ESPN: Zen of the Zone

[jr4750]

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bas...tays-true-famous-syracuse-orange-zone-defense

 

[OrangeYaGladi]

Good piece, but why does it seem that Dana O'Neil or whoever writes the same thing every year Syracuse gets out of the first weekend?

 

[mayselc]

This is one of the better-written stories I've seen from her. Really well done.

With all the quotes from coaches, I'm guessing this is something she has been working on for months. She might have held it for next year if we hadn't made it to the Sweet 16.

 

[OrangeFoo]

So this is a great article... but am I missing something or is this 40 years of zone stuff total made up garbage? I don't remember the zone becoming a thing until the turn of the century. In fact I remember Jason Hart as a junior or senior playing some of the best man 2 man D in the country and in fact leading Syracuse to a blowout home win against #1 in the country UCONN by starting the game off by stripping Kahlid el-Amin clean two straight possessions in a row. I feel like we used the zone in the Wallace years only because we had almost zero depth and we had slow pokes like Janulius and Cipolla on the perimeter but it wasn't the "syracuse" zone.

To this day Bill Rafferty starting of Big Monday games involving Syracuse with his famous Team X "starts of in man to man" line is one of my fondest sports memories from growing up. He only switched to "Syracuse starts out in the the 2-3 zone w/ man to man principles" since 2000.

 

[joct]

So this is a great article... but am I missing something or is this 40 years of zone stuff total made up garbage? I don't remember the zone becoming a thing until the turn of the century. In fact I remember Jason Hart as a junior or senior playing some of the best man 2 man D in the country and in fact leading Syracuse to a blowout home win against #1 in the country UCONN by starting the game off by stripping Kahlid el-Amin clean two straight possessions in a row. I feel like we used the zone in the Wallace years only because we had almost zero depth and we had slow pokes like Janulius and Cipolla on the perimeter but it wasn't the "syracuse" zone.

To this day Bill Rafferty starting of Big Monday games involving Syracuse with his famous Team X "starts of in man to man" line is one of my fondest sports memories from growing up. He only switched to "Syracuse starts out in the the 2-3 zone w/ man to man principles" since 2000.

Yeah, and they reference the 1987 Final Four game against Pitino and Providence as the zone being dominant. They played some zone back then, but not really much more than anyone else. It didn't hit big until 1996 like you said.

 

[SU94]

I

So this is a great article... but am I missing something or is this 40 years of zone stuff total made up garbage? I don't remember the zone becoming a thing until the turn of the century. In fact I remember Jason Hart as a junior or senior playing some of the best man 2 man D in the country and in fact leading Syracuse to a blowout home win against #1 in the country UCONN by starting the game off by stripping Kahlid el-Amin clean two straight possessions in a row. I feel like we used the zone in the Wallace years only because we had almost zero depth and we had slow pokes like Janulius and Cipolla on the perimeter but it wasn't the "syracuse" zone.

To this day Bill Rafferty starting of Big Monday games involving Syracuse with his famous Team X "starts of in man to man" line is one of my fondest sports memories from growing up. He only switched to "Syracuse starts out in the the 2-3 zone w/ man to man principles" since 2000.

Agreed. I remember lots of man-to-man in the 80s and 90s. It is a myth to say that we've employed zone for the last 35-40 years under JAB. We used to mix it up quite a bit in games.

I think the 1996 team was rather "unathletic," so it started to become a staple then. But then Jason Hart shows up and JAB wants to play to his strength. Then a few years down the line, Johnny Flynn and Paul Harris come, and they are very kinetic man-to-man kids. So, we played a good bit of man-t0-man there too.

But, the 1996 season (mostly in March) when when it began to get acclaim in media circles. And if you watch those games in 1996, the zone is must more alive today. It has evolved because 3-point shooting has evolved. Teams used to have one designated shooter. That's not often the case these days.

 

[CorduroyG]

He didnt go exclusively 100% zone until the 2009-2010 season after the lemoyne loss. Pretty sure he says that in his book.

Which makes sense cuz they played man in the 2nd half comeback against kansas in nov 08. Not sure if they played any man the rest of that season.

 

[NKR1978]

So this is a great article... but am I missing something or is this 40 years of zone stuff total made up garbage? I don't remember the zone becoming a thing until the turn of the century. In fact I remember Jason Hart as a junior or senior playing some of the best man 2 man D in the country and in fact leading Syracuse to a blowout home win against #1 in the country UCONN by starting the game off by stripping Kahlid el-Amin clean two straight possessions in a row. I feel like we used the zone in the Wallace years only because we had almost zero depth and we had slow pokes like Janulius and Cipolla on the perimeter but it wasn't the "syracuse" zone.

