USA Ultimate

The Huddle, Issue #17: Using Defensive Matchups

Once you've flipped for shirt color, you are very unlikely to suddenly increase the ability of your defensive players. These are your assets, they are your chess pieces.

 

We asked our authors for a look into how they think about their defensive matchups. How do you use your pieces against the other team? This is an incredibly complicated question, and we've specifically asked our authors to work without much information. What are the basic pieces of designing a defensive strategy? How should matchups be used in a point, a game or a tournament? How should you use your Queen (your superstar defender) most effectively?

 

Maybe most importantly, when do you pull the plug on a matchup and make a change? Too quick of a trigger as a coach and you aren't allowing your best player enough chances to make a difference. But wait too long and their player has a field day on a great matchup for them. These are interesting questions for anyone that wants to coach or understand what other team's coaches and captains are doing.

 

• May The Best Man Win
  
  
  
  • I have an image, indelible perhaps, of UCSC's Jeff Hagar and ECU's Nat Taylor standing before each other after their battle at College Nationals in 1993 [not sure but this game may have decided semis]. Each was covered in grass stains, dirt, sweat, and knowing Hager probably some blood and a new scar. Standing their considering the other, you couldn't tell who won, except the Slugs had more points.
    
    For the many of us who have played at the top level, and for the many that will one day get there, we know that playing through a Section and a Region and later a National is not unlike getting through each round of a fortnight of tennis. The deeper you go, the better the competition; and of course this progression can bring out the best and worst in teams and individuals.
    
    Isolating one-on-one match-ups: you hope that it brings out the best. In my experience, regarding the individual match-ups, the best in someone has usually triumphed. Inside of the chess game that is the two teams going head to head for one hundred and twenty minutes, there are 7 one-on-one match-ups taking place and with one of those, you're getting down to the bare elements of what makes this sport so special. Of course, you'll experience match-up problems [check out my Sub-calling article], and you can't expect one guy to continue to tip his hat and take 70 if he continues to get beat; but more often than not the defender's assignment is the correct one and when he's standing on the line regarding his match-up 70 yards away, he's in his head: may the best man win.
     
  • TULLY BEATTY
• Three-Legged Stool
  
  
  
  • Think of the opposing team's offense as a three-legged stool. You want to knock it over. Do you kick the sturdiest leg? No, that'd be silly. Kick the weak leg.
    
    Look, marquee players are going to get theirs. You can put your best defender on them, rotate defenders, do what you want; they are still going to get open, still get the disc and still make throws. But we all know Ultimate isn't a one person game. That marquee player cannot function without the other six players on the field.
    
    Analyze your opponent's overall strategy and look for a piece of it that you can shut down. Look for people who are doing the little things. An offense cannot run without the little things and often the people who are delivering them aren't used to dealing with the best defenders. Who is throwing the swing to the hucker? Who is consistently catching comebacks on stalling seven? Who is getting open for a reset dump? Find that player, shut that player down and your opponent's offense will suffer.
     
  • LOU BURRUSS
• The Right Adjustments
  
  
  
  • In a person defense, getting the right matchups can be critically important. It can also require some trial and error. Teams which face each other all the time get to try out a number of different approaches until they get most comfortable. Teams that don't see each other often have a challenge at the start—but fortunately both teams have that challenge. The team that figures out how to neutralize (or at least slow down) the key threat from the other team the fastest can get an advantage early in the game.
    
    I don't believe that there is any 'best' defender on a team. I think that this is situational. For example, if the other team has a handler driven offense—especially if it focuses on 1-2 key handlers—then you will likely need a different defender than if the team plays a wide open offense that relies on 1-2 key upfield cutters to make the action happen.
    
    Therefore, I believe, early in the game, it's important to see if you are simply "better" than the other team. Try to match up your strength against their strength down the line. Best upfield defender on the best upfield cutter for the other team. Best handler defender on the best handler defender of the other team. If it is working, don't change it. Win the game and get a beer. What if it isn't working? What levers do I pull now?
    
