Talked some new folks into going trail running with me today because Tous had to work so Stacy Huffstetler, Ben Kleaveland and I headed out at 8:30am. We actually ran trails this time as opposed to the path at forbidden drive and while I believe the overall distance was shorter the run was significantly more difficult due to all the elevation changes, ice, roots, rocks, and dog running around under foot. However the run was phenomenal. About an hour of running hills and uneven terrain total distance was probably about 4.5-5 miles. All in what started out as 8 degree (feels like -4) and finished at something like 11 degree weather. These trail runs before Ultisquash are going to become a habit.
After the run I headed off to Haverford for Ultisquash. Fairly low numbers and it took me about 45 minutes to hit my next wind and start playing normally. I had a few good games, a couple of abysmal ones where my team couldn't connect passes but once I got my next wind I started to play aggressively and attack the disc wherever it was. I also got an abnormally high number of point blocks. Unlikely for that to continue.
(211)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Tim, you could make frequent handblocks a habit. It's just as much about anticipation as any good defense...
Perhaps what Tim meant to type was "If I continue to get this many point blocks, it can no longer be considered abnormal."
Point blocks are easier when there's a wall taking away half of the possible areas to throw to. And sure, point blocks are about anticipation, but pressing for point blocks causes broken marks. Broken marks crush D teams. I'd rather never, ever get broken and trust my teammates to get the blocks on the open side than get a point block a game.
I agree with you, one shouldn't try to get blocks at the expense of holding the force. But I don't see that they're necessarily separate defensive moves in all situations.
Guess we'll just disagree on this one :)
This brings up an interesting question. How many easy goals is one guaranteed turnover worth? What if that turnover is within 10 yards of the endzone you're attacking?
I always found that the fun part of playing D was the ability to take risks. You're at such a disadvantage that if you never roll the dice, you may never get a chance to win. The hard part is trying to figure out the difference between a stupid risk and one that's worth the reward.
Not sayin' you should alter your mark to go for point blocks. Just sayin'.
I believe that there are more, deeper layers to your question. At the beginning of a game, I'd say its important to stay within the framework of what your D team is trying to accomplish as a whole. Its like the early rounds of a boxing match where the two fighters are feeling each other out. As the game progresses and as the need for breaks either increases (losing or tied) or decreases (winning) determines what aggressive decisions you need to make.
This goes for marking as well as guarding cutters. Personally I am of the opinion that getting recklessly aggressive on a mark is the wrong way to go about trying to get blocks. I'd rather play the odds that one of my 5-6 defenders up field can set their man up for a block rather than me jumping a mark and causing a jailbreak up the break side. Guarding cutters, I know that I make a switch when I feel the need to get a D where rather than focusing as hard on shutting down the cutter I start to bait more. I give up a little more of the open lane knowing that as my offender cuts I need to jump to his inside shoulder to have the best shot at a good bid.
Its really all about game management of the whole team as well because you definitely set up teams by playing certain types of defenses in certain situations and switching them up intelligently. For a D team, generating turnovers is the most important thing we do. With teams that I've coached and players I've taught one thing I've always stressed on defense is that you can do whatever you want if you're going to get a block. But if what you do causes a massive defensive breakdown you need to stop doing it. And whatever you're doing still needs to fit into the framework of the system (fairly outrageous example: just because you have an awesome backhand mark doesn't mean you force backhand when the team is forcing flick).
In response to Amy, I agree that not getting broken is not separate from getting point blocks so we don't have to disagree. And you make a decent point that my mark could use improving in real game situations. I think one major difference between my US mark and my Ultimate mark is how active my arms and hands are which is something worth trying to bring to regular ultimate to see if I can up my point block totals. Certainly something to experiment with.
Before I get to the rest of this:
1. D-Team's most important thing is to SCORE GOALS.
2. O-Team's most important thing is to SCORE GOALS.
3. The Need for Breaks never increases nor decreases until the game is over.
I believe there are more deeper layers to your answer because we can play The Sicilian Game all day:
What about the thought that the most basic offense is played by any given team on the first 2 possessions. More basic=more predictable. Go for a block then. Or "If I can tell that my defender is going to try to get a block now, I will cut differently." Should you not then look like you're not trying to get a block? What if he figures that ruse out?
What about 'a competent thrower will break most marks'? How does that inform downfield defense? Which is more important, the first break of a series or the second? 3rd 4th? Which is more vulnerable to team defense?
