Thoughts.

So I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately. As a defensive player this year, I spent a ton of time on the other side of the disc, trying to deny my quarry all that he desired.

Mostly I’ve been thinking about what makes for good defense. As an individual player, what can I do, how can I play to best ensure the D line generates a turn?

The answer I came up with? Well, it depends.

The way I see it, there are two primary ways to play defense: smart defense and emotional defense. I’ll qualify this first by saying the two are not mutally exclusive, and second by saying that this is a very general classification.

Smart defense means, more often than not, playing to contain. A smart defender anticipates what his mark wants and makes it difficult, if not taking it away entirely. A smart defender realizes the various situations he is in–is my man a viable threat to go deep given current position/situation? am I sure laying out for a 50% chance of a D is worth giving up the force for 2 seconds if I miss, or is it more practical to set a hard mark right away and prevent flow?–and responds accordingly, limiting the threat of his man. Ideally, a smart defender all but neutralizes the impact of the player he’s guarding on the field.

Emotional defense means busting ass and trying to make every play. An emotional defender always lays out for those close discs on in cuts, throws an aggressive mark, trying to force a turn. An emotional defender’s primary objective is to generate turns–whether this is through baiting opportunities, or just through running hard and laying it all out.

I’ve come to realize I’m much more of a smart defender than an emotional defender. I think, for much of the season, I’d been really lacking in good, emotional defense, conceding too much in one way or another in an effort to dictate and keep from being beaten at what I chose to take away. Not as effective as I could have been.
I started incorporating more emotional defense into my game, fighting harder to get a D on whatever my man was trying to get, and my defense improved accordingly. Still very much disposed towards smart defense, but in position to make plays more often. This is pretty much where I’m at right now.

Most of what I’ve been thinking about is, simply, would I be a better defender if I become a more aggressive, emotional defender? Would the extra D’s I might generate from those close bids and the occasoinal burn from overcommitting to a cut outweigh the “team D” effect from simply doing my job and holding the force and keeping my man in check? It’s hard to say.

I feel like there’s a place for both styles of play, though. In some conditions, for example–windy conditions comes to mind–there’s no need to “force” the D as much, since turnover rate is naturally higher. In this sort of situation, giving up the easy breakside throw or getting too far out of position trying to make a great play has a higher degree of risk vs. reward as a defender. Turns are easier to come by, so why risk letting the other team score and put the ball in your court when you can force them to keep playing perfect to do the same thing?

In other conditions though–high level play, in non-windy conditions, say–the utility of smart defense is lessened, and getting that one key D can be potentially game-changing. The turnover environment is lower–a team runs a smooth offense that doesn’t shoot itself in the foot and doesn’t take exceptionally large risks (ie hucks for completions, not for skies)–so rather than simply do one’s job and only delay the inevitable, it might be more valuable to be the guy who lays out for every close disc (not that there would be many), hoping to generate a turn where there normally wouldn’t be one.
Of course, if a team has a good strategy to force an offense to take risks, or can otherwise increase the turnover environment through a team strategy where everyone doing their job is essential, then smart defense would again be more beneficial. This would almost be ideal, in my book. Force the other team to be perfect, knowing (or hoping) that they aren’t, rather than relying on the (at a level where teams are evenly matched, athletically) low chance of forcing a D.

There is a middle ground, but finding the balance can be hard. I would think a defense that alternates between smart and agressive defense–lulling an offense into thinking a team is playing to contain and won’t make the plays and then turning it on, snapping them out of their comfort zone with tight, aggressive D–might have the most success in the long run, but I’d be lying if I said I had a good mastery of that balance.

I’m about to wander into the realm of incoherency at this late hour, so I’ll leave it at that. In practical terms, whether one leans smart or emotional should always vary with a team or player’s strengths, and from there it should adjust to the given conditions/competition. Getting fired up has its place, but few things are worse than a questionable bid that fails and leaves the field wide open for the opponent. By the same token, taking a step back and playing smart to keep your opponent in check can be very useful, but sometimes the risk needs to be taken. Those close plays a smart player almost gets are the same plays an emotional player eats up.

Which side of the risk/reward curve do you (you is, of course, a term I use very loosely, since there are very few who read this) lean towards?

Finally over my spring term hump. Finals soon, but I expect to get at least a few productive blog posts in over the coming month. Been taking a step back from the game proper, but still thinking lots.

Some specific stuff I’ve picked up on that’s made a big difference in my play:

-Release timing. This made a huge difference in my throws. Previously, I’d always have my release starting somewhere in the middle of my throwing motion, the wrist snap completing at the end of my arm motion. Ideally, though, the wrist snap and release are all one motion at the end of your throw–rather than start the disc rotating before you’ve fully set the trajectory, impart as much spin as possible at the end of the disc’s motion, and it’ll fly with much tighter spin, and thus more stability and better control.

-Grip the disc properly. Generally, get a tight grip you can throw fakes with and not lose the disc with.

-Cock the wrist back farther.