    A. Defensive Call. Even in a person-defense, there are choices which I try usually before swapping matchups. The team is killing our forehand force with breakmarks, go to backhand. You might just make your defenders a step better by changing the mark. Try a Zone. ("Never lose without trying a zone defense"—just ask Fury about that.) Try changing the distance on the mark.
    
    B. Get Fresh. Ultimate games are long. Did you ever watch Pete Sampras play tennis? He won his service games. That was practically a given. (And you need your offense to be similar if the game is close.) When he was receiving serve, he often looked horrible. He'd step into the court and try to crush a few returns. If he missed, he lost at love. If he got the first two, then he kept at it and won. Set over. You don't have to get every defensive point. Rest your studs, or a few of them, on a few of the points. Get everyone as strong as possible and make a run at the next point.
    
    C. Switch Some Matchups. Sometimes your key defender is not at his/her best. Switch an on field matchup. But your best on their second option and your second on their best option. Maybe a help D shows up.
    
    D. Think About How You Are Getting Beat. Is the other team getting deep shots? Are they squirreling up field? Put your best defenders in a position to stop what's working. If they are winning with deep shots, and you have a tall stud, use a defense that keeps him/her in center field. If your best defender has a shut down mark, get that mark on the disc so those deep shots aren't quite as good or don't get up at all.
    
    Defensive matchups aren't prescriptive. Like so much else in Ultimate, it's the team that makes the right adjustment the fastest that will win the close ones.
     
  • ADAM GOFF
• To Rotate Or Not To Rotate?
  
  
  
  • To rotate or not to rotate? That is the question. Well, that depends on what type of game we are talking about. If we are talking about semis at Nationals, and I have a great downfield defender and the other team has a great downfield offensive player, then my defender is going to be on that offensive player for as long as they are effective. If this is pool play at Nationals, than I feel like it is somewhat necessary to share the load for fear that you may wear out your best defensive player during Day One.
    
    If a team scores twice pretty effortlessly, I am inclined to call a defensive strategy switch. There are times when I may let it go to the third point depending on circumstances.
    
    Superstar matchups depend on a few things:
    1. Does the superstar defender get lots of Ds on down-fielders who do not touch the disc as much as your token handler?
    2. Does the superstar defender get lots of Ds on dump throws/cuts?
    3. Does the superstar defender get hand blocks/have a great mark?
    4. Does the superstar defender simply cloak his/her offender and never gets any Ds but yet you wonder what happened to the other team's best player?
    
    I have met players in my life who simply like to get Ds and are very, very good at it. Those types of players are effective at positioning their bodies on in-cuts to get that picturesque layout D. Therefore, I think it is wise to keep this superstar defender on a downfield offensive player who does not touch the disc as much but when they go to cut for the disc that defender is 100% ready to play their part.
    
    I have also met players who get few Ds but pressure the other teams' best handlers into making poor decisions or simply disappearing. They occasionally get the layout D on the handler dump, but in general their defensive blocks are not visible to common spectator's eyes.
     
  • LINDSEY HACK
• Limitations To Matchup Theory
  
  
  
  • Defensive matchups can be a positive aspect of successfully implementing a defensive strategy, but they can also serve to be a limitation. There are certain instances where a defender just has another players number and as a team you would be foolish to not consider that, but if you let certain matchups become the focus of the defensive strategy it may prevent you from running the defenses that are most successful for the team. As a defensive captain, I have always tried to set the defensive philosophy and then let matchups occur within that strategy.
    
    If a defender feels that he can shut a particular player down, then he'll usually get a chance to try his hand, but if the player is demanding a matchup they better also feel the pressure to deliver some results. The teams I've played on have always set their own assignments on the line, so if a player makes a request for a matchup they usually get it. Frequently this will lead to the defender putting some extra pressure on themself to succeed, and hopefully get their full attention and effort into the matchup. The key is to balance this within the defensive team play and make sure that, on balance, the team has good matchups. In this way, I think the assignment of a matchup coming from the defensive player, rather than initiated from the coach/captain, gives the defender a chance to succeed because they feel the most responsibility for the outcome of their matchup.
    
