on cuts to the basket. In .9 there is no way to pass back to him for shot. Sometimes good to pressure inbounder, but in this situation I like defender off. Groce and everyone else knows play is going to Richardson the hot hand so Griffeys man steps out to cover him on the fake screen that Groce is hoping that Richardson''s man gets lost going under the action which he does. Now 5 screens for Richardson if step back 3 isn''t there. Now Richardson is coming right at inbounder to get off shot, but his man recovers to him along with Griffeys man. Zeller''s just guarding his man doing nothing wrong. 1 starts to move out and his man steps with him just enough( could have been a little closer to basket to help). Griffey cuts for layup. Inbounder makes right decision because a fraction earlier I think Richardson is actually open. Kind of a broken play but actually well designed by Groce to have that kind of action going which obviously confused Indy. Joe, thanks for the spot on break down of this play.

Like

A couple of errors here...Hubie Brown calls them HUMAN ERRORS.... players will make mistaks when the game is on the line.

1- Player covering the inbounder should not have let him have a good look towards the basket.
2- Allow NO cuts towards the basket...All cuts should have been forced away from the basket. IF you are going to get beat, its by a 3 ball, a prayer from the arc going away from the basket.

Even with a little help from the backside, I don't think he could have prevented that pass unless he was dead center in the paint... leaving his man wide open.. better a 3 ball than a lay up.

Like

@Coach G, leaving #1 alone is not the question here, the point here is see ball man and help. Pass to #1 is a long risky pass. Person guarding #1 could back to him easily were he initially positioned defensively in/near the paint. The pass will take that long to get to #1.

Easy in hindsight to say guard the basket but with .9 seconds it's hard to legitimately receive and get off any jumper. Receiving the ball in/near the basket is any coaches first choice to get it off quickly and have the best chance for it to go in. With all that movement going on you still have to protect the paint.

Like

Why wasn't Cody Zeller in or close to the paint on this inbounds play? Thanks for sharing!

Like

Cry? You mean get drunk!!

Like

i bet the indy coach had to go and cry about this after the game...

Like

i was watching this game and couldn't believe they were so tight on everyone and nobody under the basket.... there was only .9 seconds left so i was thinking alleyoop layup all the way...hard to get off a clean outside jumper in .9 seconds!

Like

Coach Groce said this was actually a broken play.

Like

I meant inbounds under at that point of the game.

Like

I always played our match up zone vs side line inbounds plays... that made sure we weren't going to get burned by a lob, a cutter to the basket, or a pass back to the inbounder.... JMO

Like

Thank you for all of the comments. We appreciate all of your insights! Lots of great things to consider!

Like

Nice play - In college you can't leave #1 alone or else you may find yourself the recipient of a long pass and 3 as WV learned against Xavier in the NCAA Tourney. At the middle school level you can leave #1 alone most likely, jr. high and high school a little tougher to leave the 1 alone. Definelty can't in college. Also love the slight deception built in to the play.

Like

Just to be devil's advocate to all those stating that you would go zone in this situation, Illinois has two, possibly three kids with range out past 22'. The idea here is not to give up ANY open looks, which is why I'd have stayed in man. If you go zone in this situation, Illinois would have overloaded one half of the zone and gotten an open look from the inbound.

Granted, it probably would have been a 3, but it is still not what you want.

If Indiana would have stayed true to their man principals, we wouldn't be having the discussion...

Don't you love the X's and O's though! ;)

Like

While there's some truth to the comment that a zone should have been played, if a team is going to man the play, they have to lay back toward the basket and let the offense run their picks, after PRE-DETERMINING whether to zone/switch on the screens.

If someone (or two) had not chased players, but sat back to watch the play, there would have been help. Or at best, a forced shot on a contested pass.

How about that poor defender in the corner chasing the #1. He's farthest away and is neither in position to help, nor to see both ball and man.

Good for IL to take advantage of the idea that athletic players trump brainpower. GREAT CALL COACH.

Like

This is why I love your blog. The Illinois game was a terrific one to watch, but TV does a poor job breaking down a play. Your step-by-step diagram (and the subsequent breakdown of Indiana's m2m) as I watch the video is terrific. Keep up the good work.

By the way, zone would not be the way to go. With .9 a player can catch and shoot--no coach wants to give an open look for a last second shot. This last second layup was a defensive breakdown and not due to selecting the wrong EOG defense

Like

Zeller played bad defense - whether this is a result of the play or his own confusion, I don't know. Still, a good play that should get a good look - just don't expect a wide open layup most of the time....

Like

My first thought too was "Where was the help side D?" Why stand locked on O1 when he is so far away. As to playing man or zone D in this situation, I think the coach needs to go with what his team is a) more comfortable with or b) better at. In IU's case, they rely and relish in their man-2-man D, so I think it was a good choice, but poor execution on their part. No need to Cody Zeller to be SOOOO interested in guarding the 3-point line. Protect the basket young man!

Like

I always keep a man under the basket to avoid layups. If your going to beat me, its going to be with a fantastic shot, not a layup.

Like

Watch Zeller What is he doing

Like

Great play. Going zone would have been my choice. Defender 1 could have been the hero if he was in the paint. The misdirection is what makes this play work. Being number 1 is not a hot thing this year..

Like

And Crean called it a 'broken play', some day he'll take responsibility for his lack of ability to coach the X's & O's...

Like

This is the kind of thing that shouldn't happen to an eighth grade team. I think IU may need to spend a little less time jacking 3s and a little more time on some solid defensive principles...

You can make a case that every IU player did something incorrectly to help this to happen.

Like

It was like being in Heaven ;-)

Like

terrible defense ZONE IS WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PLAYED AND I HATE ZONE BUT IN THIS SITUATION IT WAS NESS

Like

The simple breakdown was defender #1 being

too concerned about O-player #1... O-1 is not

a threat being so far away... D-1 should have

positioned himself in front of the hoop, mid-block

with butt to baseline... Absolutely no need to

pay that much attention O-1 who is 45-ft from

the throw-in spot.

Like

Great play against a Man to Man Defense. In late game any defense against any baseline inbound I never cover the inbounder tight, always keep a man under basket.

Like

I'm sure this play is designed specifically because of where the inbounder was.

I have a dozen OOB under the basket plays. But, it just shows us coaches we need to be prepared for any kind of situation if the ball is to be inbounded somewhere else!

Like

Is it really a great play or just really bad defense? I love the alignment from that spot throw-in, but could Indiana have been any worse defensively in this spot?

Like

Why would Indiana play man to man defense with the ball under their own basket? A great offensive play is often confused with a poor defensive play.

Like

I am always amazed when players are more worried about giving up a long three than a lay up. Where is the help side defense when the inbounds passer is in the deep corner? Lay up = 98% and 3 Pt = less than 40%.

Like

I like this set because it creates so much open space around the basket, creating an easier entry pass to the cutter.

Like

I guess it wasnt drawn this way on the board, or just 100% execution with real-look hesitation.

Like