What about you telling me that you don't go for blocks early in the game? Does that change my strategy? On O? On D? Which is better-- setting your guy up for a block or constantly forcing every pass to be perfect? Or is it better to force your player to get the disc to the detriment of the actual throwers on the other team?
Every error (missed block, risk taken, whatever) is a springboard to future success.
So rather than get all negative about my post, why don't you answer J's original question?
To answer your question, the first break is the most important one to stop because after that point everyone on the field is scrambling to recover.
I'm not saying I have a 'don't go for blocks' strategy. I'm just saying I don't always take risks for blocks. I would say that my basic defensive positioning and strategy forces precise throws and could still result in blocks for me. My risky, block hungry positioning and strategy forces perfect throws, and even those don't always work.
There's one roster spot left. Who would you take? A reckless defender who gets absolutely burned 90% of the time, but gets a D the other 10% or a defender who always plays smart and safe and within the team defense, never gets burned, but never gets a D.
(For the sake of this argument, I'm not considering an unforced error a D. Only layouts, skies, point blocks, etc.)
okay:
Q: "How many easy goals is one guaranteed turnover worth?"
A: None.
Q: "What if that turnover is within 10 yards of the endzone you're attacking?"
A: Irrelevant. If you believe in your ability to score, you don't care where you get the disc, just that you do.
These questions compare apples to oranges. Turnovers are worth nothing if they are not converted.
So, rephrase:
"How many easy goals given up are worth one guaranteed goal scored?"
Depends on many variables. How efficient is your opponent? How efficient are you? How easy is "easy"? What are you encouraging by allowing the easy goals? What are you setting up for later?
Most important is the first variable. If the opponent is scoring at a high rate, you will likely be best served by taking more chances. Which may well backfire and result in easier goals for them, but the distance betwixt easy and easier is less than between hard and easy.
That is, rather force your opponent to score ALL hard goals than some easy and some not. Failing that, take chances and risk more in order to gain more. Why not aim for HARD and HARDER?
The first break: I disagree. The first break is often a swing-type pass which reverses the field. I do not believe a mark can prevent a thrower from completing this pass given that he looks with enough time remaining on the shot clock. Or consider the quick-short break to get the offense to the breakside. I do not believe a *thrower* can be stopped from completing this pass.
The pass after this-- the first continuation pass downfield-- is the the throw that must be prevented. If this one can be stopped, the defense has had an opportunity to regroup and reset and reorient itself to the disc.
As for "Who do you take with one roster spot left?" Well, what does the rest of the team do? Who are our other 26 players? What types of help-d do they play? Can this guy get blocks against the best cutters in the game? Does the team-defender get torched by great cutters? Who plays better offense? Does he get beat equally on every cut or just specific types of cuts? Who plays better zone-d?
Difference does not necessitate inequality. Which was the point of my earlier comment. And the pain of making cuts...
There are many paths to enlightenment in life as in ultimate.
these comments are too long. i'm going to get in trouble at work reading all of this...
actual trail running comment:
I also did some trail running this weekend. Theres a large nature reserve in my home town in North Jersey. The 5 or so inches of snow that fell throughout the weekend created for some difficult conditions for my 2 runs. But they also forced me to run on my toes more, to quickly regain balance/stability after slipping (very often), and stay mentally focused for the entire length of the run (something i have trouble doing when running on the road).
These are the qualities I desire whenever i go trail running, that and the opportunity to be surrounded by beautiful nature, which was abundant during these runs.
Not sure about mileage, but times were 48 and 41 minutes (different routes).
Wow you guys get real philosophical-like on your workout blog. Interesting stuff.
Without getting too long-winded:
Who would you take? A reckless defender who gets absolutely burned 90% of the time, but gets a D the other 10% or a defender who always plays smart and safe and within the team defense, never gets burned, but never gets a D.
The safe defender. While he may not get as many blocks by himself than defender #1, the reckless defender can single-handedly ruin the efforts of the other 6 guys on the field. The team probably gets more blocks with the smart defender.
How many easy goals is one guaranteed turnover worth? What if that turnover is within 10 yards of the endzone you're attacking?
Everyone has already discussed all the caveats involved in this question, but at the elite level, the answer is somewhere between "none" and "a lot," depending on said caveats. Playing several defenses to keep an offense off-balance is a good strategy and will generate turns, but some of those D's will inevitably be easier to score a single point against than others. Its the cumulative effect of the defenses played together that make it "Good D."
Post a Comment