defend the 3

[dollarbill44]

1. a few of them were contested - especially after the game got blown open in the second half...but only a few were actually truly contested and also made.

2. FORCE Guy and Jerome to drive by getting up in their grills even 30 feet out and they might score a 2 pointer - but they didn't PROVE that they could do that in the game. MAKE THEM prove it. UVA eas 2-10 from 2 in first half - FORCE THEM to shoot 2s.

3. In zone you are guarding an area not a player - in Man - you can get right up on the player IN HIS FACE...which is what battle and howard etc shouldve been doin, imo. Hunter wasnt hitting from deep he only took wide open 3s right on the line - dont leave him either. UVA only had 3 players who could score - MAKE THE OTHER PLAYERS beat you - DO NOT ROTATE away from their big 3 - let the centers guard the rim...

the zone is cool because it can be tweaked in real-time - but it really doesn't do anything as far as taking away 3s or deep threes especially...you are guarding an area not a player - UVA needs to be guarded by guarding their 2-3 players who do all of their scoring.



if that plan is followed - and the bench players of UVA beat you - then fine...but they aint going 18-25 like the big 3 did...no way. you might still lose and the bench uva players might still burn you - but why not see if they can???

If it's that simple, how come they've only lost to Duke, who shot lights out? They are a really, really good team, like NC good.
There are also really effective offensive sets to run against m2m defense to get open 3s. They are 27-2 (26-2 against m2m teams) for a reason.

 

[djcon57]

We lost the vermont game because our team tried to sleepwalk to a win. It wasn't a man v zone issue.

I literally never said otherwise. I was speaking specifically of the unguarded long 3 at the end. The design of the zone usually is to not guard that shot

 

[djcon57]

If it's that simple, how come they've only lost to Duke, who shot lights out? They are a really, really good team, like NC good.
There are also really effective offensive sets to run against m2m defense to get open 3s. They are 27-2 (26-2 against m2m teams) for a reason.

NC State played UVa at home and lost by 1 in OT.
UVA shot 4-10 from 3. Why do you think they only took 10 3s in that game?

 

[HOFCeluck]

There are also really effective offensive sets to run against m2m defense to get open 3s.

Contrary to what you may think no one has ever argued that Man to Man is some magical, unbeatable defense.

 

[Fly Rodder]

Contrary to what you may think no one has ever argued that Man to Man is some magical, unbeatable defense.

It is interesting though that 99% of college D1 teams rely on that style defense. Some even win games with it. Tourney games, too.

 

[Fly Rodder]

I literally never said otherwise. I was speaking specifically of the unguarded long 3 at the end. The design of the zone usually is to not guard that shot

I'd like to see how many last second three pointers teams give up vs how many Syracuse gives up. Based on observation it seems like SU gives up an awful lot, but that could just as easily be bias.

 

[sugrad68]

The game has changed. Shooting the ball is so popular and common, that the college player of today is simply better then the college player of 20 years ago beyond the arc. Therefore, the zone can be questioned these days against certain teams. If in my job a certain strategy was not working for a certain project, I would have to change the strategy to make it work. I love the zone, but sometimes the same strategy just will not work for all teams. But JB keeps trying to put a square peg in a round hole. I am not blaming JB. I am just stating, the zone is sometimes just not right for the matchup.

I agree. The game today does not depend on big men like Patrick Ewing in the middle. Most teams play with 3 guards out there, like Virginia. Plus a forward who can hit from 3. I have never been a big fan of the zone but no one can argue the success SU has had with it. I much prefer hard-nosed man-to-man. Has anyone noticed when we play teams that play that hard-nosed man-to-man we have trouble scoring? I don't know if the SU players on the team can even play M2M effectively. Takes a different skill set than playing zone. I certainly would have liked to at least seen an attempt at it yesterday.

 

[CorduroyG]

There absolutely is a defense for shots taken 26-28 feet out. There’s a reason is always happens to us. Vermont ring a bell?The zone is built to dare them to take that shot and now more players can make that shot

exactly. the game is changing, but boeheim still coaches the zone like its 2003. kids grow up now shooting 3s. good shooters make open 3s like layups nowadays, no matter how deep they are. boeheim simply hasnt adjusted to this change. the zone is gonna give up 3s, and if a team or a player is hot from 3 we're screwed. i feel like every games comes down to if the other team hits a bunch of 3s or not. va tech blew us out cuz robinson was on fire. louisville couldnt hit anything we blew them out. duke was cold at cameron and we won. o'connell got hot in 2nd half and they beat us at dome. sparty couldnt hit anything in the tourny last yeat and we won.

i forget who we were playing but it was a recent road game, the other team switched to a zone for 1 possession, we made a couple passes and buddy drilled an open 3. they switched back to man on next possession. zone defense is gonna give up 3s, and thats very dangerous with the way the game is played today.