    The matchup for the best defender would really come from the style of the other team. If they have one big target that the offense likes to throw to, that would be an obvious choice for the best defender. However, if the team is a patient team that relies on resets around the disc, I would put the defender on a handler who the team relies on for resets. Again, putting the defender on a player that they are confident matching up with will most likely have the best results.
     
  • GREG HUSAK
• Maximizing Defensive Assets
  
  
  
  • Know your foe.
    There are lots of ways you can get the most out of your defensive matchups and it starts with not only knowing your own players but also knowing your opponents. The more familiar you are with the opposing team's offensive weapons ahead of time, the better you can prepare to counter them quickly and effectively. Furthermore, as important as it is to recognize primary play makers, it's just as important to know how the rest of your roster compares overall to the other team's personnel.
    
    When deciding what kind of matchup to assign your "best" defender, a defender's physical strengths, which offensive position(s) s/he is most adept at defending, and the D-line's competencies versus the opposition are all factors. Ask yourself:
    
    A. Does it make sense to put your best defender on a go-to player of similar skill and stature in hopes of containing him/her, throwing off the offensive flow, and then relying mainly on your other defenders to generate the D, or
    
    B. Is it better in the situation at hand to give your best defender a mismatch and have him/her bait and get a D while relying on the rest of your defenders to challenge the other primary play maker(s)?
    
    Making these distinctions is difficult without at least an idea of what your competition brings to the field and how your whole team matches up to them. Otherwise it's likely that you will waste time with trial and error and guesswork, which could make the difference between a win and a loss.
    
    To sub or not to sub?
    Who you consider your "best" defender to be might be someone different from game to game depending on who the other team's offensive weapons are and what they do. However, there are some basic principles that can be applied regardless of specifics.
    
    1. If it's not broken don't fix it.
    
    Sometimes it'll take a few points for a defender to get a feel for what an opponent's go-to moves are and how to respond to them. Once that happens, if the defender continues to be effective and take away those looks, it would make sense to let that defender keep doing what s/he's doing. A switch would mean that someone new might also need a few points to figure out what someone else already has and that might turn out to be a few points too many. With that being said...
    
    2. If you're worried about wear and tear or predictability, don't be afraid to rotate.
    
    The two big problems with having the same matchup for a whole game are the risks of burning out your best defender and allowing the offense too much time to read the defense and adjust. To avoid these situations, having 1-2 acceptable backups to switch off can be a good strategy. This way, you give your primary defender an occasional rest, which will help him/her make it through the tournament intact, and you keep the offense on their toes since no two people defend exactly the same way. In order to help the learning curve when putting in a new defender, the primary defender should also take a few seconds to brief the backups on what s/he has already figured out so that it hopefully takes less time to fill the role than it would have otherwise.
    
    3. If it's broken, fix it promptly.
    
    A defense cannot afford to allow easy scores. Even if the defense gets scored on eventually in a given point, one of their jobs is to make the other team's offense grind it out and get them tired. A tired offense gets sloppy and makes mistakes, which leads to that break opportunity. Also, in situations where your offense is working hard for their scores, it's really important for the defense to stay on the field to give them the time to recover so they can be productive on the next offensive point.
    
    If within 2 points, the opposition's offense has scored without so much as a contested throw, something has to change. It doesn't have to be drastic since those kinds of changes might take longer than a point or two formulate and implement, but even something as slight as a few matchup switches or a force change or throwing a zone could shake things up a little bit and make your defense more effective.
    
    Don't forget about the big picture.
    How you decide to use your "best" defender(s) from game to game requires taking a big picture look at overall strategy for the tournament. What are your goals for the tournament? Which are the games you have to win? Which games (if any) can you afford to lose? Which are the games you would like to win but don't have to win? At what point do you consider a game to be a lost cause (and is this even an acceptable thing to consider)? Answers to these kinds of questions can help lead you in the right direction when thinking about when and how much to use your defensive studs.
     
  • KRIS KELLY
• Maximizing Impact
  
  
  
  • Lets step away from Ultimate, and assume you are playing a card game in which there are five random cards face up on the table and you will get dealt five cards randomly; your job is to pair each one of your cards up with one on the table. There are many ways of doing this (five to be exact!).
    
