heres what i HATE about the zone

[Fly Rodder]

If man to man was so great, and the best defenders in the world are playing it, whey do so many NBA teams score so easily, so often.

When was the last shut-out in the NBA?

NM ... I get it.

 

[br801]

Hmmmm...is that what you set the over/under at?

I would take the over...

Okay, how about 15%? That's about one out of 6 or 7 posts.

 

[patcuse]

Last I checked you can be a fan of someone but still be critical of certain things said person does.

Kind of like being married and slapping your wife around but you still love her

 

[Townie72]

never said i disliked him cuz i don't but i did call JB "lazy" for not practicing M2M.unfortunately that post was deleted.
and if you wanna go digging' i'd venture your post history says huge shafer fan also.how did that work out ?

Nope. I was neutral about Shafer.

I'm not a reflexive supporter of all SU coaches. But when you have the kind of very long term success JB has had, his commitment to the school and the BB program, his hiring of SU alums as AC's, his directness with the Press and the fans, the guy is owed more than the sniping of the malcontents on here.

In his Presser after Virginia he explained what the problem has been with this team . for those who bothered to listen.

 

[AirForceOrange]

Okay, how about 15%? That's about one out of 6 or 7 posts.

Hmmmm...that is harder to pick the over/under...

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Kind of like being married and slapping your wife around but you still love her

That's a terrible analogy. Just stop.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Ohh, so you were critical of him but stopped short of saying you disliked the guy as opposed to Pizza, who did not.

Have you read the complete explanation/defense of the Zone from "Bleeding Orange"?

You know, when your takes are just dressed up versions of Cusehulks ramblings, it's probably time to step back for a minute.

With him though it's understandable...he's a &cking child.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Kind of like being married and slapping your wife around but you still love her

Uh, no?

 

[br801]

That's a terrible analogy. Just stop.

Yes, but it's a terrible thread. We get what we deserve, I suppose.

 

[Townie72]

You know, when your takes are just dressed up versions of Cusehulks ramblings, it's probably time to step back for a minute.

With him though it's understandable...he's a &cking child.

I have no idea what this means.

Every time someone on here posts the M2M nonsense that I happen across --- that the facts disprove --- I'm going to be in their grille.

 

[skurey]

Our D is ranked 37th overall adjusted for tempo.

 

[two3zone]

I have no idea what this means.

Every time someone on here posts the M2M nonsense that I happen across --- that the facts disprove --- I'm going to be in their grille.

I don't understand what the issue is, when the zone is getting torched by St John's or Virginia, what's the harm to switch to man and face guard these shooters who are going bananas? Could Virginia have shot any worse than they did in our game?

I love the zone as much as the next guy but when it's getting destroyed there's no reason outside of stubbornness not to switch it up.

The Clemson game, only shot we can't give up is a 3, give me one valid reason to stay in zone. Why does there need to be a guy underneath? It makes no sense. The sad part of that situation is if you asked JB why he didn't go man to protect the one shot they needed all he would say is "we only play zone". I'm sorry, that excuse doesn't work for that situation.

 

[tbonezone]

Nope. I was neutral about Shafer.

I'm not a reflexive supporter of all SU coaches. But when you have the kind of very long term success JB has had, his commitment to the school and the BB program, his hiring of SU alums as AC's, his directness with the Press and the fans, the guy is owed more than the sniping of the malcontents on here.

In his Presser after Virginia he explained what the problem has been with this team . for those who bothered to listen.

look no one here argues he's done wonders for the the SU program. but he's been less than wonderful lately. his win total is actually dropping (per ncaa sanctions) how many coaches can say that? and win % is dropping. the zone is indeed a gimmick who's time has passed. time to learn a new trick. or retire.

 

[SWC75]

Don't we play a zone with M2M principles? Or is that just BS said by one guy at the beginning of a telecast? Seems like learning m2m principles is pretty close to learning the defense. I'm imagining these kids who have been playing primarily M2M for bulk of their lives would likely be able to go into that defense on occasion.

The flip side to that is that if you can use man-to-man principles in a zone, why do you need to stop playing the zone?

 

[Townie72]

I don't understand what the issue is, when the zone is getting torched by St John's or Virginia, what's the harm to switch to man and face guard these shooters who are going bananas? Could Virginia have shot any worse than they did in our game?

I love the zone as much as the next guy but when it's getting destroyed there's no reason outside of stubbornness not to switch it up.

The Clemson game, only shot we can't give up is a 3, give me one valid reason to stay in zone. Why does there need to be a guy underneath? It makes no sense. The sad part of that situation is if you asked JB why he didn't go man to protect the one shot they needed all he would say is "we only play zone". I'm sorry, that excuse doesn't work for that situation.