-Always be on your toes, whether cutting, defending, marking, pivoting, whatever. You’ll respond faster.

-Move, don’t reach. Use your body when you’re on defense.

-Have a plan. Whether it’s just “look for/force x. if x doesn’t work, then do y,” or something more complicated, have some idea of what you want to do and you’ll be more likely to be succesful and less likely to wind up confused.

Thinking about it, I imagine there’s gotta be some fundamental difference in the way people perceive and play the game that makes some people decidedly D players and some decidedly O (beyond factors such as “well, he’s got throws, but can’t play defense worth a lick. o-line it is!”).

And I think I might have something. Well, maybe. I figure, the fundamental difference lies in how one thought processes playing the game–generally speaking, your D-types are better/more inclined to be reactionary players, while your O-types are more…manipulative? subversive?

Whoops, my D player is showing. But seriously. When I’m playing, I’m aware of a few possibilities that might happen/things to look out for (such as helping when last back), but largely I’m simply reacting to what’s happening. That makes intuitive sense, of course–it carries over to when I’m playing O to an extent, though, in that I’m usually looking and reacting to what’s happening (which is why I tend to better with continuation cutting than initial cutting–opportunity cuts, and setting up for them, comes more naturally to me), rather than “creating” offense so to speak. When I go to cut I’m usually cutting to a point to see what my defender gives me, and then I’ll take it, rather than thinking where I’d be the biggest threat and setting my cut up to get there–I often find myself cutting from the back, faced with a halway decent face mark, and starting a deep cut from 25+yards away from the disc–not ideal at all.

I figure effective O-line players (at least, a good portion of them) tend to be more ‘in control’ of their games so to speak, knowing what needs to be done and doing it.

I feel like this is really well embodied by the stack of inaction. A combination of factors–defensive positioning, disc position, timing–and a lack of anybody willing to just bite the bullet and try and make something happen leads to a bunch of players standing in the stack waiting for somebody to cut off of. This also has a cousin, the stack of one mind, where several people all make the same cut simultaneously, reducing the effectiveness had just one cut (you see this often with the break-side continuation cut off a dump).

Anyways, I doubt very seriously people are locked in to one style of play or the other, though I suspect some are more inclined towards one, with the reactionary mindset being easier and more common.

It ties into why I think Offense is more highly valued than defense, and what all that VORP stuff is getting at–any decent athlete can run around and chase a disc with a bit of positioning, but it takes a lot more practice to develop one’s throws and cutting and field sense and all that jazz that makes for an effective offense.

Took yesterday easy, and got in a weightless workout again today. Pretty much the same as Monday’s workout so I won’t bother retyping it, though I did replace handstand pushups (too hard to do several before burning out) with a modified version of an elevated pushup. Basically just tried my best to put as much weight on my hands as I could…needs some tweaking, but it’s got potential. Upper body lifting session tomorrow…it’s supposed to be above freezing, too, so I’m considering giving running another try tomorrow, see how the ankle responds.

I consider myself a pretty well-experienced man defender. There are a few things that I think are key to good defense:

-Dictate. Far and away the most important thing when on defense. You always have to focus on taking something away from your cutter; don’t try to be greedy and take all of your cutter’s options away, because he’ll be able to get whatever he wants as a result. Pick one thing–”He’s fast with great ups, so I’ll force him to cut towards the disc by setting up a few steps behind him”–and stick to it. Even as he cuts in, unless you’re positive he’s all-in on that cut, don’t overcommit, lest you see him turn around on you and bust deep, uncovered. Keep a take-away mindset about you at all times, and you’ll be less likely to get juked or faked into giving up what you want.

-Triangles. This goes hand-in-hand with dictating. There are three points in the triangle, and this varies depending on who you talk to: either it’s your man, you, and where he wants to go to be open, or your man, you, and where the disc is (the handler). Either way, you’re looking to get the same net result: get yourself in a position where you take away as many of your cutter’s easy options as possible.

-Stay close. This can vary depending on you, your energy level, and your man, but generally speaking the best defenders play close to their man. I can still set up to take away the out, but if I’m only one step away from my man I’ll be much better prepared to respond if he cuts in or busts to the break side, making all of his plays contested ones. The variance comes in if your man is much faster than you or if you’re out of gas and can’t keep up the energy that the quick reactions of staying close require.

-Be prepared to cover what you’re giving him. This comes with staying close to your man. If I’m forcing my man out in a forehand force, for example, I like to set up fairly close, in a ready stance, with my left and right feet oriented so that my left foot is pointed towards the break side, and my right foot it pointed deep. In this way, if my man just busts to either side I’m already prepared to start running after him.

-Keep your weight forward. This ties in with the above. It’s easier to start running or change momentum if your weight is already moving in that direction. If you’re on your heels, you’re handicapping yourself by a good step or two on most cutters. Always keep your weight forward when you’re set up, and as you respond to your cutter, continue to keep your weight forward.

-Don’t break into a run as long as you can manage it. You go faster when you run as opposed to when you shuffle, but you lose the response time the ready stance affords when you break into a run. Make sure you know your man is committed before you break into a run after them.

