Its time to switch it up on D

[Cusefan0307]

Washington is on right now. It’s going to be interesting who finishes with more wins. It’s going to go down to the wire.

 

[SU94]

When teams like Maryland and Virginia go bananas against us from 3, we lose almost every time

We beat Maryland. Thanks for playing.

 

[Janner]

First I want to state that dont mind the zone (and since I'm engaging in this discussion I must also not mind beating a dead horse). But my biggest problem with Jimmy's philosophy is that its based on the premise that there is never a time in which you should play man to man. That and he is the only coach in college basketball that believes this. I disagree with this philosophy, and so does everyone else in his profession.

 

[hungrychuck]

First I want to state that dont mind the zone (and since I'm engaging in this discussion I must also not mind beating a dead horse). But my biggest problem with Jimmy's philosophy is that its based on the premise that there is never a time in which you should play man to man. That and he is the only coach in college basketball that believes this. I disagree with this philosophy, and so does everyone else in his profession.

Well, as to "never" they do stray from the zone when they bring out the trunk monkey, but that is always in extremis.

The long-proferred answer to your point is that because they do nothing else, they play zone more effectively than anyone else.

Sometimes that seems true, sometimes it doesn't.

 

[Dave85]

While we have a good defense this year, the fact remains that the 3 pointer can kill the zone. College ball is relying on the 3 pointer more than ever. When teams like Maryland and Virginia go bananas against us from 3, we lose almost every time. I would like us to keep the zone as the primary defense but switch it up with some man and the press. Teams know how to execute against the zone better than they did 10 years ago. Not to mention a bigger attraction to recruits who refuse to play only zone.

what say you?

Every year I have to post a link to...The Article:

Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim says he learned (slowly) to rely on the zone defense

 

[Janner]

Well, as to "never" they do stray from the zone when they bring out the trunk monkey, but that is always in extremis.

The long-proferred answer to your point is that because they do nothing else, they play zone more effectively than anyone else.

Sometimes that seems true, sometimes it doesn't.

Jimmy does stray away from the zone but I never said he didn't, I said he never plays man. And I don't disagree with any of your response, im sure that is the answer that is/would be given. Im not trying to come off as argumentative here because I know your stating the answer that would be given and not necessarily your opinion, but, just because zone is played at a high level does not mean you cant play man at a high level also (or at least in spurts). More importantly, the philosophical premise for that stance is that there is never a time where playing man-to-man is beneficial. That to me is an exceptionally close minded and very limiting view. And I think we have all seen times when the zone is not working as it should for whatever myriad of reasons. Finally, he is the only coach in basketball with this philosophy, that is and should be an enormous red flag imho.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

I'm all for a change. I say we go with a 3-2 instead. Or you can call it a 1-2-2 zone. Either way, extend the top guy out, have the wings contest threes, and the 2 bigs protect the paint and grab up all the rebounds.

Deal?

 

[AirForceOrange]

 

[TinyManInside]

Washington is on right now. It’s going to be interesting who finishes with more wins. It’s going to go down to the wire.

I would not be surprised Washington finishes with more wins, mainly because they play in a conference that doesn't have the depth that the ACC has.

UW has basically won EVERY game that it was competitive in for the first 38 minutes, and they have a very slim point differential. Not sure that can hold up for an entire season (Ennis SU season, for example - 25 games where we won every close one, then 9 games to finish out the season where we lost every close one). Having a kid like Nowell who can get a 10 foot floater against basically any defense sure helps in closing out games (that and not playing 3 of your guys 40 minutes a game for every single meaningful game the entire season).

A few games ago I was thinking that we were headed for a Boeheim/Hopkins NIT matchup, but I think there is an outside chance that UW makes the NCAAs. That Kansas win in Kansas City is going to look very good if they're on the bubble. But then again, they do have David Crisp, who is capable of torching any game at any time with a 3-18 fg/ 5+ turnover performance.

