re: This is the year of McMahon?

quote:

---

am very open about my low basketball iq but I find it remarkable how we manage to do nothing discernibly well under McMahon. It’s difficult to be a contender when you don’t have any strength to rely on.

Is McMahon known to be an offensive coach? Defensive specialist? Pear had a clear strength of bringing a top tier offense every year

---

The data has clearly shown over and over, balance is the key to being really good. You have to be really good defensively and have a solid offense. But the offense doesn't have to be elite if you have a really good defense.

In his opening press conference McMahon spoke specifically about the importance of balance. That was the most encouraging part of an otherwise very lackluster and underwhelming first impressions. It was great to hear him emphasis it though because Wade's teams were notoriously imbalanced (often elite offensive and terrible defensively, until that flipped in his final season). That imbalance kind of "capped" the extent of Wade's teams' success.

To his credit, McMahon's teams have been balanced. It's just they've been equally bad on each end of the floor. This year they were perfectly balanced. Per KenPom, ranked 99th in both offensive and defensive efficiency (neither being good).

I think McMahon wants to play an uptempo game. He wants his defense to create deflections/turnovers and quickly turn defense into offense. He doesn't want to grind out the shot clock on defense like Wisconsin and Virginia usually do. But he doesn't want to run and jack up a ton of 3's or layups like Alabama does. However, each roster has different strengths and weakness that often dictate the best style of play. Even if that is not necessarily the style of play the coach prefers. IMO, the biggest issue with McMahon has been his inability or unwillingness to deviate from his preferred approach to fit the roster. In year one, LSU played well in the first two SEC games. Then, opponents adjusted and McMahon never countered. They went from 1-1 (with a chance to be 2-0) in the first two, tough, SEC games to not even being competitive in the majority of the final 16 games. Last year it would often take LSU falling behind big before they seemingly changed their approach. Almost as if McMahon has a set game plan (approach/substitution rotation pattern) that he simply doesn't want to deviate from...even if it clearly isn't working during the game.

One of the best examples was the SECT game vs. Miss. St. LSU started out sluggish. About halfway through the first half McMahon inserted Hunter Dean. His energy, defense, and explosiveness (relative to Baker) completely changed the game in LSU's favor. It was evident to everyone...including the announcers. As a result, LSU went from a back and forth sluggish game to a (nearly) 10 point lead at the half, playing great basketball for the final 10-12 minutes. The the 2nd half starts and the same lineup that started the game, and didn't play well, was in. Including Baker who did nothing in the first half. Almost immediately MSU erased the LSU lead. It took McMahon 8 minutes, and a lost lead, to insert the guy who had been the difference maker in the 1st half (Dean) into the game. By that time LSU had lost their rhythm and momentum. LSU was +14 in the game with Dean on the Floor. They were -4 with Baker. Yet Dean and Baker played roughly the same amount minutes. I get that Baker was your starter. But sometimes you have to have a feel for the game and adjust. McMahon has never done that well at LSU.

Ohgeeznotthisshitagain.gif