Does this make sense...

[Dave85]

"Then again, it could also be telling us that Boeheim’s players are ill-equipped for the NBA game, maybe with the 2-3 zone to blame? Going to Syracuse means you’ll play zone for a few years, and then try to go guard the top players in the world one-on-one. It makes sense that so few of Syracuse’s lottery picks have panned out, and that the few who make it can’t find much success on the highest level."

The idea that Syracuse players can't play man is idiotic. I heard Triche once say playing Syracuse 2-3 zone is actually a lot harder than playing man. It's really idiotic if you consider when the zone collapses or comes out on top you are playing man-to-man. Even when players drive it's no different than man defense. I hear this comment at least once a year.

 

[Briancuse]

It makes no sense at all, defense is more about effort than anything else really, if you have some athletic ability, and you want to play defense, you can be a good defender.

 

[Dave85]

It makes no sense at all, defense is more about effort than anything else really, if you have some athletic ability, and you want to play defense, you can be a good defender.

I forgot the link: http://sujuiceonline.com/2015/04/22/nba-playoffs-lack-syracuse-basketball-players/

Matt Goodman is the author.

 

[orangehomer]

it makes no sense, and the reason why is that good talented players are good talented players, and it really doesn't matter what they did in college. the fallacy is that analysts act like college coaching somehow develops nba talent, which is just not the case. even a phenom like Anthony davis is not good because of anything calipari taught him at Kentucky, he is good because he is a transcendent talent. delusional fan bases like UConn try to tell themselves that their greatness is that they developed nba players. the reverse is the truth. they were great because they had future nba talents, college coaches don't "develop" nba players. they coach to win as many college games as possible.

 

[Brooky03]

The argument has never made sense.

The Syracuse players who've struggled in the NBA, struggled for reasons entirely unrelated to defense. Those that were poor defenders were so because that's just who they are as basketball players. Carmelo Anthony was never going to make any All-Defensive teams.

On the flip side, is MCW a really good NBA defender because he played zone in college? No, he's good because that's who he is.

 

[Cuse117]

I'd say the zone is to blame, but not for the reasons people think. Many of our players get drafted high not because they're polished players, but because of their NBA calibre bodies and athleticism. It's the same reason we lose so many players to the draft before they really show us what they are capable in college. When you have a bunch of super athletic 6'6-6'9 guys they are inevitably going to be drafted before they should be based on the potential of what could be based on what nba scouts see as the perfect body type. This of course will in turn lead to a higher fail rate when they don't hit their max potential.

 

[NYCorange]

I actually both agree and disagree.

On the one hand, the zone can help hide poor individual defenders who have a decent BB IQ (the reason Duke went zone for part of this year). It also requires a somewhat different skill set than man-to-man. Andy Rautins, for example, was one of the best we've ever had at the top of the zone, but I don't think defense has been his strength in his pro career.

On the other hand, a lot of our players do translate well defensively to the NBA and will even more in the future. NBA defenses in the past few years have shifted drastically towards overloading the strong side now that the illegal defense rules have been eliminated. Nearly every team employs some version of Tom Thibodeau's defense which asks players to essentially crowd the lane, push everything baseline, and often briefly guard two-on-three by hesitating in between until help arrives as the ball gets swung weak-side. Sound familiar? It should, because more and more zone concepts are getting incorporated into NBA "man-to-man" defenses.

Does this look like zone or man?

 

[kuethstheman]

Playing good m2m takes a lot of coaching and practice. For a marginal rookie, I believe not having gotten that in college could be the difference between hanging on or not.

As for our lottery picks, they've hung around in the NBA long enough to learn m2m. If they can't get the hang of it in 3, 4, 5 years in the NBA, they weren't going to learn it in college during a year or two of limited practices.