Here’s the situation we presented to the panel:
You are in an elimination game against a team you have played several times this year. They have a very skilled deep thrower that typically plays as a handler, rarely going downfield. This player has hurt your team in the past by throwing long goals, regardless of the type of mark you use. Your scouting report coming in is simple: push this player deep and keep them away from the disc.
At halftime, this player has unusually already gone deep, successfully, 3 times. Once was on a called pull play. They have hucked for another goal, though not on a pull play. You are behind 8-6. What do you do in the second half? Should you continue to push this player away from the disc? What kind of defender, given your normal options (you can’t just put World’s Greatest Defender on them) should be used?
While a seemingly broad question, Issue 3 really boils down to a few key ideas. Ben van Heuvelen starts his response, and this entry, with a few of them: “On defense, your goal isn’t to shut down all options , because that’s impossible against a good offense. Rather, your goal is to dictate to the offense those options it can take. So, the first thing to realize here is: if Big Thrower hasn’t been able to make big throws, you’ve done something successful.”
Having a gameplan, especially one developed over the course of a season/career, is something players/coaches should trust. A frequent effort of gameplans in this sport are figuring out what certain teams/players want to do, and trying to take that away.
“Whenever lining up against a gifted opponent I have always found it helpful to ask myself: what does this player want to do? In this case, this player is most comfortable and probably most confident in a handler role, staying behind the disc and throwing goals rather than receiving them. When playing against teams that have a player like this, someone who excels in many aspects, always make them beat you with their Plan B or Plan C, never Plan A.”
“You take away a team’s strength and make them beat you with their weakness. If they do, you make them do it again, because it’s their f***ing weakness!” — Jon Gewirtz
This idea is nearly universal in the sport, and in all sports. Where trouble arises is when teams find ways to beat you with their second/third plans, like in the proposed scenario. Now comes the hardest question at all: do you make a change, or keep playing it out?
In my opinion, it doesn’t matter what adjustment you make as long as you make one. -Ryan Morgan
It’s important to note that most panelists make the distinction that change means tweaking matchups and individual strategies, not entire gameplans. Using different or alternating defenders against ‘Big Thrower’, changing what defenders do on the mark, and similar changes are the kinds of responses proposed, but most would still try and hold true to the main goal: don’t let ‘Big Thrower’ play his usual role as deep-throwing handler. “But again, the most important adjustment to make is to make an adjustment” -Ryan Morgan.
As a wise woman once said, never lose a game without playing zone. I think this thought answers the question but taken to a broader sense: never get beat over and over again without changing something. -Miranda Roth
There are team-wide changes that can be made as well, such as throwing different kinds of zones: standard zones; the “box-and-one”, which puts 6 players into zone positions while one would mark ‘Big Thrower’ regularly; and others.
You can also adjust your methods of denying this player the disc by changing pressures against his teammates: “It’s important to keep in mind that he’s not a handler by himself. That is, he’s has someone to complete the chemistry and that guy may be the one to really clamp down on.” writes Tully Beaty. Dan Heijman agrees: “What we need to do is ratchet up the intensity on their throwers. Make it so they don’t want the disc in their hands.”
There are tons of different small adjustments that could be made, and in an elimination game, you might need to use any and all that you can think of.
“Or…” says Chris Talarico, “if you don’t like these options, you can go back to shutting down the deep and allow him the underneath…and kick yourself after you lose for allowing the same guy to beat you the same way. Again.”
I think the most important thought process comes from Ben Wiggins, as usual:
“My gut usually sticks with the scouting report; I have a lot of faith in how I scout teams, and if I was sure 50 minutes ago that this guy is a better thrower than cutter, well, 50 minutes and some lost sweat shouldn’t change that. In fact, nothing in the first half has contradicted our report…heck, if we had been pushing him towards the disc, maybe we are already down 8-5 or 8-4. This might just be his day.”
I couldn’t agree more that long-developed strategies shouldn’t be abandoned at the first sign of adversity. Stick to your guns, trust your gameplan, and most importantly, trust your teammates.
Super excited to start reading The-Huddle for the x-th time, and hopefully encouraging others to do the same. I’m not sure that any other source has been this valuable.
Cheers!
Not A Handler 