To this day Bill Rafferty starting of Big Monday games involving Syracuse with his famous Team X "starts of in man to man" line is one of my fondest sports memories from growing up. He only switched to "Syracuse starts out in the the 2-3 zone w/ man to man principles" since 2000.

And by the middle of 08-09, I think we were playing a ton of man. That team really didn't care too much about defense, but we played a lot of man that year.

Since the Lemoyne game we've been 99.9% zone.

 

[Townie72]

What JB has done since committing to the Zone is really a sophisticated management technique.

It's the same basic process that allows manufacturing costs on may products to fall continually. You learn and adjust, learn and adjust, over and over again. It's "Continuous Improvement" taken from the business world (and the Japanese originally) and applied to basketball.

After 16 years of learning and adjusting in playing, coaching, teaching and recruiting, his understanding of the zone and how to use it are way beyond what others could do by just experimenting with it.

 

[andyw715]

And the continuous improvement is what is lost on the general audience. Sure there may be wholesale changes between halves of ball (extension/retraction strategy) but the multitude of nuance adjustments game to game and play to play that the zone implements is lost on those who think its "5 lazy guys standing around".

There is also something to be said for players (specifically post/driving) that are used to close proximity/contact with a defender that throws them off when they receive the ball seemingly unguarded, it dares them to shoot or pass when they normally wouldn't (and most likely its a bad/uncharacteristic shot, or pass that gets deflected/stolen).

 

[Dave85]

He didnt go exclusively 100% zone until the 2009-2010 season after the lemoyne loss. Pretty sure he says that in his book.

Which makes sense cuz they played man in the 2nd half comeback against kansas in nov 08. Not sure if they played any man the rest of that season.

That is my recollection. Here's my theory. As JB has become even MORE crotchety, if that's even possible, he's just sick of hearing people second guess his decisions on when to play M2M versus 2-3. So just play 2-3 and he doesn't have to listen to any complaints.

 

[Dave85]

What JB has done since committing to the Zone is really a sophisticated management technique.

It's the same basic process that allows manufacturing costs on may products to fall continually. You learn and adjust, learn and adjust, over and over again. It's "Continuous Improvement" taken from the business world (and the Japanese originally) and applied to basketball.

After 16 years of learning and adjusting in playing, coaching, teaching and recruiting, his understanding of the zone and how to use it are way beyond what others could do by just experimenting with it.

I agree. Last night when watching Duke's zone I was thinking, "what is that player doing, he didn't move to the right spot after the pass."

 

[Dave85]

And by the middle of 08-09, I think we were playing a ton of man. That team really didn't care too much about defense, but we played a lot of man that year.

Since the Lemoyne game we've been 99.9% zone.

This is the best article on JB's zone philosophy I've read:

http://www.syracuse.com/orangebasketball/index.ssf/2013/03/syracuse_coach_jim_boeheim_say.html

It's a pain to dig up. I finally bookmarked the page.

 

[OrangeFoo]

I agree. Last night when watching Duke's zone I was thinking, "what is that playing doing, he didn't move to the right spot after the pass."

It took Oregon one pass to get an open shot against Duke's zone... outside of the ball handler shooting a gap in the zone and drawing the center which leaves someone wide open on then baseline, the easiest path to an open shot against our zone that I can think of is 2 passes: pass to ft followed by a dumpdown to a baseline cutter but even that's easier said than done given that we deny that pass like madmen.

 

[HoustonCuse]

Honestly, watching that Duke zone last night made me understand why most of the world thinks it's a junk defense.

 

[Townie72]

This is the best article on JB's zone philosophy I've read:

http://www.syracuse.com/orangebasketball/index.ssf/2013/03/syracuse_coach_jim_boeheim_say.html

It's a pain to dig up. I finally bookmarked the page.

And yet after almost every SU loss, someone --- usually the same couple of people --- posts on here the idea that SU should have switched to some M2M during the game.

And the reason that they think that JB won't move to a M2M is not because he doesn't think it would be effective it's that he is "stubborn".

A the game vs. Indiana at the Verizon Center, I --- through some unusual circumstances --- was located among a large number of IU fans.

You would think that a team like IU, with it's history, would be surrounded by knowledgeable fans. Well, I don't know what else they knew about basketball, but they seemed to have no concept of how the SU zone was suffocating their offense. And how unable Crean or the IU players were able to deal with it.

 

[OrangeFoo]

And yet after almost every SU loss, someone --- usually the same couple of people --- posts on here the idea that SU should have switched to some M2M during the game.

