On Bone and minute distribution
EDITED 1/21 at 3:05 p.m. to add graph at the bottom
A comment Ken Bone made during his teleconference yesterday about Klay Thompson perhaps getting fatigued got me thinking.
There are a lot of reasons why the Bennett system has been successful most everywhere it's been. The slow-down style does a lot of things for a marginally talented team -- frustrate opponents, increase variance -- but perhaps one of its greatest assets is that it allows a coach to play his best players for heavy minutes.
Yes, the system demands a lot out of a player defensively, but there is no sprinting down the floor on a fastbreak as offense often amounts to 20 seconds of rest before truly getting into your set. It's the reason why Kyle Weaver, Derrick Low and Taylor Rochestie all were able to play more than 80 percent of the minutes back in 2007-08 and still be fresh enough to roll through the first two rounds of the NCAA Tournament.
If you've got a couple of really talented players and a handful of role players who are willing to sell out for what you're doing, you can be very successful.
Which is precisely why many of you approached the reign of Ken Bone with just a little bit of trepidation. Besides requiring different skills, it also requires a greater number of players with those skills in order to work well. Teams that are successful playing a fast-but-not-blistering tempo (around 70 possessions) generally go nine deep in their rotation with guys rarely playing more than 75 percent of minutes -- check out teams like Kentucky, BYU, Minnesota, Purdue ... on and on. There are exceptions (such as Duke and Cal), but it pretty much holds true.
Bone is a guy who has been very successful in the past (in relative terms -- it was Division II and Big Sky, after all) playing at about that pace, so I was curious about how his usage of personnel this year compares to past years. Here's the raw data, showing the minutes per game of the top 10 players on each Bone squad, dating back to his first year at Portland State (there obviously is no available data for SPU back in the day):
| 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | |
| Pace | 67.3 | 72.0 | 68.0 | 65.7 | 68.5 |
| 1 | 33.4 | 28.8 | 30.9 | 31.6 | 35.3 |
| 2 | 31.2 | 28.5 | 30.7 | 28.3 | 30.7 |
| 3 | 26.8 | 26.7 | 25.3 | 27.3 | 27.7 |
| 4 | 22.7 | 24.6 | 23.8 | 24.2 | 26.8 |
| 5 | 22.5 | 23.6 | 20.1 | 23.9 | 22.2 |
| 6 | 22.0 | 19.3 | 18.8 | 21.0 | 16.4 |
| 7 | 19.7 | 14.0 | 18.4 | 20.5 | 14.1 |
| 8 | 12.8 | 13.4 | 14.3 | 16.3 | 11.5 |
| 9 | 10.0 | 12.1 | 14.0 | 9.0 | 10.2 |
| 10 | 8.5 | 11.4 | 11.4 | 8.3 | 6.7 |
The answer? It's different -- pretty significantly different. It's tough to see just from the table, so here's a graph that makes it a little easier to see. The colorful lines are PSU (it's not really important which year is which, because they all trend basically the same way) and the white line is WSU 2009-10. Click here to see the graph full size:

Basically, what you see is that he's asking for more minutes from his top four players, the same out of his fifth and a lot less out of his bottom five -- this despite playing at what amounts to a roughly average pace for a Ken Bone squad. Clearly, Bone isn't using his personnel in his ideal way.
The interesting thing is that it didn't necessarily start out this way. Looking at games early in the year, Klay Thompson was playing a lot of minutes, and Reggie Moore would log big minutes occasionally, but the rest of the minutes were spread around.
Then Gonzaga happened. With the Cougs holding a lead, Bone tried to get his best players a rest, and the game began to slip away. By the time he put his best unit back in the game, it was too late -- the tide had turned, and Gonzaga would finish the job.
In the wake of that game, Bone said he'd have to reevaluate his rotation in close games, and probably need to have his best players log more minutes. Often times, that's not a huge issue, but this team has been involved in an inordinate number of really close games. Hence, he's relied heavily on his best players, and the percentage of minutes being played by each guy becomes more and more skewed from Bone's ideal.
