Does playing 100% zone(except when we press) have an effect on recruiting? | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

Does playing 100% zone(except when we press) have an effect on recruiting?

Does playing 100% zone affect recruiting?

  • No, it has zero effect

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    100
I would not be surprised if it affects recruiting.

Is it the truth that the zone hurts your chances to get to the next level? No I don't think so.

Would it be easy to convince a 17-18 year old kid that it will hurt? Yes I think it would be pretty easy for a lot of these coaches.
 
basically the same thing it’s get the ball to our best players
I don't know about "best" it's usually who has been designated. We can look at all the advance data we want, but at the end of the day, a less efficient scoring player is generally taking the most shots. Battle took a ton of garbage shots. He was infamous for the 21' 2P FGA. The NBA has long since figured out the most efficient scoring shots and they're 3s from certain spots and anything within 2 feet of the basket. Other than that, don't bother. If there was any logic to SU's offense, it would be focused on getting Buddy space to get a clean look or clearing out the paint for dump offs to Marek and Q. Instead we get the Buddy Backdown(TM) or chucking up lots of 3s. For the most part, SU has good shooters, but offense usually looks messy.
 
I would like to see a story based on asking former top recruits if the SU reliance on the 2-3 affected their decisions.
Hint to Post-Standard, DO, and others,
 
Also, guys who want to get the next level want to have good counting stats, they're not stupid. They know they're not going to get a ton of rebounds here, but they likely will get more steals and blocks than other schemes. Zone is good for some things like that. "Led the ACC in steals" is great to have on the resume. NBA scouts won't be snowed, but that kind of thing helps. Having the center cover the corner 3 and the paint is just nuts and that why I think we're just getting projects mainly since Fab.
 
NBA plays both zone and man. Boeheim keeps insisting in print his players can't play man.
SOOOOO...
 
I would not be surprised if it affects recruiting.

Is it the truth that the zone hurts your chances to get to the next level? No I don't think so.

Would it be easy to convince a 17-18 year old kid that it will hurt? Yes I think it would be pretty easy for a lot of these coaches.
I think this is spot on. I don't think playing in a 2-3 zone in college has any impact on how the player translates to the NBA. HOWEVER, it's very easy for other schools recruiting those same kids to sell them on NOT playing in a 2-3 zone consistently.
 
Success of Baye and MCW = the downfall of Syracuse basketball.
I'd go as far as to say the 1996 tournament run doomed us to a quarter century of zone.
 
I'd go as far as to say the 1996 tournament run doomed us to a quarter century of zone.
Both are statements are certainly hyperbole since we are probably top 5-10 in the country in wins since that point but there may be something to how we have only brought in Centers that are basically Keita clones since and tried over and over and over again to turn combo guards into PGs.
 
The 1996 and 2003 zone looked nothing like the 2010 to 2013 to present zone.

I blame Rick Pitino for figuring out how to overload the zone with Kyle Kuric and Luke Hancock as the reason we sent the center to the corner.
True points. I was just about to make that reply re: Pitino. JB thought he figured out a solution. That's when the center position was officially doomed.
 
I think it has an impact on our players success in the pros and the lack of SU stars in the NBA has an impact on recruiting but there are other things such as the recent mediocre records that have a greater impact.

I don't think top high school stars are thinking about what defense they want to play. They are thinking about what car they want to drive.
 
Playing two years of zone in college has no bearing. These guys all play AAU ball and have played man, zone and press. It’s the Jimmys and Joes not the scheme.
 
I'd go as far as to say the 1996 tournament run doomed us to a quarter century of zone.
FWIW - Part of that doom included a national championship and various final four runs..
 
Playing two years of zone in college has no bearing. These guys all play AAU ball and have played man, zone and press. It’s the Jimmys and Joes not the scheme.
No bearing on recruiting? How can it not.
 
I think it’s a little in between 1 and 2. I think it deffinetly has an impact. There is enough chatter weather it is valid or not. . Plus, it’s one less thing to show to the NBA. If your a stud man to man defender you know you can be a defensive stopper in the NBA. If you are an incredible zone defender that is an unknown for NBA GM’s if it transitions to man defense. Anywhere teams can negative recruit they will. If someone has us and another high profile school even; I’m sure the man to man vs zone defense will be a factor.
 
I absolutely think it has had an impact on SU’s recruiting. I can pretty much guarantee that other coaches( see Calipari-Isaiah Jackson) use “ the zone” as part of a negative recruiting pitch against SU. All these big recruits dream of playing in the NBA. Playing the zone full time in addition to SU’s recent inability to produce NBA big men is definitely being used against us on the recruiting trail.
 
It's likely some talented recruits have avoided us because they don't want to play zone defense exclusively --- but don't say it out loud. Same way most prefer to play an up tempo running game style of offense which at one time we played but don't anymore.
 
Does a bear sht in the woods? Now that we are less appealing, zone all the time is a larger negative then it was when we were a ranked team playing rivalry games that attracted National attention Back then the zone did not hurt our recruiting but now it does. We are an oddity but no longer a successful oddity.
 
Last edited:
Yes 100%.

I think the fact we play zone is a big reason Andre didn’t come here.
 
I thought Jerami didn‘t make the all star game because there were too many better front court players in the conference. I went to vote, but saw the competition for the spot and just did not believe he should make it.

Grant isn’t near all star level this year because his defense developed.

I think, in the past, great players would come to Syracuse despite the zone because we had such an exciting offense. Now, though, we don’t, and playing zone is neither effective toward progress to the NBA nor the kind of action any ambitious, competitive, skilled high schooler wants to play. And if you‘re into overthinking and psychology... maybe you start to wonder if a kid who wants to play zone might believe he has m2m deficiencies. That all said, sometimes we still represent a better option for a 3- or 4-star who has evaluated the landscape and other rosters and wants to play for 30k people In the best conference.
 
1614355634827.jpeg
Product of the zone has the best defensive rating in the association
 
I'm sure it does on some level.

But the flip side is that a JB offense typically lets the stars showcase their offensive skills. A lot of clear out and create your own shot.

So whatever it may taketh, I bet it equally (or more) giveth.

Now, how much does the thought of playing for a cantankerous 76 year old impact recruiting? I don't know.
 
Haven't read the thread.

It does hurt your NBA stock. Former Suns exec said on a podcast they try and stay away from Cuse players because of the zone.

Of course you can point to certain players doing well or getting drafted high but maybe showing of their m2m skills would get them drafted higher or being an actual impact instead of a G league to Europe player.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,584
Messages
4,713,514
Members
5,909
Latest member
jc824

Online statistics

Members online
391
Guests online
2,880
Total visitors
3,271




Top Bottom