 

[FrancoPizza]

There absolutely is a defense for shots taken 26-28 feet out.

No defense huh? I guess we might as well just roll over. smh

 

[Fly Rodder]

i forget who we were playing but it was a recent road game, the other team switched to a zone for 1 possession, we made a couple passes and buddy drilled an open 3. they switched back to man on next possession. zone defense is gonna give up 3s, and thats very dangerous with the way the game is played today.

UNC. Roy did not like the outcome.

 

[Ghost]

We lost the vermont game because our team tried to sleepwalk to a win. It wasn't a man v zone issue.

Also, because our defense allows crap opponents to minimize possessions, and if they get hot, or can at least keep the score low, can keep it close until it's down to just who makes shots at the end. It's a dangerous way to play the game if you have vastly superior talent.

It does allow us to be a tough little bugger to those really good teams in the tourney of late. I guess that's the upside. We're Vermont now!

 

[longislandcuse]

When running a business, you become familiar with this phrase: “Hope isn’t a strategy”.

It’s concerning that we seem to be hoping teams miss rather them defending them into a miss.

 

[kcsu]

When your team is getting eviscerated you change up your defense. Its why you should never say commit to only one. Even if you only play a different D 10% of the time it forces your opponent to prepare for it. JB stating that he will never play man is beyond stupid. I can't think of one reason why any coach would ever do that regardless of your intentions.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

When your team is getting eviscerated you change up your defense. Its why you should never say commit to only one. Even if you only play a different D 10% of the time it forces your opponent to prepare for it. JB stating that he will never play man is beyond stupid. I can't think of one reason why any coach would ever do that regardless of your intentions.

So did you make this comment after Dule eviscerated UVa's man to man defense with a barrage of 3 pointers. Doubt it.
Sometimes there are just nights like that.

 

[kcsu]

So did you make this comment after Dule eviscerated UVa's man to man defense with a barrage of 3 pointers. Doubt it.
Sometimes there are just nights like that.

My point is what is the advantage of proclaiming as a coach that you will never play a certain O or D?

 

[dollarbill44]

NC State played UVa at home and lost by 1 in OT.
UVA shot 4-10 from 3. Why do you think they only took 10 3s in that game?

Because they scored in other ways. NCSU kicked our butt too.
If I were a coach, I wouldn't rely on one style of defense either, but I don't believe that playing m2m would have made any difference last night, other than maybe we lose by only 20. UVA is a much better team than SU.

 

[CardiacCuse]

When your team is getting eviscerated you change up your defense. Its why you should never say commit to only one. Even if you only play a different D 10% of the time it forces your opponent to prepare for it. JB stating that he will never play man is beyond stupid. I can't think of one reason why any coach would ever do that regardless of your intentions.

I think it comes down the the branding of it...it's now the trademark d of the program...going away from it would be like damaging the brand...or something IDK

 

[CardiacCuse]

If it's that simple, how come they've only lost to Duke, who shot lights out? They are a really, really good team, like NC good.
There are also really effective offensive sets to run against m2m defense to get open 3s. They are 27-2 (26-2 against m2m teams) for a reason.

Duke has the athletes to get up in guy jerome and hunters faces and STAY there. not many programs do...but i think SYR actually does as well..they actually have the physical advantage over UVA thats why UVA sucked from 2 in the first half...SU is TALL and LONG...which is good for defense in general not just man 2 man.

if you had 3 tyus jones type defenders on those 3 guys - playing smothering man - you force UVA to beat you with their backups - that's what I would try to do. you simply cannot face gaurd those 3 in a zone but you could in man...and yeah there's counter-measures UVA can do...screens, etc...they are going to get their's to a certain degree...but AT LEAST MAKE GUY/Jerome/hunter DRIBBLE BEFORE SHOOTING...come on!

Now...in NO WAY am I saying that approach would definitely work...far from it...you're right UVA has only 2 losses...for a reason...they.are.good.


maybe the loss would be just as bad in man vs zone...but imo UVA is perfectly built to play vs zone...they probably love it that SYR won't ever switch out of it...UVA is more-suited to beating a zone than man, imo.

 

[kirbivore]

There absolutely is a defense for shots taken 26-28 feet out. There’s a reason is always happens to us. Vermont ring a bell?The zone is built to dare them to take that shot and now more players can make that shot

harass the shooter when he crosses half court and deny the ball. Dixon's Pitt teams were good at doing that and shutting down the Notre Dame shooter du jour.