I think fatigue is becoming a very real issue for this team. A lot of guys have had to take either a significant jump in minutes (Moore) or play tougher minutes than they ever have before (Thompson) or both (DeAngelo Casto, whose situation is further complicated by recovery from knee surgery).
Bone is in a tough spot with this team. He plays his best players fewer minutes, and perhaps they're not even in games. He plays his best players for heavy minutes, and they run out of gas and can't finish games -- or worse, the season -- strong. It's definitely a quandary.
Faced with those two options, and seeing what we've seen out of this team recently, I really believe Bone has no choice but to rely more heavily on his bench players. However, that shouldn't be as scary of a prospect as it once was.
Early in the season, I understood Bone's decision-making process with the rotation. He had a bunch of unknown, unproven quantities whom he wasn't sure were going to be able to perform in games. But now, he's got a better idea of what he's got -- and what he's got is three pretty reliable bench players whom he probably needs to use more, and in higher leverage situations.
Nik Koprivica is already playing a fair amount for a bench player -- about 50 percent of the minutes -- but it's becoming more and more clear that Xavier Thames and James Watson are underused assets. Sooner or later, Bone's going to have to cast his lot with these guys, and let the chips fall where they may.
Might as well be now, because it's becoming increasingly clear that this team has hit a bit of a wall, and there are guys just waiting to step up.
EDIT, 1/21 at 3:05 p.m.: A reader posed a hypothesis that Bone is already addressing this in conference play. It's only six games, but I've added a line for conference play so you can all see what's happened since conference play has started. It's the black one (full-size graph here):
Yup, it's gotten worse, not better.
33 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Excellent post
It’s certainly becoming an issue with the team. It may also be part of the frustrating issue of playing with the lead. Instead of it being a problem just with us playing with the lead, part of it may be that we just have a second half problem with fatigue in general. Something to think about that I haven’t looked at as much.
I think there has to be a happy medium between all of the best players, or a lot of reserves. Fact is, this team is going to have a hard time creating garbage time minutes in games with how they’ve been playing so resting on account of that isn’t reliable. On the other hand, if Klay and Reggie keep playing 30+ and Casto keeps playing 25+ a game, we’re in deep trouble in a month.
I’d like to see Klay at least lose 5 minutes a game, with Reggie losing some as well. Both of these two have outwardly stated they’ve been fatigued after games and some of their performances show it. The only guard that doesn’t seem to be affected by fatigue has been Capers, whos playing almost 28 a game.
Casto needs to come off a lot more than he has. If we keep him out there at 27 minutes a game, 10 minutes above last year, he’s going to break down. His knee is not as fully recovered as it should be and his performance suffers because of these things.
As far as where the minutes come from, Watson is Casto lite at this point. He can run the floor and is really starting to gel into the offense. He also has a decent face up game, something that Casto does not. X is only playing 16 a game and can be used to spell Moore. He’s shown to be a capable scorer and ball handler in the time he’s been used. As far as the other guard used, the question become do you want Allen or Harthun? It seems like using a 9 man rotation would be the best option to rest his big guns.
Just kidding
After looking at it again, and noticing the dropoff between 8th and 9th man, it’s easy to see how Bone could use one of those two guards in limited roles to reduce minutes without them being in the rotation or using set minutes.
by Brian Floyd on Jan 20, 2010 11:33 PM PST up reply actions
It some people strongly disagreed with me when I said
I didn’t want to become UW-East. I just don’t see it happening where we fill our roster with super talent year in and year out.
Great post by the way.
We have been talking about PW’s adjustment to the Pac-10 level, slow as it may be, but it is real. You move from one level up to the next and as a coach you figure out how to adjust or sink and get blown out by 40 every game. Oh wait, I need to reserve that comment for football season.
Time will tell on the talent thing
There are some very nice pieces here already, and by all accounts Simon and Aden will be upgrades over what’s currently on the roster.
