THE Men’s National Team ended his 2023 World Cup qualifier commitments with a defeat to Latvia proved superior (again) and won in Riga with 67:57.

With qualification assured, Greece was not “hurt” by this defeat, already looking ahead to the next daythe following a marathon in which a total of 39 players took part.

The Sportish Analysis using InStat Scout the defeat of Greece.

Leimanis gave the Latvians 30 points

His name is Toms Leimanis and insiders probably remember that he played in our A2 Men’s (now Elite League) with Koroivos in 2018/19 season with excellent numbers. Now he plays at Estudiantes in A2 Spain and was the one who determined the development of the game.

The 29-year-old Warden was the one who initially opened up the Greeks’ defense. With the national team playing close to the Latvian pick and roll (using flat to deliver the shot from dribble) to combat their lack of size, it was Leimanis who used his own shots to open up the national team’s defense and adapt had to.

Once that was done, he was the one taking the ball and creating situations for his teammates, hitting the flat defense in the pick and roll. When the tackle switched to him (to Hedge Out, with the big one coming out powerfully), he timed a pass to get the ball moving.

Our old friend finished the game with 11 points and 8 assists. The Latvians got 19 points from these 8 assists. Overall, Leimanis was responsible – directly or indirectly – for 30 of his team’s 67 points.

The Latvians’ size and strong defense made the difference

With the exception of Leimanis (1.83 m), the Latvians had no player below 1.92 m in the squad. That’s exactly what they wanted to exploit in every way, especially when Greece decided to defend with changes on all screens, even off the ball (in an attempt by the national team to ‘cut off’ the three-pointers off-screen) of the Latvians, who were a trademarks of theirs).

The Latvians had a calm in their game. Chasing the miss match, passing the ball in high-low situations near the basket (where a player with the ball is on top of the racquet and passes to his teammate under the basket who has a smaller player with him) .

At the same time, the Latvians’ concentrated defense caused problems for the Greek guards. Latvia played not only hedge out (high dynamic help) in pick and roll. The defense started all over again, with the hosts constantly sending the Greek guards to the weak hand (the left-hander Flionis on his right hand, the right-hander Murato, Moraitis, Katsiveli, Toliopoulos on the left).

Moraitis (due to explosiveness) and Katsivelis (because he prefers the left lane despite being right-handed) were the ones who managed the situation best, but Greece’s attack struggled in circulation. The reason; Only Moraitis had the ability to vertically threaten (with penetration) the Latvian defense and create an imbalance.

Hatzidakis and the value of short roll

Still, Greece were involved in a game where many things went wrong. A start was made early in the second period when the additions of Manolis Hatzidakis, Mouratou and Moraitis changed the face of the squad. Greece got faster (Mouratos and Moraitis were the fastest players in the squad and Hatzidakis the fastest big players) and changed the game, ran more. Toliopoulos scored a little later and the match went to the point.

Hatzidakis’ screens, but most importantly the giant behemoth’s ability to short roll (that is, roll to 4-5 meters and pass) opened the game for Greece. Hatzidakis has always had elements of a good passer for his position and the Rhodes tournament was played under the tutelage of two coaches (Ilias Kanzouris and Ilias Papatheodorou) who require their big players to short roll – and look at their options before attacking – he even more opened his game.

Hatzidakis gave the national team’s game a different identity (as he did against Serbia, which did something similar) and – not by accident – had the best coefficient in +/- with +3.

The matchup zone that turned the match upside down

One of the good moments of the Greeks is certainly the counterattack in the fourth third when it brought the game to a point. Like against Serbia, coach Manolopoulos used a special matchup zone.

A zone that started out in 1-2-2 logic (one on top, two at shot height and two near the basket) but became 2-1-2 (where the best player followed the high roller) and in 2- ended. 3 (with the top player reaching under the basket as the tall player cuts to the “drawing board”). Against Serbia the “1” was Rogavopoulos, while against Latvia the “1” was Katsivelis. Here is an example:

Katsivelis is the first line of defense in a 1-2-2 zone.

Pacesniks slices to the basket and Katsivelis follows him, the zone transitioning to a 2-1-2 with the prospect of a 2-3.

Latvia attempts a pass in the corner, but Moraitis steals the ball

This trick helped Greece to pin down the Serbs and turn the game against the Latvians. However, against Latvia the plan was abandoned after 3.5 minutes, possibly because the hosts found a gap in an attack and scored. Since then, Greece went into the logic of staff defense and made substitutions and brought the game to the point. But it was the details that made the difference.

The Latvians finished the game in two attacks. Strautins’ three-pointer to 61:55 gave the Latvians wings. In the next phase, another Latvian high-low (with a pass from Kurucs to Grazulis nailing) closed the game.

A good try

Greece, like Latvia, started with a 12 which has not existed side by side in the past and is unlikely to exist again in the future. It understandably took about 10 minutes for her to get into the field and for everyone to find their footing. Nonetheless, a lot of effort has been put in.

The moments of Hatzidakis in defense and attack, the balance of Katsivelis, the initiatives of Moraitis and Toliopoulos, the good and bad moments of Hougaz, Mandzoukas and Tanoulis in the power forward position, all these are things that can last for a long time run.

There is no victory like defeat. There is a clear defeat for a Greece that presented itself with an emergency composition, but against a Latvia that also had an emergency composition. A possible clash between the two rivals at the 2023 World Cup will be played under completely different conditions and with – at least – 20 different players for each side.

Still, there were moments when the national team showed something. Now all the kids who got chances hope something similar will happen to their teams to improve even more.