calumnus said:

---

He is considered a defensive coach because he generally plays a lineup based on defensive matchups, rather than forcing the other team to make defensive adjustments to his offense. He generally favors tough on ball man-to-man shot denying defense. Teams typically score fewer points than their average because his teams are generally in the 300s in pace of play. His teams are generally not very good in defensive efficiency but are worse in offensive efficiency. Hence he is considered a "defensive coach."

---

Jeff82 said:

---

That's my problem with him this year, at least. This team has struggled to stop the other team, which means: 1) Fox is not getting his concepts across; 2) the players are not listening, or: 3) they just don't have the ability to execute what he's trying to teach them.

It's probably three, in that so far, Kuany, Klonaras, Thiemann and Thorpe are all substantial recruiting misses. They tend to make up for not having much size by also not having very good defensive footwork, from what I can see, which among other things is why we have so much difficulty defending the pick-and-roll.

If we don't see some development from at least one of these guys by next year, when they'll be juniors, or another big man that can give us some defensive presence inside, I'll be ready to pass judgment on Fox. If you're going to recruit projects, then you have to be able to explain to them what they need to work on to get better, and convince them to put in the effort to do so. That was one of Monty's big strengths, which is why his teams generally punched above their weight.

---

oskidunker said:

---

Jeff82 said:

---

That's my problem with him this year, at least. This team has struggled to stop the other team, which means: 1) Fox is not getting his concepts across; 2) the players are not listening, or: 3) they just don't have the ability to execute what he's trying to teach them.

It's probably three, in that so far, Kuany, Klonaras, Thiemann and Thorpe are all substantial recruiting misses. They tend to make up for not having much size by also not having very good defensive footwork, from what I can see, which among other things is why we have so much difficulty defending the pick-and-roll.

If we don't see some development from at least one of these guys by next year, when they'll be juniors, or another big man that can give us some defensive presence inside, I'll be ready to pass judgment on Fox. If you're going to recruit projects, then you have to be able to explain to them what they need to work on to get better, and convince them to put in the effort to do so. That was one of Monty's big strengths, which is why his teams generally punched above their weight.

---

Agree. Very disappointing and next year not looking much better with only a 6'7" newcomer . Fox says good big men are hard to find yet every other pac 12 team seems to have one. .

Roxy said its hard to play zone against Stanford. Why is this?

---

HoopDreams said:

---

the biggest puzzle of this year for me is how we can have the same players return with a year in fox's defensive scheme, and a year of getting strong, yet poorer defense

you could say we did lose 2 players (Paris and South), but neither we top defenders and both undersized.

Paris did improve defensively his senior year, but is that much better a defender than Hyder and Foreman? Maybe, but it just doesn't explain the big drop in defense given the other factors above

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

He is considered a defensive coach because he generally plays a lineup based on defensive matchups, rather than forcing the other team to make defensive adjustments to his offense. He generally favors tough on ball man-to-man shot denying defense. Teams typically score fewer points than their average because his teams are generally in the 300s in pace of play. His teams are generally not very good in defensive efficiency but are worse in offensive efficiency. Hence he is considered a "defensive coach."

---

Ouch. Has it been true of all Cal coaches known as defensive coaches that they just slowed the pace? Or were any good by efficiency standards?

I suspect that one thing that happened is that teams figured out what Fox likes to do defensively and switched up their attacks. But that is difficult to see for someone like me who only watches Cal games.

---

joe amos yaks said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

He is considered a defensive coach because he generally plays a lineup based on defensive matchups, rather than forcing the other team to make defensive adjustments to his offense. He generally favors tough on ball man-to-man shot denying defense. Teams typically score fewer points than their average because his teams are generally in the 300s in pace of play. His teams are generally not very good in defensive efficiency but are worse in offensive efficiency. Hence he is considered a "defensive coach."

---

Ouch. Has it been true of all Cal coaches known as defensive coaches that they just slowed the pace? Or were any good by efficiency standards?

I suspect that one thing that happened is that teams figured out what Fox likes to do defensively and switched up their attacks. But that is difficult to see for someone like me who only watches Cal games.

---

Coach Padgett ran with great talent.

---

• WSu: 6'10"; 6'10"; 7'1"; 6'10".
• uDub: 6'11"; 7'4".
• OSu: 6'10"; 7'1"; 6'10"; 6'10".
• uO: 6'11"; 6'11".
• Farm: 7'-"; 6'10".
• uSC: 6'10"; 7'-"; 6'10"; 6'11".
• Ucla: 6'10".
• ASu: 6'10".
• uA**: 6'11"; 6'11"; 6'11"; 7'1". **(Shakes head) Eligibility is a "modern miracle".
• uU: 6'10"; 7'-".
• Cu: 7'-"; 6'10".
• Cal: 7'-".

