All its gonna take is a good 3 point shooting team to beat us. | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

All its gonna take is a good 3 point shooting team to beat us.

Baylor doesn't have the guard play to make a deep tournament run. Period. Also, re: Baylor; they can't really shoot the 3 outside of Heslip...

I think you are wrong on both counts. I love Pierre Jackson, I think he is their secret weapon and the real difference maker on their team.

The 2-3 zone is killer against unfamiliar teams though as we pick off a fair amount of entry passes as well as pass backs.

this is something of a myth. against NCAAT caliber teams (and by that, I mean teams that qualify under their own steam, not the automatic qualifiers who protected seeds draw in the first round), the defense is not always that formidable: the last time Syracuse won the turnover battle in a 2nd or 3rd round NCAA title game was Maryland in the 2nd round, 2004. Marquette, Butler and Gonzaga all turned it over less than the Orange in those game; Oklahoma and AZ State tied the Orange in 2009, Alabama won in 2004 S16 (and of course SU lost the turnover battles in both 1st round exits 2005 and 2006).

Syracuse wins in the post season when the half court offense executes efficiently.

Which is why I wouldn't book tickets for New Orleans just yet.
 
Fran will tell you how to beat the Zone tonight, At least 3-4 Times:blah:
 
Hmmm like Florida? Aren't they a very high quality good 3pt shooting team that shot about 50% from dep against us? How could we possibly have won that game?

Kids and teams go off from 3 against all styles of defense and then its prett yhard to beat them no matter what defense you are playing. We routinely defend the 3 year in and year out very well. Look at the stats. If you are going to gripe at least do it with some inteligence. Your fear of losing to a hot 3pt shooting team is valid but not simply because we play a 2-3 zone.

Inteligence eh.. We play zone. What are the Zones weakness? Baseline, Foul line and pretty good looks at 3 correct? My point is a team that wouldn't be able to shoot lights out against aggressive m2m it makes it a little simpler for them to swing it around and find a nice shot instead of having to pick and roll and dribble against are tuff guards. IMO

We run into a good 3 point shooting team and we give them nice looks at 3 and we struggle a bit it could be a sad day. Instead of smothering a lesser talented team and giving them no chance at all against are deep talented team.

Ex. In high school when a team played zone I loved it because I knew I was atleast going to have some open looks against better teams.
 
Inteligence eh.. We play zone. What are the Zones weakness? Baseline, Foul line and pretty good looks at 3 correct? My point is a team that wouldn't be able to shoot lights out against aggressive m2m it makes it a little simpler for them to swing it around and find a nice shot instead of having to pick and roll and dribble against are tuff guards. IMO

We run into a good 3 point shooting team and we give them nice looks at 3 and we struggle a bit it could be a sad day. Instead of smothering a lesser talented team and giving them no chance at all against are deep talented team.

Ex. In high school when a team played zone I loved it because I knew I was atleast going to have some open looks against better teams.

You realize the type of zone SU plays is a touch different than the one played by your high school basketball opponents, yes?
 
Inteligence eh.. We play zone. What are the Zones weakness? Baseline, Foul line and pretty good looks at 3 correct? My point is a team that wouldn't be able to shoot lights out against aggressive m2m it makes it a little simpler for them to swing it around and find a nice shot instead of having to pick and roll and dribble against are tuff guards. IMO

We run into a good 3 point shooting team and we give them nice looks at 3 and we struggle a bit it could be a sad day. Instead of smothering a lesser talented team and giving them no chance at all against are deep talented team.

Ex. In high school when a team played zone I loved it because I knew I was atleast going to have some open looks against better teams.

How come we do such a good job defending the 3pt line every year if thats the case?
I could also say that agressive m2m is easy to score against you just rub a guy off the screen and you have and then your best ball handler either has an opening or has it against a big on the perimeter. Look at teh stats we defend the 3 very well. Uconn plays m2m and is defending the 3 very poorly this season.

Its not one or the other defenses are not static or played the same game in and game out whether they are man or zone. They adjust for each team and during games as well. This year with shot blocking center we can extend more and stay out on shooters when we need to. Yes this in turn opens the foul line up but we have options.
 
Fab has enough to frustrate sullinger, and our guards are quick enough to slow OSU's gaurds down some. Carolina is who I worry about.

They are just so tall long, have a true PF. We only have Rak who is getting better.
Barnes is built like a stackhouse. They have the best frontcourt in the country probably. It is going to be tough to score inside against them. We have to do that. They have alittle more experience then Kentucky as well. As good as Davis is Macadoo has some stronger less skinny bones.

The zone gives open three shots when it doesn't extend. Its a misconception to think we give open outside shots. On the contrary its our guards defensive sliding matching up and lack of pressure that is the weakness.

And the zone only doesn't extend when we don't have the defeners to stick with their man.
 
It will have nothing to do with being a good 3 pt shooting team. Some team will just come out and play harder than us, get in our shorts and our shots will not be falling from the perimeter. That's what usually ends up doing us in come tourny time.
 
What is this obsession with Ohio State? They are not as good as us and no im not scared of them.