What is there about this sentence you don't understand?

"Syracuse is holding opponents to just 29% from 3-point range, which ranks 11th in college basketball."

M2M is no better at defending against the 3 than is Zone the way we play it.

Closely guarding someone 25' from the basket is inviting them to blow past you, get into the defense and score or dish for an easy "2".

 

[two3zone]

What is there about this sentence you don't understand?

"Syracuse is holding opponents to just 29% from 3-point range, which ranks 11th in college basketball."

M2M is no better at defending against the 3 than is Zone the way we play it.

Closely guarding someone 25' from the basket is inviting them to blow past you, get into the defense and score or dish for an easy "2".

Ok, and that stat is amazing and I applaud or defense against 3pt shooting. You're not answering the question though, what about when it's obviously not working and in situations where it probably shouldn't be used, i.e. vs Clemson in the closing seconds.

Answer that for me with a logical response and I'll drop this.

 

[NineOneSeven]

What is there about this sentence you don't understand?

"Syracuse is holding opponents to just 29% from 3-point range, which ranks 11th in college basketball."

M2M is no better at defending against the 3 than is Zone the way we play it.

Closely guarding someone 25' from the basket is inviting them to blow past you, get into the defense and score or dish for an easy "2".[/QUOTE]

You mean like what virginia and st johns routinely did for long stretches?

 

[Townie72]

Ok, and that stat is amazing and I applaud or defense against 3pt shooting. You're not answering the question though, what about when it's obviously not working and in situations where it probably shouldn't be used, i.e. vs Clemson in the closing seconds.

Answer that for me with a logical response and I'll drop this.

Your whole argument is based upon an assumption that switching to M2M will somehow be better.

You understand that, right?

If not, then why would you recommend it?

Or this a "It couldn't hurt" reccommendation?

 

[SoBeCuse]

What is there about this sentence you don't understand?

"Syracuse is holding opponents to just 29% from 3-point range, which ranks 11th in college basketball."

M2M is no better at defending against the 3 than is Zone the way we play it.

Closely guarding someone 25' from the basket is inviting them to blow past you, get into the defense and score or dish for an easy "2".

This is all fine and dandy but frankly null and void in terms of our losses. We have been losing because of getting slaughtered inside and because our offense generally stinks and is limited...like too reliant on having to make jumpers/3s. Next year should be much different.

 

[tbonezone]

and your argument is that playing only zone defense exclusively is the best strategy. and how many ncaa championships has that strategy won ?

 

[Fly Rodder]

Closely guarding someone 25' from the basket is inviting them to blow past you, get into the defense and score or dish for an easy "2".

Which is perfect if the only thing you absolutely cannot allow is a three.

The zone "works" because it plays the numbers over the course of a season (and sometimes in a game) against college shooters, but when the other team is hitting their open looks consistently (which the zone gives them), than it's not the most effective defense. In small sample sizes it can be absolutely shredded and there's absolutely no good reason outside of dogmatic adherence not to switch defenses up. In the case where they absolutely need a three, I'd rather they didn't get a good look at all instead of a good look and a 29% chance of making it.

Edited to add: I don't think anyone is arguing that SU needs to switch from 100% zone to 90-100% man. But good gravy, there really are some times when man defense is the most effective strategy.

 

[two3zone]

Your whole argument is based upon an assumption that switching to M2M will somehow be better.

You understand that, right?

If not, then why would you recommend it?

Or this a "It couldn't hurt" reccommendation?

You're wrong. I never said to change up out main defense. I'm advocating to changing it up when we're getting smoked "not working" and when the situation calls for it "end of the game and the opponent needs a three". Stop spinning it and answer the question as to why that's a poor idea. You haven't come up with one logical reason onto why it's a bad idea.

 

[two3zone]

and your argument is that playing only zone defense exclusively is the best strategy. how many ncaa championships has that won ?

I'd say one, but our offensive talent on that team trumped our defense that year.

 

[Fly Rodder]

I'd say one, but our offensive talent on that team trumped our defense that year.

During the season. And Kansas absolutely needed a three at the end and got a wide open look. Absent an absolutely incredible play from Warrick, that game might have gone to OT and with McNeil/Warrick as the C.

 

[HOFCeluck]

During the season. And Kansas absolutely needed a three at the end and got a wide open look. Absent an absolutely incredible play from Warrick, that game might have gone to OT and with McNeil/Warrick as the C.

Collision and Langford (who was having a huge game) fouled out. I'd have liked our chances,