• uMT: 6'10".
• uTx: 6'11"; 6'10".
• MichStu: 6'11".
• tOSu: 6'10".
• uK: 6-10; 7'-".
• Ku: 6'10"; 6'10".

• Zags: 7'-"; 7'-"; 6'10"; 6'10"
• uVa: 7'1"; 7'-"; 6'11".
• uMeatchicken: 7'1"; 6'10"; 6'10".

Alkiadt said:

---

joe amos yaks said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Ouch. Has it been true of all Cal coaches known as defensive coaches that they just slowed the pace? Or were any good by efficiency standards?

---

Coach Padgett ran with great talent.

---

And didn't win with that talent.

---

joe amos yaks said:

---

I think Coach Monte consistently achieved the best balance of offense / defense.

He was fortunate to find good players to play in his program.

---

Jeff82 said:

---

Given that Cal has some recruiting limitations, a key skill for a Cal coach is the ability to get the players to improve. Monty excelled at that. So far under Fox, Brown seems to have improved, as has Anticevich, but the big men have largely tread water. How much of that is limitations caused by COVID-19, I don't know. Like I said at the start, if they don't improve by next year, that's a big problem for me as far as retaining Fox.

---

NathanAllen said:

---

I think Mark Fox is known as a defensive coach because of his last four years at UGA when his defenses ranked in the top-50 in Kenpom's Adjusted Defensive Efficiency metrics. I remember watching his UGA teams and it was almost always a slugfest against them. As others have said, super slow pace, and just really physical hoops.

His defenses have generally been a "pack the paint" sort of defense, forcing teams into tough shots inside the three-point arc.

That's been most disappointing to me. Yeah, Cal's three-point defense has been bad the past two seasons, but last year, Cal gave up just 47% on two-point shots, which was 81st in the country. Wyking Jones' last season, Cal was giving up 56.7% on two-point shots, which ranked No. 344. I don't think I need to add any color on just how bad that was or just how impressive of a turn-around it was in Fox's first season.

But this year, that's dropped back down to 51.2% (No. 210) while the three-point defense has dropped to allowing 39.4% (No. 333).

Traditionally, Fox's best defensive teams don't turn teams over much. And they've been average at keeping teams off the offensive glass. But they've been stellar at forcing teams into bad FG%, altering shots, and getting blocks.

The other disappointing thing so far this season has been prior to this season, Fox's worst defense ranked No. 137 in Kenpom's adjusted efficiency metrics. That was his first season at UGA. The second season? No. 47. And Fox never had a team rank lower than No. 89 in the adjusted defensive efficiency metrics the rest of his time at UGA.

Last year at Cal, the defense was No. 130 in Kenpom, which was up from No. 286 in Jones' last season. But this year, as others have noted above, it currently sits at No. 163.

Maybe less prep due to COVID is playing a role. Maybe the injuries are playing a role. As others have mentioned, maybe Austin/South was a better defensive duo than Betley/Foreman. Either way, Cal's defense, so far, has been worse this year and no one is probably more upset about it than Fox.

---

annarborbear said:

---

Not having a shot-blocker really hurts. Fox's recruiting has come up short on that, without even a potential project player brought in.

---

NathanAllen said:

---

annarborbear said:

---

When you have a shot blocker, you not only get the shots that they block (obviously), but you also keep some people from going inside knowing that a potential block may be waiting for them. No one is afraid at all of attacking the basket against us this year.

---

Exactly. I wish there was a stat that tracked diverted or altered shots. Because there are many times good blockers don't necessarily get the block, but they influence shots.

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

He is considered a defensive coach because he generally plays a lineup based on defensive matchups, rather than forcing the other team to make defensive adjustments to his offense. He generally favors tough on ball man-to-man shot denying defense. Teams typically score fewer points than their average because his teams are generally in the 300s in pace of play. His teams are generally not very good in defensive efficiency but are worse in offensive efficiency. Hence he is considered a "defensive coach."

---

Ouch. Has it been true of all Cal coaches known as defensive coaches that they just slowed the pace? Or were any good by efficiency standards?

I suspect that one thing that happened is that teams figured out what Fox likes to do defensively and switched up their attacks. But that is difficult to see for someone like me who only watches Cal games.

Sugglo,

Good defense is not slowing down the pace. Good defense is forcing turnovers, not allowing the opponetts best players to shoot from their sweet spot and having good floor balance to not allow fast break points after your own missed shots.

---