    Example
    
    Presented on the table: 7 J 3 9 K
    
    Your cards: Q 10 5 4 8
    
    Leaving this as is works perfectly fine.
    
    However, lets say you have an overall objective that you have to pair them up such that more of your cards are of higher value than those already on the table. Your job is to maximize your cards effectiveness at beating the other cards in value.
    
    Using the previous example, if you arrange your cards up so that your high card is against their high card, you will get the following:
    
    K J 9 7 3
    
    Q 10 8 5 4
    
    You will only manage to win one matchup, while losing four of the other matchups. Now, if you choose your matchups carefully, you can manage to win up to four of the matchups, out of the five:
    
    K J 9 7 3
    
    4 Q 10 8 5
    
    Ok, so lets step back onto the frisbee field and apply this abstraction. The point of this is that matching up your best against their best is not the optimal use of your resources. A defensive unit should utilize their strengths to maximize their impact on the opposing teams offense.
    
    So, the next question is, how does one do that?
    
    Well, assuming you have an understanding of their offense (vert, horo, etc.), how they run it (in vert, are they breaking the mark to create flow or jamming it open side; in horo, do they look to the middle pair or try and hit the wings), and who is having the biggest impact in keeping it going (is the main handler anchoring the offense or do they rely on a stud cutter to open up the downfield), it is a matter of matching up your players to win more of the matchups.
    
    For example, if they have a standout handler that is the anchor to their offense, trying to shut them down with your best defender is probably not the best allocation. A dump is probably still a 90% completion rate with your best defender on them and if the handler is doing his job, the disc will spend more time downfield in the flow of the offense, leaving your best defender out of the play more often than not, minimizing his chances of getting a block.
    
    A better allocation might be a tall defender who's reach can interupt the handlers first and second options, slowing the offense down. Also, putting your best defender on a cutter who seems to get a lot of touches would also be a good option as your best defender will be more involved in the play (can poach, help easily on deep looks, etc), increasing his chances of getting a block (downfield cutter getting 3 touches a point with your best defender who might get a block 10% of the plays he is involved in, means he should get a block once every 4 points).
    
    This also has a residual effect that the handlers might second guess using this cutter causing them to use second and third options downfield which will get higher stall counts, more pressure on guys who may not get the disc as much to play a more active role, and elongates play, giving your top defender more chances at a big play downfield.
    
    Just like the card game, you are very rarely going to be able to win every matchup, and in the cases that you can, you don't need to worry about defensive matchups. Putting your worst defender on their best player, while having better matchups on 5 or 6 of the other players may seem counterintuitive, but can play into your team's hands. You know your team, its how you use your team's resources that will decide the outcome of the game.
     
  • BRETT MATZUKA
• Who Should Guard Their Best Player?
  
  
  
  • Let me answer this question with a question. When was the last time your best cutter defender spent a scrimmage covering your best handler? How about the other way around? Sure, your best on the ball defender talks all the time about hounding the region's best handler, and your best athlete wants to stop the receiver all others fear, but you don't want to go into a game hoping (or just hoping) your top players match up well against their top players. Funny matchups at practice teach defensive skills and offer insight into what a given player likes or does not like. A handler who loves getting bumped might excel when your grittiest, most physical defender matches up with her. If the tallee cutter/defender you want to try on the handler has never covered someone who gets the disc a lot, then it will be harder for you to change the matchup.
     
  • TED MUNTER
• Matching Up With Defensive Characteristics
  
  
  
  • I have a fairly low tolerance for good defenders getting beat. On the other hand, I'm always telling my girls (until I'm blue in the face) that the offensive player always has an advantage because she always know where she's going to cut, and the defensive player is always a step behind. That being said, I'm always going to put my best defender on the other team's best offensive threat, unless there's a reason that I don't want that matchup—be it height, or speed, or whatever. In the college game, though, it's a lot easier to make up for those disparities.
    
    Right now, I'm teaching my kids team D, which has been really frustrating for them, because they're used to being focused on a single player for the entire point. I'm seeing the light bulbs gradually go on, though, and I'm going to have them use it at a tournament in about a month.
    