-Realize where/when your man is a threat. This comes with experience, and knowing your opponent (do they like to do breakside flow often, will they put it deep, how far can they put it, etc). If you’re covering somebody who’s running deep and they get 30+ yards away from the disc, you can ease up and let them keep running deep in vain while you stay close but conserve energy–at that distance, if the disc is put, it’s likely to be short, meaning you’ll already have better position, and it’ll take a while to get there in most cases, giving you ample time to respond on D. Likewise, if your man cuts to the break side and you’ve got a hard trap and the other team shies away from the break look, you can give yourself an open-side buffer to avoid the possibility of getting beat to the easy side of the field. But generally speaking, stay close enough that you’d have a play on a swilly put.

This also extends to poaching; if your cutter’s just standing still in the stack, or is uncalled in an iso and isn’t staying active, take the time to look around, assess the field, and keep an eye out for an opportunity to poach. I’m not saying immediately leave your man alone, because that’s generally not a good idea, but if you see a play developing and have the chance to get in the way, go for it, especially if you know you can get the D.

What else. Dump defense…same rules apply, try and play close while taking one option away with your positioning (I like to take away the upline cut), make sure you don’t get beat, and when they take what you’re giving them play it hard and contest the throw. This isn’t always possible, but keep pressure on, and make sure you’re quick to set the mark in that situation to avoid dump-swing looks.

That sums up most of my defensive thoughts in man. Playing good D (in my opinion) really hinges a lot on the athleticism of the defender; as you tire you need to give more of a buffer to keep taking something away, which gives your cutter more options. There’s no shame in coming out immediately after a hard-fought D point; fresh legs make for consistent D.

A fine art, though few view it as such. A more common view for many could be any of the following: Nothing new, A sign of the young, overzealous college player, something wonderful, something dangerous, the list goes on. It’s so many things all at once, and I think it’s a marvelous tool to have in one’s repetoire, if used correctly.

But first, a short how-to.

Put simply, a bid is falling with style. Because one wants to reach a disc which is too low, moving too fast at one’s side, or just generally out of reach whilst standing, the bid is used as a means to force the body to move in such a way that the disc is within reach.
Sounds simple, but there are a number of mental blocks and physical blocks that prevent it from being instinctive for most.

The budding bid-happy college player goes through several phases before really reaching the point where the bid is practical for the player and in-game (there may be more, but these are the phases I’ve gone through):

1) Oh man, laying out is so awesome. One is in awe of the bid, and wants to have it. This phase is generally typified by lots of comments when somebody bids, audibly enough for several nearby players to hear, in the hopes that conversation on the topic will yield some insight not yet afforded to the budding bidder.

2) Research. Perhaps a foray into the internet, perhaps simply through Q&A with one who’s been there, one comes to understand some of what goes into a bid–see the disc, know you need to layout, layout.

3) Failed attempts. This could range from wanting to bid but only being able to get on one’s knees before falling, thinking the bid is necessary but hostering it in a given situation, or perhaps as far as jumping and falling willy-nilly at whatever is within range, which is the most dangerous as it can result in poor landings and serious injury. All these things have in common is that it gets a player ready for real-time layouts; the comfort zone is continually expanded.

4) Success. Whether it be simply while tossing, for a D in the zone, or an offensive bid, whatever, there comes a moment where one finds success. One doesn’t necessarily need to catch the disc or get a hand on it to have a successful bid; generally, one has the realization after it happens–holy crap, I just flew.

5) Bid-happy. The budding bidder is at a dangerous point; with the newfound bidding ability, it becomes all too easy to do it whenever one can, as practice/showing off. This leads to many heckles of “gratuitous”, but also is an injury risk. Laying out is not a painless thing; it really requires a mind-over-matter sort of mentality. It’s definitely possible to hurt one’s hips and shoulders with improper form, particularly if repeated, and even with proper form (absorbing the impact with one’s torso) repeated collision can lead to a lot of arm scrapes (I’ve got perpetual scars on my right arm by the elbow) and, I find, at least, back pain due to the unnatural body position absorbing the impact requires.

6) Refinement. Once the concept of “laying out” has been integrated into one’s game, one seeks to improve the usefulness of the bid–laying out at head-height as opposed to foot-height, getting a full extension at full speed, improving timing, etc. This comes from experience–the bid-happy phase, while dangerous, also (hopefully) provides insight as to when it’s appropriate in a game to take the risk of a bid and when you can’t afford to give your man two unmarked seconds after a failed defensive bid–but also comes just from examining one’s game. I find visualization of in-game situations to be very beneficial here; picturing yourself in a number of different situations and getting the layout D in X situation, or thinking better and holstering in Y situation, it all becomes that much more instinctive in real life if you’ve thought it out beforehand.

After that, I don’t know. I’m still refining my choosing of when to bid, as my layout D vs. layout attempts ratio is nowhere near where I want it.

Not the clearest of how-tos, but hopefully you can glean some insight out of all this.