 

[OrangeDW]

Jimmy does stray away from the zone but I never said he didn't, I said he never plays man. And I don't disagree with any of your response, im sure that is the answer that is/would be given. Im not trying to come off as argumentative here because I know your stating the answer that would be given and not necessarily your opinion, but, just because zone is played at a high level does not mean you cant play man at a high level also (or at least in spurts). More importantly, the philosophical premise for that stance is that there is never a time where playing man-to-man is beneficial. That to me is an exceptionally close minded and very limiting view. And I think we have all seen times when the zone is not working as it should for whatever myriad of reasons. Finally, he is the only coach in basketball with this philosophy, that is and should be an enormous red flag imho.

We’re usually a good defensive team. That’s all that matters, in my opinion.. Scheme is irrelevant.

Some coaches make their adjustments by switching from man to zone, Boeheim makes his by adjusting how they’re playing the zone.

 

[Townie72]

First I want to state that dont mind the zone (and since I'm engaging in this discussion I must also not mind beating a dead horse). But my biggest problem with Jimmy's philosophy is that its based on the premise that there is never a time in which you should play man to man. That and he is the only coach in college basketball that believes this. I disagree with this philosophy, and so does everyone else in his profession.

Your statement, "Jimmy's philosophy is that its based on the premise that there is never a time in which you should play man to man" suggests to me that you do not understand why JB does what he does.

Can you list for us as many of the reasons he has for playing 100% zone as you can?

With this as a starting point, we can than look at what parts of the logic you disagree with.

For example, when he says that playing M2M simplifies practice and allows the limited time to be used for other things, do you agree or disagree?

 

[Janner]

Your statement, "Jimmy's philosophy is that its based on the premise that there is never a time in which you should play man to man" suggests to me that you do not understand why JB does what he does.

Can you list for us as many of the reasons he has for playing 100% zone as you can?

"No one else does it" doesn't prove anything.

I don't understand your question. JB doesn't play 100% zone on the defensive side of the ball. He presses. This was discussed earlier in the thread per the discussion with hungrychuck.

While "no one else does it" does not "prove" anything, it was never suppose to, nor did I say it did. Quite the opposite as I end my next post with the sentence regarding that topic with "in my humble opinion". What I am saying is that I disagree with the premise that if you play zone you can not play man-to-man well. Those two things are not mutually exclusive, in my opinion. I believe you can do both.

I think the best way to save us both a lot of time and posting lol is to ask one question. In your opinion, in all of your years of watch/playing/being involved in basketball, has there ever been a time under any circumstance, where you felt a man-to-man defense would be more succesful than a zone?

 

[Dave85]

I don't understand your question. JB doesn't play 100% zone on the defensive side of the ball. He presses. This was discussed earlier in the thread per the discussion with hungrychuck.

While "no one else does it" does not "prove" anything, it was never suppose to, nor did I say it did. Quite the opposite as I end my next post with the sentence regarding that topic with "in my humble opinion". What I am saying is that I disagree with the premise that if you play zone you can not play man-to-man well. Those two things are not mutually exclusive, in my opinion. I believe you can do both.

I think the best way to save us both a lot of time and posting lol is to ask one question. In your opinion, in all of your years of watch/playing/being involved in basketball, has there ever been a time under any circumstance, where you felt a man-to-man defense would be more succesful than a zone?

JB is a stubborn man. He's not going to change. He's always going to play 2-3 zone. He's always going to have a small rotation of players.

 

[Sherman20]

While we have a good defense this year, the fact remains that the 3 pointer can kill the zone. College ball is relying on the 3 pointer more than ever. When teams like Maryland and Virginia go bananas against us from 3, we lose almost every time. I would like us to keep the zone as the primary defense but switch it up with some man and the press. Teams know how to execute against the zone better than they did 10 years ago. Not to mention a bigger attraction to recruits who refuse to play only zone.

what say you?

The team is now ranked 14th in defensive efficiency, per KenPom. They can improve in some aspects but that’s damn good. Defense isn’t the issue. It’s the stagnant and predictable offense that’s killing us.

 

[RF2044]

We’re not switching to man . But perhaps we should modify the types of athletes we recruit so that we put an emphasis on skill rather than defensive zone potential ...at least for some of the positions

This.