    For this situation, I will let them get beat a few times before I try something else, because I want them to learn what they should be doing and what the field looks like if they're doing it right vs. if they're doing it wrong. I'm definitely harder on the ones who know what they're doing, though, for that very reason. They know what they're supposed to be doing right, and if they're out of position, I'm going to ask them to tell me what they did wrong, and have them keep guarding the person who's beating them until she's shut down. Also with this team, I'm a lot more likely to mix around strong and not-as-strong defenders because I want the up-and-coming ones to cover a better player, anticipating that this will also make them better defenders.
    
    I think it superstar matchups depend on what kind of player the superstar defender is. I'll use Danny (Quarrell, from Portland) as an example—he's one of the best defenders, hands down, but you don't really want him guarding Nord in the endzone (though he probably has ended up doing so at some point).
    
    I want him guarding BLW instead, because I want him to prevent one of the game's best handlers from even getting the disc in the first place. And because the height matchup is a lot more favorable. On my college team, my best (smartest) defender is also "vertically challenged." I will put her on the other team's best handler and leave my taller, more athletic players to guard the deep threats, because there are fewer players in the college game who can put the disc wherever they want. I have more confidence that they can shut down a huck play by playing team D than I do that they can get a turnover by each putting blinders on and chasing a single player around the field.
     
  • KAMA SIEGEL
• Give Your Defenders A Chance
  
  
  
  • Just as with an offensive squad, each player on the defensive line has a few areas that he or she excels at. Some may be good at running down the long, streaking cuts, while other will be good at then tight, close-to-the-disc cuts. There may be another who has a very active mark that comes up with more point blocks than anyone else. And just as the offense trains players to fill certain roles, so should the defense train players to stop certain roles.
    
    When faced with a very good offensive player, you must first realize that stopping that player is going to be very hard. The amount of effort spent trying is not likely to produce a worthwhile result. Defense is about exposing and exploiting the other team's weakest areas. Therefore, you must abandon the hope of shutting this player down, and simply reduce him to a less threatening player (i.e. not throwing or catching scores). You must cater your attack to when he does not have the disc.
    
    Every player has a comfort zone. You can watch as they enter the mode where they know exactly what they are going to do next without even thinking about it. This can be the worst or best place for a defender to place their mark into. A smart, agile defender can allow their mark to enter the zone, only to take away their favorite option. Take the example of a player with a strong flick that loves to cut up the line. Once identified, a smart defender can allow the player to make that cut, but jump over and sit on the flick. The offender is caught off guard, and throws a shaky, off-balance backhand that can be picked off by another defender.
    
    However, it's also possible that once in the zone, they know all the options well. Given the same offensive player traits as above, this one will actually make a very good backhand throw, doing just as much damage. A good defender is not going to allow the player into that comfort zone, or at least make it very difficult to enter. Every defender can take away something. So is this case, we give up everything but the up-line cut. The offender will still be a key player, but if we take away is favorite strength, it's more likely that he will expose the team's weakness.
    
    I like to appoint match-ups as soon as possible. This gives the defender a while to get used to his mark's habits. Just as in poker, most players have tells. They will often be as subtle as a certain hip shimmy that wouldn't be noticeable to the average spectator, but any defender worth his salt will notice every aspect of when he gets beat. Those tells will become evident and the defender can play off them.
    
    Sometimes, the mental adjustments cannot be made fast enough. This is evident to a coach when the same sequence of event happens with the same result. It's at this time that you put a different defender on. Here is the key: you don't put the original defender on someone else. Doing so will add new elements to what the defender is learning, and will only server to delay the process. After a point—two at the most—and a brief talk to make sure recognition is there, the defender is put back on. If he still can't make the adjustments and it's early in the game, then see if someone else can be a quick study. If it's late in the game, it's not likely you'll be able to solve the problem with a new defender. There's not the time for the new one to make it through the learning process. In this case, your game plan has failed, and your only hope is to flip to something involving team defense to make up the gap.
    