And the reason that they think that JB won't move to a M2M is not because he doesn't think it would be effective it's that he is "stubborn".

A the game vs. Indiana at the Verizon Center, I --- through some unusual circumstances --- was located among a large number of IU fans.

You would think that a team like IU, with it's history, would be surrounded by knowledgeable fans. Well, I don't know what else they knew about basketball, but they seemed to have no concept of how the SU zone was suffocating their offense. And how unable Crean or the IU players were able to deal with it.

When a team starts getting open shots on every possession the coach has to make a choice:
- option 1: stick with their D and hope that the other team will miss wide open shots
- option 2: change something with their existing D to hopefully stop what's working
- option 3: switch to a new D entirely

That exact thought process is what got Duke to start playing zone last night... they were getting killed in man 2 man as they couldn't stay in front of the Ducks and Oregon wasn't missing the dunks and layups they were getting. There was no option 2 as Coach K has zero depth this year so he opted for the zone.

It's never been clear to me why our coach, or any coach for that matter, would limit themselves to option 1 and 2 only when they are clearly not working. And I don't want to hear "but but we never practice man 2 man"... these kids have been playing man 2 man since they stepped on a basketball court. You just need to decide whether or not you're switching screens or not. To me trying the same thing that doesn't work over and over is just plain old stubbornness. No excuse for it.

 

[OttoMets]

"...
a young Rick Pitino lamented of his Providence team after losing to the Orange in the Final Four, "We had an off shooting night, which is a credit to the defense of the other team.''

In Syracuse, New York, you can count on three things: salt trucks, coach Jim Boeheim and the Orange's zone defense."

Dana, what defense was Syracuse playing for the majority of this game?

 

[HOFCeluck]

"...
a young Rick Pitino lamented of his Providence team after losing to the Orange in the Final Four, "We had an off shooting night, which is a credit to the defense of the other team.''

In Syracuse, New York, you can count on three things: salt trucks, coach Jim Boeheim and the Orange's zone defense."

Dana, what defense was Syracuse playing for the majority of this game?

First thing that occurred to me as well.

 

[OttoMets]

First thing that occurred to me as well.

There's the opportunity to write a great article about Boeheim's evolution using history and other coaches' opinions.

She settled for an average piece by way of distorting facts to fit her narrative and using (some) empty cliches from other coaches. Lazy. No wonder people are often under-informed about what Boeheim's doing, if this is what passes for reporting.

 

[NJCuse97]

Just watching the first 5 minutes of that game, Providence is playing the "2-3 matchup zone" Packer says (apart from claiming our ali oop offense is illegal) that we have much better athletes that enable us to go m2m. Wonder where the Pitino learned the "2-3 matchup zone".

 

[pearl31]

gawd Packer was such a dumb@ss

 

[HOFCeluck]

There's the opportunity to write a great article about Boeheim's evolution using history and other coaches' opinions.

She settled for an average piece by way of distorting facts to fit her narrative and using (some) empty cliches from other coaches. Lazy. No wonder people are often under-informed about what Boeheim's doing, if this is what passes for reporting.

Yeah agreed...it's nice to read a complimentary JB piece...but that's the same recycled clunker that you see every once in a while that offers no real insight to anything JB or zone related and is relatively easy to throw together.

 

[Dave85]

Honestly, watching that Duke zone last night made me understand why most of the world thinks it's a junk defense.

I agree. Their 2-3 was just awful.

 

[TheCusian]

When a team starts getting open shots on every possession the coach has to make a choice: - option 1: stick with their D and hope that the other team will miss wide open shots - option 2: change something with their existing D to hopefully stop what's working - option 3: switch to a new D entirely That exact thought process is what got Duke to start playing zone last night... they were getting killed in man 2 man as they couldn't stay in front of the Ducks and Oregon wasn't missing the dunks and layups they were getting. There was no option 2 as Coach K has zero depth this year so he opted for the zone. It's never been clear to me why our coach, or any coach for that matter, would limit themselves to option 1 and 2 only when they are clearly not working. And I don't want to hear "but but we never practice man 2 man"... these kids have been playing man 2 man since they stepped on a basketball court. You just need to decide whether or not you're switching screens or not. To me trying the same thing that doesn't work over and over is just plain old stubbornness. No excuse for it.

That's because there are more nuances and adjustments in option 2 that don't give up the advantage of playing a systems that befuddles teams - than - going to man which every team is comfortable in.

Basically if you want to give up your advantage and allow your opponent to play their regular offense, it's like waving the white flag.