 

[Janner]

JB is a stubborn man. He's not going to change. He's always going to play 2-3 zone. He's always going to have a small rotation of players.

I completely agree with every single word of that post, it's right on point

 

[Townie72]

I don't understand your question. JB doesn't play 100% zone on the defensive side of the ball. He presses. This was discussed earlier in the thread per the discussion with hungrychuck.

While "no one else does it" does not "prove" anything, it was never suppose to, nor did I say it did. Quite the opposite as I end my next post with the sentence regarding that topic with "in my humble opinion". What I am saying is that I disagree with the premise that if you play zone you can not play man-to-man well. Those two things are not mutually exclusive, in my opinion. I believe you can do both.

I think the best way to save us both a lot of time and posting lol is to ask one question. In your opinion, in all of your years of watch/playing/being involved in basketball, has there ever been a time under any circumstance, where you felt a man-to-man defense would be more succesful than a zone?

I'll be glad to engage you in this conversation. But first you are going to have to prove to me that you understand the complete logic behind JB's almost exclusive use of the Zone. (I actually don't agree the Press is a defensive scheme in the same vein as M2M or Zone.)

You can find this in JB's recent book or on the Internet in discussions and training sessions he has conducted.

It's not my contention that you can't play both well. It's JB's. The argument is between you (with your knowledge of basketball) and JB with his.

 

[Townie72]

I completely agree with every single word of that post, it's right on point

What's the difference between "stubborness" and "a commitment to a strategy based on some strategic principles". It's not that he won't change (and agree with you). It's that he doesn't agree with you.

 

[Townie72]

JB is a stubborn man. He's not going to change. He's always going to play 2-3 zone. He's always going to have a small rotation of players.

I just finished a book about Curtis LeMay and his command of US bombers in Europe in WWII.

The British air force was committed to night time bombing of major population centers. The US Air Force's strategy was daytime bombing of military and industrial targets.

Neither switched sides in this. It wasn't stubborness. Each believed they were correct.

JB wants to win. He has no interest in experimenting with something he doesn't believe in to satisfy the few critics in the fan base.

 

[tbonezone]

" It's not that he won't change (and agree with you). It's that he doesn't agree with you."

YEAH. and every other college coach in america. we must all be wrong. the earth is flat cuz JB believes it.

 

[Townie72]

" It's not that he won't change (and agree with you). It's that he doesn't agree with you."

YEAH. and every other college coach in america. we must all be wrong. the earth is flat cuz JB believes it.

No, the shape of the earth is a physical fact.

The superiority of one defense over another is a matter of opinion. The facts (statistics) demonstrate that SU is usually a pretty good defensive team.

Frustrated fans lash out, cry for changes, any change. It's what they do.

 

[tbonezone]

the facts do say how many teams play zone only and how many titles they have won . those are indeed facts .
opinion says you and JB may not always be the smartest people in the room. but i'll just stick to the facts.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

No, the shape of the earth is a physical fact.

The superiority of one defense over another is a matter of opinion. The facts (statistics) demonstrate that SU is usually a pretty good defensive team.

Frustrated fans lash out, cry for changes, any change. It's what they do.

I like stats as well. 40 years. 1 championship.

35th in defensive efficiency that year of the championship. Similar to other years, better than some, but what was different that year that resulted in a title? Hmmm...

NCAA Basketball Stats - NCAA BB Team Defensive Efficiency on TeamRankings.com

My bad, meant to include the link above.

 

[Townie72]

the facts do say how many teams play zone only and how many titles they have won . those are indeed facts .
opinion says you and JB may not always be the smartest people in the room. but i'll just stick to the facts.

Well if 98% of the teams play either all M2M or M2M and Zone, than it makes sense that the number of Titles would reflect this.

"Smartest people in the room", eh?

 

[Townie72]

I like stats as well. 40 years. 1 championship.

35th in defensive efficiency that year of the championship. Similar to other years, better than some, but what was different that year that resulted in a title? Hmmm...

So you are summarizing 40 years with the line "One Championship"?

It's hard to argue with that, but not for the reason you think.