Saturday, September 26, 2015

Seeing the field

I was watching a highlight reel from Atlantic Coast regionals, and saw a lot of what I guess I would call inside-lane hucks to a parallel receiver.

Nate Castine rips one here:


Hayley Wahlroos was highlighted doing the same thing this year for Oregon:


When I first started playing ultimate, I had no idea how to see the field, but pretty soon I figured out (or was maybe told?) that if you're on the far sideline, that's a good spot to run deep from. So the flight path of the disc in relation to the route of the receiver looks like that on field A (whereas the two above hucks look more like that on field B):



As a result of that, it conditioned me to think that good deep cuts come from spot X when the disc is in spot Y, when the defense is forcing Z. However, as shown above, a good deep cut can still come from spot X when the disc is in spot Y when the defense is forcing...uh, -Z.

It's been fun watching some parts of the Illinois practices this fall, where kids who have never played before will do things like throw OIIO breaks without realizing it, just because they see a possibility of getting the disc somewhere and recognize that if they throw it a certain way, they can get the disc to that spot. Granted, it may not have tight spin [yet] or anything, but...it's the creative thought that counts, here. Another thing that almost every rookie does at one point or another is throw to an upline cut on the around side (field C) instead of an upline on the invert/force side (field D), which is traditional.


Is there any advantage to waiting to throw an upline until you can throw a "force side" throw?

  1. It's the norm, so it's expected by the receiver.
  2. It's easier to put out to space (if it's not, maybe you shouldn't be throwing it)/there's a bigger window you can hit.
  3. It's a "force side" throw, so an "honest" mark is unlikely to block the throw.
Disadvantages:
  1. It's the norm, so it's expected by the mark/defender.*
  2. Stall count gets higher as you wait (the difference between 9 and 10 is a turnover) (this can be negated if you throw it sooner and put touch on the throw, provided space is present upfield).
Advantages to throwing an upline while the receiver is still in the "around" portion of the cut:
  1. It's not the norm, so it's not expected by the defender.
  2. If you wait too long, the mark may react to a call to go more straight up and take away the "force side" upline throw (heaven forbid the dead side of the field opens up).
  3. Stall count is lower.
Disadvantages:
  1. The window to hit your receiver is likely smaller.
  2. It may be nigh impossible to throw due to the position of your mark.

I'm sure I could fill up the list with more pros and cons for each throw. But after some simple picking apart, it seems to me it still makes the most sense to throw uplines to your receiver on the upfield side of your mark (assuming the receiver is cutting from the breakside; "hardest" uplines from the breakside are a different discussion entirely). But it's always interesting to me to see new players try it the other way. Obviously, they try it because they think it can work. Maybe it can. Will the game ever shift towards a majority of these throws over the way upline throws to a receiver coming from the breakside are currently thrown? I doubt it.

Sometimes a "good" team gets scored on by a "bad" team because of a "lucky" throw. What if people worked on "lucky" throws and got really good at throwing them, so they were a sustainable option? The game would have to evolve defensively. Right now, defense is dictated by the way offense plays. Yes, you can switch a team out of a vert stack by throwing a junk look or whatever, but the defense is generally conditioned to position themselves based on their historic understanding of how a team plays offense/how most teams play and understand the game. The most basic example is downfield defenders positioning (generally) on the "force side" of their defensive assignments, because generally throwers look for easy passes on the open side (if every thrower tried relentlessly to break the mark and ignored open side cuts, perhaps we would play defense differently). A more complex example is a defender at the front of a vertical stack in the endzone faceguarding/standing almost on the breakside of his/her defensive assignment, because in many vert offenses a common play is a quick break throw to the front of the stack. Players are getting better at throwing and developing a wider range of release points/flight paths, so defense has to adapt accordingly to account for these things. I'm interested to see what the game looks like in ten years; is the rate the game is changing more exponential, or logarithmic?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

*This may actually be an advantage, and a lot of simple yet effective vert stack plays are based off of this idea of getting the mark/defense to assume you are attacking the live side, so that you can get an easier break throw to score/move the disc off the sideline.

Friday, August 28, 2015

Nationals Thoughts

With the fall season underway for Illinois, it's about time I wrote down some scattered thoughts about nationals.

