Update: Thursday, 2:32 p.m. UVA Basketball guard Isaac McKneely has committed to Louisville, an ACC rival.
Not a lot to report aside from that news.
There was a reason I wrote this story on the perceptions of his fit in the Ryan Odom system today, as you are now aware.
First draft: Thursday, 10:51 a.m. If UVA Basketball ends up losing Isaac McKneely, it won’t be because of NIL.
The word getting to me is that while new coach Ryan Odom would certainly welcome back McKneely, the team’s leading scorer this past season, he’s not going to break the NIL budget to keep the rising senior.
The biggest concern with McKneely being: fit.
Odom and his staff have been on hand for several offseason workouts in which the roster that went 15-17 under interim coach Ron Sanchez has worked through the basics of Odom’s up-tempo approach.
The question that has emerged with McKneely has to do with his relative lack of foot speed, leading to concerns about his ability to not be a liability defensively in the Odom defensive scheme, which uses a mix of full-court, three-quarter-court and half-court presses, and then in the basic half-court D, requires on-ball defenders to be able to prevent dribble penetration one-on-one.
ICYMI
The Odom approach is a stark contrast to the Pack Line defense favored by Tony Bennett, which has on-ball defenders funneling ball-handlers to the pack for help in limiting dribble penetration, masking any deficiencies for defenders in one-on-one settings.
The Pack Line is a man defense with zone principles. Odom’s system requires guards to be athletic enough to be able to survive and thrive defending on an island.
Just to be clear here: I’m not meaning to pick on McKneely with this column; he’s just the guy that I’m getting tons of emails about in regard to his status going forward, for probably obvious reasons.
Similar questions about fit for the guys recruited to play Bennett Ball could be asked pretty much of any of the guys whose names are in the portal at the present moment.
With McKneely, his value on the offensive end is clear. McKneely is an elite perimeter shooter – 42.2 percent from three for his college career – though he’s a bit of a one-trick pony: 69.4 percent of his field-goal attempts this past season were threes.
Three years in, he still hasn’t been able to develop an ability to penetrate and score – this past season, McKneely was 25-of-60 (41.7 percent) on shots in the lane.
That’s 1.9 shot attempts per game in the lane, for a guy who averaged 34.4 minutes per game.
That number could also be a reflection of the athleticism issue that limits his effectiveness as a defender.
The comp for me in my head for McKneely, listed at 6’4”, 195, is VCU senior guard Max Shulga, a four-year player under Odom – Shulga, listed at 6’5”, 210, also played for Odom for two years at Utah State.
Their shooting numbers overall this past season were nearly identical – McKneely was 152-of-346 (43.9 percent); Shulga was 151-of-348 (43.4 percent).
The differences:
- From three: McKneely was 101-of-240 (42.1 percent), to Shulga’s 72-of-186 (38.7 percent).
- At the rim: Shulga was 49-of-75 (65.3 percent), to McKneely’s 17-of-34 (50 percent).
- Overall in the paint, Shulga was 66-of-128 (51.6 percent), to McKneely’s 25-of-60 (41.7 percent).
- In the midrange: McKneely was 26-of-46 (56.5 percent) to Shulga’s 13-of-34 (38.2 percent).
- Getting to the line: Shulga averaged 5.4 free-throw attempts per game and shot 78.3 percent at the line, to McKneely’s 2.2 attempts per game and 81.4 percent shooting at the line.
- Assists/turnovers: Shulga 4.0/1.7, McKneely 2.9/1.8.
Shulga is a two-level scorer, at the two levels valued in the modern analytics game – at the rim and from three.
He got to the line significantly more, a function of his ability to attack the rim, and created more opportunities for teammates, also a function of his ability to get to the rim.
And then on defense: Shulga had the edge in defensive rebounds per game (4.1 to 2.6), steals (1.8 to 0.8), and defensive rating (0.946 points per possession allowed vs. 1.136 points per possession allowed).
How much of the difference in the numbers is relative to the different styles of play?
Fair question.
It could be that Shulga attacked more on the offensive end and was more disruptive on the defensive end because the system that he played in asked him to be more assertive.
And that McKneely, given similar instructions, and training and development, could turn into being a similarly productive player in the Odom system.
That’s a question for McKneely – and his agent – and then Odom to decide.
Share
Chris Graham
