Does playing 100% zone defense help or hurt recruiting?

[Alsacs]

Just your opinion.

 

[jordoo]

I hurts. Some kids don't want to play zone and the staff eliminates another group of players that aren't physically good fits for the zone. I think it's hard to argue any other way.

 

[Cuse House]

I hurts. Dome kids don't want to play zone and the staff eliminates another group of players that aren't physically good fits for the zone. I think it's hard to argue any other way.

That's the catch right there. We are not only impacted by kids who believe what other coaches tell them "zone hurts your NBA chances" to be true, but we are also telling guys to kick rocks because they are half an inch too short.

 

[LaggyJon]

Hurts recruiting

Helps us win (though, I don't think mixing in a small percentage m2m would hurt, and arguably would help)

It isn't going to change, regardless of what people on this board want

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[OrangeYaGladi]

Can GMac recruit?

Are potatoes shaky?

 

[Jeremy L.]

It hurts, but if they players are talented enough and have played man-to-man their entire life, playing zone defense won't hurt their draft stock. The whole "can they play defense at the next level?" debate is crazy.

I guess where I stand is that players are scared away by it because it's the one thing everybody talks about. But in reality, playing zone defense doesn't make you forget how to play man-to-man defense (especially when the zone has m2m principles).

 

[cuseinseattle]

I think it hurts on a minimal level. It hurts because it's m2m in the nba but we have gotten kids drafted consistently over the last 6 years so I think that mitigates it to some degree. I think most of the kids who say no because of zone are using it as a convenient excuse when it's really Boeheim being older or something to do with Hopkins or the investigation etc.

 

[Gotothehole]

It’s our Coaching situation is killing us. We need energy and youth; question is when will the bleeding stop. Did you forget we were in the NIT last year?

 

[Zepharus]

HURTS. Like it or not it has a negative stigma. It gets bagged on and while it has helps us forge an identity and win games it is now an albatross around our necks. This MUST change

 

[CuseTG2003]

It kills us imo. Most elite recruits won't even consider us because of it. We're purposely tying one hand behind our back.

 

[SoBeCuse]

In terms of recruiting it's gotta be yes. I think it scares away the elite players. When players get here, however, it doesn't seem to be a big deal to the NBA teams/GMs by and large. SU players get drafted. Whether or not they are actually good defenders is another issue. The 100% part is the problem correlating to recruiting, IMO. It's an easy tactical issue to recruit against I would think.

 

[TinyManInside]

It is a fact that opposing coaches use it as a negative recruiting tool against us. How effective is that narrative? I don't really know how to objectively evaluate that.

 

[HSPORANGE]

And the f

It’s our Coaching situation is killing us. We need energy and youth; question is when will the bleeding stop. Did you forget we were in the NIT last year?

And the Final 4 the year before

 

[Funk Doc]

It is a fact that opposing coaches use it as a negative recruiting tool against us. How effective is that narrative? I don't really know how to objectively evaluate that.

Yeah...it is very tough to evaluate how much that hurts us when schools use it. For me, even though a bias Orange answer, is that it really shouldn't. I mean the ultimate goal for recruits, has and always will be the NBA. When is the last time a player was taken early simply because they were a great defender, even without a solid offensive game? Rodman? Can't think of too many others. Usually the narrative on draft day is that defense is correlated to how athletic the player is, and are they willing to put the effort in to be a great defender. Again, I'm bias. I like the zone, don't love it. Wish we mixed it up still though! With the right personnel, it can really be a great weapon.

 

[Briancuse]

It didn't hurt us getting Melo, or landing us other loaded recruiting classes, I think there are always one or two kids who don't come here because they don't want to play zone, but I think its very few.

 

[OttoMets]

It's just one more stone to be cast in negative recruiting.

In reality, zone's not hurting anyone. A good player is a good player and it doesn't matter what defense he plays. But kids don't know any better, so if an opposing coach can single out SU for being different, that can sway a recruit's opinion.

 

[Oráiste]

It’s our Coaching situation is killing us. We need energy and youth; question is when will the bleeding stop. Did you forget we were in the NIT last year?

I'm confused . . . on the one hand, Hopkins has been running the program for several years and losing him is going to kill us
while on the other hand, we've lost 42 games and not gone to the tournament 2x in the the last 3 seasons, and that is a sign Boeheim has lost it

I don't think both can be true

It is a fact that opposing coaches use it as a negative recruiting tool against us. How effective is that narrative? I don't really know how to objectively evaluate that.

they use lots of things as negative recruiting against us . . . and against everyone else. it is the staff's job to easily counter that negative recruiting by pointing out we've had a 1st rounder six years in a row so the supposed stigma doesn't really exist.

 

[Cusefan0307]

It's just one more stone to be cast in negative recruiting.

In reality, zone's not hurting anyone. A good player is a good player and it doesn't matter what defense he plays. But kids don't know any better, so if an opposing coach can single out SU for being different, that can sway a recruit's opinion.

It's certainly not hurting our guys draft stock. That's for sure.

 

[longislandcuse]

Hurts, but I don't mind us playing it and recruiting towards it.

HOWEVER, we need to be able to play M2M in spurts and if we're going to play zone 24/7, the team needs to be a good fit for it and pressure needs to be implemented.

A zone that sits back letting opponents dictate pace isn't good for recruiting. Add pressure: full court press at times with a token 3/4 court press to fall back to the zone and I think that becomes more inviting. It's also tactically smart since the opposing team has 5-10 seconds less to probe.

 

[GooseMutt]

Blend of zone with man to man fine

100 percent zone absolutely killing us

 

[GooseMutt]

I am also perplexed that we have had so many notable point guards drafted who played at Syracuse on a big stage with huge exposure who JB gave so much offensive flexibility to create, which is a point guards dream, and they aren't lining up to play here.

Do some not even consider us cause their size does not fit our zone profile?

Do others want man to man for NBA preparation?

I know these points have been made on this thread/ board by people way more knowledgeable than me but can we deny this.

The zone benefits Coach but maybe it wouldn't kill him if we played man to man with large leads or when the zone is being battered.

 

[saltine44]

It didn't hurt us getting Melo, or landing us other loaded recruiting classes, I think there are always one or two kids who don't come here because they don't want to play zone, but I think its very few.

Carmelo? SU wasn't 100% zone back then. In fact didn't they go man to man for the entire half against OkSt or Auburn in the tournament?

 

[jordoo]

Carmelo? SU wasn't 100% zone back then. In fact didn't they go man to man for the entire half against OkSt or Auburn in the tournament?

Press against OkSt with J-McNeil as the if I recall.

 

[Briancuse]

Carmelo? SU wasn't 100% zone back then. In fact didn't they go man to man for the entire half against OkSt or Auburn in the tournament?

We weren't 100 percent zone? but it was 90 percent, you know the deal when you come to Su,

 

[NYCorange]

It depends on what one means by "hurt". Does it make it harder to land the top kids? Yeah, for sure. But does it also allow us to have success with kids who might have holes in their m2m defense? Which makes it easier to get successful kids sometimes? Yeah that too. Andy Rautins probably isn't nearly as successful on D somewhere else, but he was a plus defender for us. Same might be true with Southerland and Wes Johnson.