    When there is one standout defender, he should be marking a mid-level, role player type. One who tends to fly under the radar, but is still an integral part of disc movement. Baiting here is encouraged, since this player is trusted to get the disc, but will not do significant damage if the bait fails. If every other average defender is taking away the one that that leads to scoring on their marks, the chances of the offense's weakness showing up increases. The idea is not to shut down the best offensive players. As long as they are not catching scores, there is opportunity whenever the disc is released from the players' hands. Then the object of the defense is to make those releases as unsure as possible. By doing things like making the windows smaller or forcing the thrower into a throw they're not adept at, they are increasing their chances of getting a hand on the disc.
     
  • SHANE STEWARD
• A Theoretically Helpful Exercise
  
  
  
  • I can't really answer these questions. The right answers depend on too many factors, many of which can only be judged during your game. Variables such as individual's athleticism, defensive abilities, your opponent's strengths, current conditions, number of defenders available, ect, are all part of the equation.
    
    Having an answer to these questions is hard, but judging the quality of your answer is even harder. At best it's incredibly difficult to evaluate results based on your coaching input alone. Most of the time your defense will fail to get a block, and when it succeeds the question remains whether the offense would have otherwise thrown a turnover anyway. Further, in any competition based sport, your success is always (always, always) relative to your opponent's performance. A great defensive effort might have been due to poor offensive play, and vice versa.
    
    So is all defensive strategizing merely blowing hot air, no better than randomly choosing a given defense to try? Yes and no. You are gambling with whatever defense you choose, however you can improve your chances by thinking about your relative strengths and weaknesses, and how they relate to those of your opponent.
    
    Try this: imagine coaching a defense in a game against an offense where the defense never gets to play offense; their goal is to only get blocks. Your team cannot poach or switch. Fully unconstrained by stamina, both teams need only seven players. Each of the seven offensive players are uniform in their ability to handle, cut, and catch long throws. Likewise, your seven defenders are individually equal in their ability to mark and defend both longer and shorter cuts. However not all players are equal - but the difference between players is one unit, so the defense's fourth best player, or D4, is three units better than D7, and O1 is six units better than O7. One last assumption: Offensive players have a two step advantage over the defender with their corresponding number so O3 beats D3 by two steps, every time.
    
    So how do you match your defense up with the offense? The easiest answer is to match corresponding numbers, so O1 is guarded by D1, O2 by D2, and so on. This makes sense, as it minimizes the overall advantage that the offense has over the defense, for O1 will gain less against D1 than any other defender, O2 will beat D2 by less than anyone else save the already assigned O1, and so on. However given the last assumption where the offense has the advantage, everyone in this scenario is open - a big problem for any defense.
    
    What about the opposite - guarding O1 with D7, O2 with D6, O3 with D5, and so on? That would make life much harder for O's 5-7, as they are now playing against the D's best. This could be great strategy against a team that likes to use all of its players, for it will limit their options that otherwise they would depend on. However it also will leave O's 1-3 with greater amounts of separation, which a team relies heavily on its top players will love to see.
    
    Some teams favor using their D's 1-2 on O's 3-4, shutting down the best O players they can, while minimizing losses elsewhere. Others focus on rotating their D's 1-4 on Os 1 and 2, in order to give different challenges and levels of difficulty for their best opponents. Some use D's 6 and 7 on O1 to prevent long throws, giving O1 open cuts back to the disc and trying to stop everyone else. There are teams who favor choosing one strategy and sticking with it the whole game/season, allowing them to specialize in their given roles, however this also allows their opponents to study and practice their response. Other teams forgo specializing particular roles and change their strategy every point. While this limits their defensive abilities, there is a large advantage in not allowing the offense to know what is coming.
    
    Whats the best strategy? Even in this sterile environment, no one knows. The definition of a successful defensive strategy is limiting the offense's effectiveness more than any other strategy would, which often means getting beat repeatedly , and scored on often. Further, just because a given offense favors on approach, for example throwing only to their top players, does not mean, if stopped, they will be unable to use O's 4-7. In fact, it might make them better. It's difficult to both devise and evaluate any particular defensive strategy, but in doing so you can improve your odds in a very tough gamble. While you certainly will not know everything you might want, especially before you try a particular strategy, if you can think about how your strengths and weaknesses relate to your opponent's, and devise a strategy based upon this information, your defense will be much better for it.
     
  • SETH WIGGINS