The zone is a work of art

[AlaskaSU]

It can be active or inactive, and it can shrink or expand. St Jons had two hot outside shooters. We continued to have an active zone pressuring the ball until we started to press. Pressing turned out to be good as they were weak in handling the pressure. We should have perhaps known that in advance. However, we knew after the first half that we were getting killed by three pointers from only two players. At the start of the second half we should have had a less active zone, no more trapping and falling back into the passing lanes. Instead, we should have always had someone in the face of their two shooters. JB works the zone like a charm. Sometimes there is nothing that a coach can do to pull a win out of a hat but that does not seem to have been the case with a train wreck like the jons. It is not unusual for offense to run hot and cold, but defense should always be there. We have superior defensive capabilities compared to the Jons and our effort was not lacking as we turned them over many times. The problem is that our defensive strategy did not adjust as it should have.

 

[RF2044]

I don't know how many times I've said this on the board, but the one thing you can always control is the level of effort / intensity you give. Shooting can come and go. Sometimes games turn into slug fests, and the shots just aren't dropping.

But the one constant that doesn't vary is the level of effort you put forth. Sitting back and playing passively doesn't cut it.

 

[two3zone]

Games like that where the zone can't stop hot shooters at the top of the zone is where I have no problem going to man to at least cool them down for a little bit.

 

[AlaskaSU]

They did not play passively, and I am not advocating that they play passively. They did not lack for effort. The problem is that the zone did not adjust to focus on their two shooters. Lack of effort is a silly argument. They want to win more than you do. They continued to play the passing lanes when they should have been focusing on covering the two Jons at the top of the zone.

On average a turnover is worth about one point. Their two hot shooters were scoring three points at a time. Our defensive energy was misdirected.

 

[CU44SE]

Idk, hop tried to press two different times in the second half and St. John's broke it within 2 seconds and scored easy buckets on the other end. Hurts when you don't have a rim protector on the backside, I would not call Coleman that. Therefore he didn't press untill the very last second.

 

[HOFCeluck]

SU fans in general have a bizarre fascination with the zone (OK it's not that bizarre) work of art, BRAND, etc...

It's just a tool that helps us win games. If it's not working, perhaps we should try another. Oh wait...we haven't had one for six years.

 

[Cuse'91]

The zone's effectiveness came in part due to the fact that many teams never saw a zone until they faced us, that just isn't the case anymore. Teams see zone probably in ever single game they play. The novelty is gone, and with that, much of its shock value.
Times change... Think about all your great short cuts driving around your city; gps/waze has made those "secret routes" common place for everyone...

 

[FrancoPizza]

We lost to St Johns... who lost to Carnal Word... who lost to Lights on the Lake. This is Depaul '06 territory. There should be an automatic ban for anyone rationalizing or apologizing for what happened on that court. That includes the coaching, the scheme, the effort, the personnel, the relative humidity, jet lag and bus lag.

 

[RF2044]

We lost to St Johns... who lost to Carnal Word... who lost to Lights on the Lake. This is Depaul '06 territory. There should be an automatic ban for anyone rationalizing or apologizing for what happened on that court. That includes the coaching, the scheme, the effort, the personnel, the relative humidity, jet lag and bus lag.

Agreed. Horrific loss.

 

[Col. Bleep]

We lost to St Johns... who lost to Carnal Word... who lost to Lights on the Lake. This is Depaul '06 territory. There should be an automatic ban for anyone rationalizing or apologizing for what happened on that court. That includes the coaching, the scheme, the effort, the personnel, the relative humidity, jet lag and bus lag.

Right...there is no excuse. None!
If the zone is a work of art, we need to produce Rembrandt work, not Jackson Pollock.
St. John's is a weak team (They played hard and shot well...but could any of their starters even make the Orange rotation)?
Given the level of the opponent, this was the worst I've ever seen SU play - start to miserable finish - at any game I've ever attended.

We actually lost to a team that got clobbered by the Fighting Vowels of Incarnate Word.

 

[tbonezone]

more this...

 

[bevosu]

I could be wrong...but

The way I remember the game we did try pressuring their 3 point shooters for a short time in the second half. At one point our guards started playing them tighter on the outside, but then they proceeded to get the ball inside with relative ease, and for the most part easily converted inside.

When that happened I think our D was faced with a dilemma. The old let them shoot 3's they'll start missing approach works when they miss. We can also get carved up inside if the opponent has decent bigs.

To lose to that St John's team was a confluence of badness. Bad rebounding, bad shooting, and bad defense.

I'm not ready to blame Hop though.

 

[two3zone]

The 2012-2013 zone was a Picasso, the current zone is a kid in kindergarten fooling around with a pen and post-it notes.

 

[Spock344]

Work of art? The zone with these crop of kids is an absolute joke.

Might I add that St Johns followed their win over us with 22-pt loss to Incarnate Word, and then a 9-pt loss to NJIT.

 

[orangehomer]

I don't know how many times I've said this on the board, but the one thing you can always control is the level of effort / intensity you give. Shooting can come and go. Sometimes games turn into slug fests, and the shots just aren't dropping.