However, I caution against continuing to characterize where this program is heading as “UW East” — Bone’s style is similar to Romar’s but distinctly different. Romar wants to play at 75+ possessions. Only once in five years has a Bone team exceeded 70 possessions per game, and it’s become pretty clear that he demands a higher level of execution out of his players than I’ve ever seen out of Romar.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that I don’t buy anymore this idea that we have to go 10 deep with the kind of talent UW does to be successful after seeing what I’ve seen out of Bone.
Forgot to finish the thought
But we need to expect — and get — more out of 7-9 than we’re currently getting.
I agree we try to have more execution on offense than UW does, as
UW often breaks down to one on one (however we have done this on occasion with Moore) and we don’t press like UW does. Nevertheless, I am concerned that we are trending toward it with the belief we can get athletic enough guys to do everything (man, press, zone).
I think Wazzu can get nice pieces, but ultimately what was the strength of TB’s system is that it can take guys good at a few things (2 and 3-tool guys) and make the team really good when they fit all together.
What I struggle with Bone is defining what his team wants to be successful at. I don’t like to see a lot of variation when you don’t have the parts to do it and I am concerned that we cannot recruit the athletes to do it all.
by ptowncoug3012 on Jan 21, 2010 11:24 AM PST up reply actions
Legitimate concerns, all
We just won’t have answer for a while. But remember, Arizona had about as much tradition as WSU when Lute Olson arrived. Not saying Bone is Olson, but some success can beget more success.
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 21, 2010 11:54 AM PST up reply actions
I was hoping that with TB. Now I am hoping this will
occur under KB. We need to put a beach on campus. I think AZ has one. Of course, it would have to be an indoor beach;)
by ptowncoug3012 on Jan 21, 2010 12:54 PM PST up reply actions
The Dunes are awesome
We just have to get recruits to visit during those few months of school when the weather is perfect. But my first week of school, I went to the Dunes and had a “holy s**t, this is what college is about” moment.
what he inherits
greatly enhances a coaches ability to ’’adjust’’.
If you can't Go Cougs... don't go.
by hollyweirdcoug on Jan 21, 2010 12:50 PM PST up reply actions
i agree it would be nice to be deeper
But I’m in the camp that the answers to our problems aren’t found on our bench.
We have 8 players that don’t make us a worse basketball team when they step on the court…and it might be 7 depending on which abe shows up.
I will contend that spreading minutes around to those 8 would be a decent idea. Give abe some more minutes at 4 and split nik’s time between 3 and 4. Spell casto with more watson. Start giving X some more minutes.
I do think a more deliberate approach to distribution may help us get over the hump, but its clear the harthun/charlie experiments haven’t panned out, and Jan 20th is too late in the season to be giving players more trial minutes.
by BigWood on Jan 21, 2010 11:07 AM PST via mobile reply actions
I'm not advocating trial minutes
If that was unclear, sorry. I’m advocating exactly what you said: More Thames, more Watson, less Klay, less Casto. I also think Abe can be effective coming off the bench to spell Klay and play the 3. I know he’ll struggle to defend out there, but he at least gives you some offense — and I do think he can give us some offense if we can figure out a way to get him some shots.
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 21, 2010 11:57 AM PST up reply actions
yeah im an idiot
I had my whole post typed out on my Droid before realizing we agreed on this…
by BigWood on Jan 21, 2010 1:47 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Bone vs. Bennett system
While Bone’s system has more posessions per game, I really don’t think it requires more energy than the Bennett system. Bennett’s sytem did not rest 20 seconds on offense. I remember watching Derrick Low constantly running around screens to get open, let alone the energy they put into defense. I acutally think I see way more standing around now than I ever did during the Bennett’s time. While they did walk the ball up the floor, they were not standing around on offense. I think one of Bone’s biggest mistakes was giving up on “the Hill” and a lot of the off season conditioning the team did under the Bennetts.