Things unrelated to our team:

  • Food trucks = great. I was sad that they weren't there for all of the weekend. I had a great soup-thing on Friday and a fantastic pulled chicken sandwich on Saturday.
  • The Kansas women had some pretty cool dark jerseys. Oregon's women had a nice kit as well, as they usually do. I didn't like Stanford's whites. Too busy. I liked the Carleton darks and UBC whites. Didn't see too many other women's kits.
  • On the men's side: Texas A&M darks were too much, but the whites were fantastic. Florida State had the best universal kit (white and dark together). UNC was pretty meh. Oregon was just okay. Colorado Texas, Pitt, and UMass were classic, clean-cut. Yngve was talking to me the other day about how everything is shifting with jersey designs now given the front number requirement. UCF had some decent enough jerseys but I feel conflicted about the solid circle print with the number inside, seems a little odd.
  • The catered dinner for the players on Sunday was decent; it was nice to have warm free food after sitting in the rain.
  • Sitting in the cold rain to watch windy ultimate is kind of taxing. The things I do for love...
  • The men's final was hard to watch. UNC ran away with it from the beginning. The women's final was epic. Even with the wind, I was still hooked on what was going on every point.
  • Jesse Shofner is awesome and maybe even a bit scary and probably faster than me *Somewhere Jon McKoy says: "Of course she's faster than you, everyone is faster than you."* *I miss Jon.*
  • Watching Pitt lose Sunday morning was equal parts exciting and saddening. I love the machine that is the Pitt program. I love that the game is business for them. I also love that UCF just showed up with big hearts (after losing to teams like Illinois earlier in the year...) and cruised into semis. I love that UCF ran sprints after losing in semis.
Things kind of related to our team:
  • Earlier this year McKoy and I were having a discussion and he mentioned how I wasn't anything special, I just had "horses" (him, Pro, Jarred). The Maryland game definitely swayed this argument in McKoy's favor. I can recall at least four terrible decision hucks that I threw to one of these three, and goodness me, they dragged everything in. I'm not sure I even had a turn the whole game. Here's to the horses. I'll never forget being on the east sideline about 30 yards out from the south endzone putting up this awful blade backhand thing to a crowd of people and having Jarred jump perfectly and save me for a goal. It felt good to win a game. I remember thinking afterwards, "Okay, so, we do belong here. This is it. We can compete."
  • ...then we played UNC and even though we technically put up more points on them than anyone else they beat (obviously not Oregon on Saturday) over the long weekend, I'll be darned if it felt like they were just toying with us the entire game. It was like they had this "Okay, well, I guess we have to play this team, so, like, I guess we will," mentality. I think we tried to guard Nethercutt with at least four or five different individuals throughout the game, and he would still get the disc, and he would still throw pretty much whatever he wanted. It was fun to play in the stadium against a team we knew was good (although at this time I still thought Pitt would win it all).
  • Saturday morning, Oregon knew if they didn't get wins they'd be done, and gosh they sure played like it. We had a couple of miscues, but they were fired up and really, really quick. I enjoyed my matchup with #66, he was a good guy who definitely got the best of me a few times.
  • Florida State was a good game, maybe one of my favorites of the tournament. We were right with them going into halftime, and they pulled away at the beginning of the second half and that was all she wrote. Their top three (Larocque, Roney, Holcomb) were all that the hype said they were. Larocque and Roney could put the disc wherever they wanted and were athletic enough to be multidimensional threats. Holcomb was a total workhorse downfield. We lost this game and it was hard to swallow I had one more game of college ultimate left. I remember talking to Walden saying I wasn't ready to be done, and he said something along the lines of how it's a journey everyone must take.
  • The Cincinnati game was a lot of fun. Early on Marty threw a low pass downwind that I failed to scoop out of the dirt, and I remember being a little worried. Somewhere, Illinois picked up the pieces and put them together for one last ride. Pro was a monster; they knew he was going deep every point and they still couldn't stop him. I literally heard people yell "That's the play!" and then Pro would catch a goal.
  • It was tough to be done but it was nice to end on a win. RIP, college career.