But the one constant that doesn't vary is the level of effort you put forth. Sitting back and playing passively doesn't cut it.

could you also argue that the idea of always "out-efforting" the other team is also bunk? both teams want to win, both teams work hard and prepare for every game. both teams have professional coaches and basketball games are their job. I just think the "play harder" than the other team argument is trite at best. unless you want a hair-on-fire coach like that clown that was at Marquette, but screw that guy

 

[RF2044]

could you also argue that the idea of always "out-efforting" the other team is also bunk? both teams want to win, both teams work hard and prepare for every game. both teams have professional coaches and basketball games are their job. I just think the "play harder" than the other team argument is trite at best. unless you want a hair-on-fire coach like that clown that was at Marquette, but screw that guy

I didn't say play harder--I said expend the maximum effort you can. Give 100% every game, and don't slough off. That's the one factor you can control game in, game out.

 

[orangehomer]

I didn't say play harder--I said expend the maximum effort you can. Give 100% every game, and don't slough off. That's the one factor you can control game in, game out.

I don't know, "expend the maximum effort you can" sounds a whole lot like "play harder".

 

[RF2044]

I don't know, "expend the maximum effort you can" sounds a whole lot like "play harder".

That sounds like a lot of splitting hairs. I'm not really interested in debating how you personally define things versus me versus anyone else.

Play hard. Every game. Don't leave anything out on the court.

 

[orangehomer]

That sounds like a lot of splitting hairs. I'm not really interested in debating how you personally define things versus me versus anyone else.

Play hard. Every game. Don't leave anything out on the court.

it's still a bunch of anecdotal crap, are you the one to determine whether or not the team "expended their maximum effort" or whether or not they "played hard enough" to meet your criteria. the more fair stance is to assume that the team plays "as hard as it can" and they are either good or bad. to pin the teams success or failure on "how hard they play" i think is a convoluted way of judging a team. so are you saying that this team has plenty of talent but they don't play hard enough, or wait, they don't "expend maximum effort"? what evidence do you have that they don't "play hard. every game." i think you meant to use the anecdote "leave it all on the court" but in some oversight said "don't leave anything out on the court". to me that sounds like advice, like don't forget your basketball shoes on the court or something. goodnight ryan, you are a good man.

 

[Dave85]

We lost to St Johns... who lost to Carnal Word... who lost to Lights on the Lake. This is Depaul '06 territory. There should be an automatic ban for anyone rationalizing or apologizing for what happened on that court. That includes the coaching, the scheme, the effort, the personnel, the relative humidity, jet lag and bus lag.

This, unfortunately, may be JBs worse season in his career. As long as the players keep working hard I'm happy. Hopefully we will be a little more respectable than Depaul '06. The flashes of brilliance in MR and TL are very encouraging. If they can find some consistency on offence and play good defense we may have a few really good upsets this season.

 

[FrancoPizza]

This, unfortunately, may be JBs worse season in his career. As long as the players keep working hard I'm happy. Hopefully we will be a little more respectable than Depaul '06. The flashes of brilliance in MR and TL are very encouraging. If they can find some consistency on offence and play good defense we may have a few really good upsets this season.

These are the types of losses that can get a coach canned. Everyone is saying let's hang on to JB as long as we can, but the truth is, his departure is inevitable and we have enough data to suggest the program is declining towards mediocrity. I don't even know if Hop is the answer. Truthfully nobody knows. What I do know is that we need an overhaul in the offensive and defensive philosophies. A breath of fresh air. To what extent Hop will have his own ideas remains to be seen. I just hope he has outside resources for installing m2m and press fundamentals... otherwise we really truly are screwed.

 

[br801]

These are the types of losses that can get a coach canned. Everyone is saying let's hang on to JB as long as we can, but the truth is, his departure is inevitable and we have enough data to suggest the program is declining towards mediocrity. I don't even know if Hop is the answer. Truthfully nobody knows. What I do know is that we need an overhaul in the offensive and defensive philosophies. A breath of fresh air. To what extent Hop will have his own ideas remains to be seen. I just hope he has outside resources for installing m2m and press fundamentals... otherwise we really truly are screwed.

I must be watching a Syracuse University basketball program in an alternative universe.

 

[HOFCeluck]

These are the types of losses that can get a coach canned. Everyone is saying let's hang on to JB as long as we can, but the truth is, his departure is inevitable and we have enough data to suggest the program is declining towards mediocrity. I don't even know if Hop is the answer. Truthfully nobody knows. What I do know is that we need an overhaul in the offensive and defensive philosophies. A breath of fresh air. To what extent Hop will have his own ideas remains to be seen. I just hope he has outside resources for installing m2m and press fundamentals... otherwise we really truly are screwed.

Yeah we were heading to mediocrity from 05 to 08 as well...until we fielded arguarbly the greatest cuse team of all time.

 

[FrancoPizza]

Yeah we were heading to mediocrity from 05 to 08 as well...until we fielded arguarbly the greatest cuse team of all time.

So you're saying we need to be mediocre in order to be great again? I didn't realize we had to pay our dues.

 

[HOFCeluck]

So you're saying we need to be mediocre in order to be great again? I didn't realize we had to pay our dues.

No, but it sounded like you think this is more than a blip on the radar. Which is panic monkey talk.