As far as minutes go, I really think they need to get Casto some more breaks and get Bjornstad and Motum some more experience. Their redshirts are burned, so get them some quality time. Even 5 minutes a game for those two will greatly help this team out not only this year, but even more next year. It would also give Casto a big break and allow him to play some more 4. He could still help them out on defense coming from the other side to block shots.
Yes, it was 20 seconds of rest under Bennett
For everyone but Low. They created special sets so that he could get some shots off since he couldn’t create his own shots.
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 21, 2010 11:58 AM PST up reply actions
Small critique
First off… long time reader, first time poster. I’m a rabid husky fan but love the content on this blog. I wanted to critique the statistical analysis because it isn’t representative of pac-10 play so far and I think Bone is already on the same page as you. I went back and looked at the last seven games including LSU and Xavier Thames is averaging 20.3min which is the exact verage of the season long averages of previous Bone Teams. Watson is averaging 9.0min which is slightly less than the average. Granted, Thompson’s numbers go up for this period as well but they are skewed by the two overtime games. Bottom line, I think this issue is being addressed. Should Thames and Casto get more than 20.3 and 9.0 min respectively for their output?
Yes
They should. And it’s actually gotten worse in conference play. I’ll have another graph up for you shortly.
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 21, 2010 12:59 PM PST up reply actions
That defintely supports the overall point but it should be noted....
That #6 being Thames increased in minutes substantially and so did #10 Watson who becomes #7 above. My point was that the people that you are asking to have increased minutes actually are having their minutes increased. Thames by 4 minutes and Watson by 9.7 minutes off their season average.
But that's not the point
The point is that too heavy a burden is being placed on the top 4-5 guys. I think the graph shows that quite nicely. It’s not so much who’s getting more minutes; it’s who’s not getting less minutes.
Yes to both. Particularly Thames, but the problem is
that it can hurt defensively if we had a lineup with Moore, Thames and KT at the 1-3 spots. Capers is effective rebounder and top notch defender and we give up significant size if Capers in on the bench and we are playing Nik or Abe at the 4.
Watson clearly deserves more minutes and I would love to see him on the floor more often playing with Casto. However our depth at the post (and I still don’t know what TB was thinking) prevents us from playing them both for extended periods of time together.
I would love us to start with Casto, Watson, KT, Moore and Thames to start with Capers coming for Moore or Thames (or even KT) for that matter and having Abe and Nik rotate in for either Casto and Watson. But I don’t think it is possible at the post with the lack of depth and thus Nik will likely start in place of Watson.
by ptowncoug3012 on Jan 21, 2010 1:01 PM PST up reply actions
TB obviously wanted to prove he could win fielding a lineup of nothing but wings and 2 guards.
CougCenter WSU's second main blog
by Craig Powers on Jan 21, 2010 2:27 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
He had Boeke.
And was bringing in Chadwick from NC… It’s not as though he ignored the position, just that stuff went sideways on the bigmen. He was also looking to bring in Angus Brandt… Another bigfella, but didn’t land him. Decent 5s are particularly hard to find.
by TiltingRight on Jan 21, 2010 9:22 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
However
Neither of those guys would have given us what we actually needed — interior toughness and rebounding.
by Jeff Nusser on Jan 21, 2010 10:52 PM PST up reply actions
Good News: Patrick Simon!
Bad News: He’s a 6’9 wing. Seriously, though, he’s going to be just an inch shorter than our two biggest guys (Charlie and Bjornstad), but plays like a guard. He has to be looking for a big man for next year
by Brian Floyd on Jan 22, 2010 12:05 AM PST up reply actions
What TB was thinking...
Here is my mock internal dialogue for Tony on senior night last year:
“Wait, why are they announcing Baynes as a senior? He’s not a junior? That first year when he couldn’t catch a ball counted? And Forrest too?
We didn’t recruit any post players. I mean none. Not even a token big awkward guy. Maybe someone out there has a prebuilt roster I can coach, as I am apparently not good at math.”
End scene.

by 

