 

[dollarbill44]

if you had 3 tyus jones type defenders on those 3 guys - playing smothering man - you force UVA to beat you with their backups - that's what I would try to do.

That sounds about right. Now, which team has 3 Tre Jones type defenders? I'll give you Tyus Battle on Jerome and maybe (big maybe) OB on Hunter, who guards Guy? You're also going to have Chukwu guard someone. Yikes.

 

[Ghost]

Because they scored in other ways. NCSU kicked our butt too.
If I were a coach, I wouldn't rely on one style of defense either, but I don't believe that playing m2m would have made any difference last night, other than maybe we lose by only 20. UVA is a much better team than SU.

It's sort of undeniable it would make a difference. You certainly change the complexion of the game - maybe it goes further South on us...but it changes it.

The point would be the same as pressing - short spurt to change it up. They may even score on the possessions - but that's not all that damaging. It's about getting Guy to try to take Battle off the bounce, Jerome smirking his way through some dribbling display before having to shoot slightly off-balance, or Hunter attacking MD or OB (and getting elbowed in the FACE!) and seeing what transpires. It's about maybe getting someone to take a shot they're less comfortable with - or just about going one-on-one and maybe our players come away more engaged.

I feel like the response to going M2M all seem to argue against it in it's totality - as if the switch would be for 48% of the game. If you use it, it's just to throw your guys out there and tell them to fight because they're getting killed in the zone. Dirty the game up and let's see if we get them to take a couple stupid shots (UVA likely doesn't), or at least break the rhythm up by having them start to take different shots...threes off the bounce, etc...otherwise, we're just hoping their arms get tired during target practice. And they may, it's certainly happened before many times, so, as always, I remain slightly conflicted overall on the value of switching

 

[longislandcuse]

Why can't we just extend the zone? We did it in the tourney last year and magically won games, while almost beating Duke to go to the Elite 8.

We clamored all year to stop collapsing the guards and force the opponent to make somewhat contested mid-range 2 point shots. ...and it worked. We were Dolezaj foul trouble from the E8.

Now here we are, another year, another mediocre season and our guards still collapse like a foul line jumper automatically ends the game. Why?... Just stop. It's proven to work.

The zone can be effective against good shooting teams. We have a lot of length. The way we play it is soooooo outdated at times though.

 

[CardiacCuse]

Why can't we just extend the zone? We did it in the tourney last year and magically won games, while almost beating Duke to go to the Elite 8.

We clamored all year to stop collapsing the guards and force the opponent to make somewhat contested mid-range 2 point shots. ...and it worked. We were Dolezaj foul trouble from the E8.

Now here we are, another year, another mediocre season and our guards still collapse like a foul line jumper automatically ends the game. Why?... Just stop. It's proven to work.

The zone can be effective against good shooting teams. We have a lot of length. The way we play it is soooooo outdated at times though.

the only thing i'm thinking is that scouting and game-prepping is on a whole new-level in this technological era...and since all that really matters is the tourney...as long as you're in ...you can wait to show your cards once the tourney starts...

why giveaway your identity before you have to??

idk...hopefully that's what is going on here...

 

[CardiacCuse]

Duke has the athletes to get up in guy jerome and hunters faces and STAY there. not many programs do...but i think SYR actually does as well..they actually have the physical advantage over UVA thats why UVA sucked from 2 in the first half...SU is TALL and LONG...which is good for defense in general not just man 2 man.

if you had 3 tyus jones type defenders on those 3 guys - playing smothering man - you force UVA to beat you with their backups - that's what I would try to do. you simply cannot face gaurd those 3 in a zone but you could in man...and yeah there's counter-measures UVA can do...screens, etc...they are going to get their's to a certain degree...but AT LEAST MAKE GUY/Jerome/hunter DRIBBLE BEFORE SHOOTING...come on!

Now...in NO WAY am I saying that approach would definitely work...far from it...you're right UVA has only 2 losses...for a reason...they.are.good.


maybe the loss would be just as bad in man vs zone...but imo UVA is perfectly built to play vs zone...they probably love it that SYR won't ever switch out of it...UVA is more-suited to beating a zone than man, imo.

well now after just watching FSU DISMANTLE UVA and hold them to 59 doing EXACTLY what I have advocated...I am 100% certain that the way FSU just played UVA is the only way SU could ever beat them (this year)...and SU has the athletes to do it, too. SU is one of the few teams in the country roughly as big as FSU is...

Force UVA to dribble and make the role players beat you and you will beat UVA -

take the small clark into the post with guards.

press them full-court.

basic strategy.

 

[tbonezone]

you know the only people who say losing early in the conference is a good thing...