Lomax thrives despite different defensive tactics

How do you stop Judie Lomax? If you’ve ever attended a women’s basketball game, you’re probably just as puzzled by that question as is her opposition. Lomax was already first-team All-Ivy coming into this season, but her game has significantly improved this year.

In the past, Lomax was a looming post presence and was absolutely dominant off the glass. This year, her rebounding has continued to be stellar, but her offensive repertoire has expanded to greater levels. Among many other things, her post game has improved and she has been shooting much better. Lomax has added a reliable outside jumper and her free-throw shooting rose from 55 percent last year to 68 percent this year.

Now, she’s a frontrunner for the Ivy League Player of the Year award, and currently leads the conference in points per game (an average of 18.8) and rebounds per game (an average of 13.9). Naturally, when a team has the league’s leader in these two vital statistics, that player generates a lot of attention. This has led to teams creating different game plans to try to contain Lomax.

In Columbia’s early Ivy games—specifically its two-game series against Cornell—the difficulties Lomax usually poses for defense were very visibly displayed. In the Big Red’s first attempt at stopping her, it resorted to a zone defense geared to prevent her from exploiting a lone defender guarding her. The zone held her to 17 points and 16 rebounds—a solid performance given what happened in the next game—but the defense also allowed additional opportunities.

According to head coach Paul Nixon, when Columbia has cracked the zone defense, the team has “been able to counter that [zone] with very good ball movement. In many of the games, the team has been very consistent hitting the outside shot.”

This was shown in the Cornell game, in which the Light Blue displayed great ball movement to get open looks. Although the team didn’t shoot as well as it normally does—especially from 3-point range, where the team was seven for 26—it still nailed enough outside shots to easily win 68-44. In particular, junior guard-forward Kathleen Barry shot well, accounting for three of the team’s seven makes. Part of the reason for the team’s success, despite the night’s relatively bad shooting, can be attributed to another flaw with the zone defense.

“In certain situations this year, the other team has actually found it more difficult to keep her off the boards, out of the zone, than if they have an individual player that they’re matching up on her,” Nixon said. “I call it the diffusion of responsibility. … Anybody could do it, but nobody does it, so it winds up not getting done.”

This element of the zone was demonstrated by the Cornell game. Of Lomax’s 16 rebounds, seven of them were offensive and the team as a whole collected 23 offensive boards. This gave Columbia more chances to initiate the Lomax attack, which helped Columbia control the game despite not shooting at its best.

A more recent attempt at using the zone defense occurred in the first half of Columbia’s home game against Penn this Saturday. The Quakers utilized a zone defense that was very noticeably focused on stopping Lomax. This showed on the scoreboard, as she only scored four points before the half. Yet, despite that, the Light Blue still led by 11 at the half. This time, the points came from the team hitting more of its outside shots. Junior center Lauren Dwyer, who Nixon says is one of the team’s best shooters, stretched the zone by making several outside shots (she finished the game with 14 points on six-of-12 shooting). Senior guard Danielle Browne displayed a soft touch, hitting two of her three 3-pointers for the game.

“Lauren Dwyer does a good job of moving and finding the gaps, the openings of the zones, and getting mid-range shots,” Nixon said.

This usually holds true. However, in the Harvard game, the Crimson zone successfully contained the Lomax attack, in part because Dwyer couldn’t convert her looks. The usually dependable shooter finished just two for 14 from the court, and couldn’t hit the shots to beat the zone. If not for senior guard Sara Yee (who has a good 3-point percentage of .317) knocking down three first-half treys, the final score of 73-55 could have been even worse.

Despite this loss, Columbia usually plays well against the zone because it has great shooters. Barry currently ranks second in the conference in 3-point percentage, and sophomore guard Melissa Shafer, who led the league in this category for a while, is close behind in fourth with a 3-point percentage of 42.5. Although the zone can work against the Lomax attack, it usually fails, thanks to this advantage on the Lions’ side.

Many teams have also tried the man-to-man defense versus Lomax, but this setup has also been unsuccessful. After Cornell’s first game in which it employed zone and got crushed, the Big Red switched to man-to-man defense for its rematch the next week. The problem is that Lomax is so good that most players simply cannot defend her one-on-one. In the past, many teams would send over the double team and force someone else to beat her. However, this year Lomax has gotten better at evading double teams.

“The way that Judie has done a good job of counteracting what teams have tried to do in man-to-man this year [is that] she hasn’t just stayed block to block. She has expanded her shooting range. ... She’s now able to take bigger post players away from the basket, and get the ball in the perimeter, face up, and look for some scoring opportunities, either taking the jump shot or driving to the basket,” Nixon said. “It’s sometimes more difficult for a team to double-team a player on the perimeter than somebody who’s just stationary on the block.”

In the Cornell rematch, Lomax was able to impose her will on the Big Red’s man-to-man defense, scoring 30 points and grabbing 17 boards. In the game, she showed many of the moves Nixon described. She repeatedly drove by her defender to get the layup, nailed several difficult outside shots, and overpowered her defender on the post. This was classic Lomax, and her efforts fueled the Lions to a 68-47 rout.

When teams have successfully set the double team, there are two main ways the opposition shows it.

“There are teams that are double-teaming her immediately on the catch,” Nixon said. “So as soon as she touches it, they’re immediately running a defender at her and they’re really trying to force the ball back out of her hands to anyone but her.”

According to Nixon, Lomax has rendered this setup ineffective because “she’s done a good job when she’s had a chance to face up, of being able to find her open teammates.”

Another double-team ploy opponents have set up occurs when Lomax “puts the ball on the floor, and as soon as she starts dribbling it, then they’re running another defender at her.” Unsurprisingly, like all other defenses thrown at Lomax, she has figured out how to crack this one.

With the second half of the Ivy season beginning, the Ivy League will get another chance at containing the Lomax attack. The conference’s ability to hold Lomax will be one of the more interesting storylines to watch as Columbia vies for the Ivy title.