Because most SU fans cannot fathom the thought that we may be the best team out there right now. It's the defeatist mentality.

We are the best, plain and simple. We have the most balance team, the greatest depth and a great coach.
 
It will have nothing to do with being a good 3 pt shooting team. Some team will just come out and play harder than us, get in our shorts and our shots will not be falling from the perimeter. That's what usually ends up doing us in come tourny time.

And then the usual suspects will blame the zone.
 
Because most SU fans cannot fathom the thought that we may be the best team out there right now. It's the defeatist mentality.

We are the best, plain and simple. We have the most balance team, the greatest depth and a great coach.
I don't think anyone in this thread has said OSU is better than us. Most people think we are the best team, we just don't think that we are the 90s Bulls and we can be beaten.
 
Baylor doesn't have the guard play to make a deep tournament run. Period.
Gotta say, you're incorrect here.
I won't guarantee them a spot in the final 4 yet, but Baylor is for real and Pierre Jackson and that Heslip kid are a big part of that.
Not sold on Drew as a coach yet, but they definitely have the horses (including guards) to make a deep run.
 
It's not going to be tonight but someone will eventually shoot us out the gym, Marquette almost did on there comeback if they hit more of there 3' s which eventually opens up the middle. I would like for us to go to man if were up 20+ or facing a very good 3-point shooting team, to not give them a chance to come back or beat us if there a less talented team. That's my number one fear is we get in the tourny and we let a team shoot us out the gym that has no business even hangin with us.

Well, that's not "all" it would take. During Marquette's comeback, our offense decided to take a break and go down to the Varsity to have a few slices of pizza. It wasn't just their scoring run; we went cold from the field at the same time.

We could actually be beaten any number of ways, but no single thing is going to do it.
 
In our 7 losses last year, teams shot a combined 44.1% behind the arc vs. us (65-145).

If you compare that to our current opponent's 3pt% of 31.1%, it would appear to be a significant factor in our losses.

I couldn't find the total opponents' 3pt % from last year, so I couldn't do a detailed analysis.

FWIW, in our 7 losses last year, we only kept our opponents under 40% 3pt shooting one time (UConn in the BET).

3 pt defense is extremely important to our success.
 
I don't care about the teams that will be a 3 seed or better. I care about beating the Creightons of the world that we will meet in the Sweet 16.

Excuses are for losers.
 
Mark my words, if someone hits 20 threes against us, we're screwed! Screwed, I tells ya!!!
 
In our 7 losses last year, teams shot a combined 44.1% behind the arc vs. us (65-145).

If you compare that to our current opponent's 3pt% of 31.1%, it would appear to be a significant factor in our losses.

I couldn't find the total opponents' 3pt % from last year, so I couldn't do a detailed analysis.

FWIW, in our 7 losses last year, we only kept our opponents under 40% 3pt shooting one time (UConn in the BET).

3 pt defense is extremely important to our success.
It was 8 losses last year, but my 3 pt numbers are roughly the same as yours (I have 64/145).

In the wins, it was 180/630, a .286 clip

so, yes, it is a very significant factor

also, in 6 of the 8 losses, our opponents outscored us from the FT line by an average of 11.7 ppg. There is probably a relationship between the two - hitting 3 pointers at a high clip causes SU to extend the defense, opening up the driving lanes, and causing more reach in fouls.

So, when the 3 pt defense falters, the opponents tend to get us coming and going.
 
It was 8 losses last year, but my 3 pt numbers are roughly the same as yours (I have 64/145).

In the wins, it was 180/630, a .286 clip

so, yes, it is a very significant factor

also, in 6 of the 8 losses, our opponents outscored us from the FT line by an average of 11.7 ppg. There is probably a relationship between the two - hitting 3 pointers at a high clip causes SU to extend the defense, opening up the driving lanes, and causing more reach in fouls.

So, when the 3 pt defense falters, the opponents tend to get us coming and going.
I'm gonna do some math (from memory, but I think I have the formula correct).

Losses: .44 +/- 1.96 * sqrt(.44*.56/145) = .44 +/- .08 = .36 to .52

Wins: .286 +/- 1.96 * sqrt (.286*.714/630) = .286 +/- .035 = .251 to .321

Since the interval ranges don't overlap, there is mathematical significance to the 3point theory.

I would imagine if we keep opponents under 36% 3point shooting we will win almost all of the time.
 
Hate to say it but I told you so.. 3's killed us.. No way ND wins with tight man to man.

LOL

Wait, I had no idea that no team that ever played tight man-to-man defense has ever lost a game.

If our top 4 offensive guys had merely bad games and not pitiful games, we would have won.
 
The 3's hurt...but the offensive rebounds we gave up to Cooley and co hurt more, IMO. 2nd shots are the biggest drawback of the zone.
 
The poor shooting by su and horrible rebounding is why we lost, dumb post really
 

Forum statistics

Threads
170,694
Messages
4,905,631
Members
6,006
Latest member
MikeBoum

Online statistics

Members online
241
Guests online
1,949
Total visitors
2,190


...
Top Bottom