Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Zelda Zonk, post: 2015864, member: 966"]
Yes, I do think it matters. Or, it COULD matter. 
Maybe, if the conclusion is that this team isn't suited/constructed for good zone, maybe it's incidentally better constructed for man. And, if they don't know what they're doing in zone, or if, as the kids themselves said—'we aren't on a string as we need to be'— then they don't have the confidence or commitment to do it properly. And maybe more 'direct responsibility' is a way to get them to be fully invested in stopping ONE PERSON. Maybe Roberson and Lydon can do what they do best on defense—'help' shot-blocking. Maybe they would play better with switching m2m... Maybe m2m gets them out and running on the break. Maybe it forces JB to substitute more for rest than for punishment, and that gets their heads back into the game and out of feeling sorry for themselves or resenting The Hook.

Lots of maybes that play out of psychologies. We have players capable of doing certain things they aren't doing. I don't think they're physical limitations. If changes affect them mentally, some of that is as valuable as anything else.

The other thing m2m forces is a demand to know an individual opponent's skills and tendencies. Haven't we been told that JB doesn't watch much/any scout tape? That we adjust to hot shooters during the games? If you play man, don't you need to actually study the individuals? Maybe our players would benefit from more or a different type of preparation.

Are any of our contributors that familiar with how we prepare, practice, gameplan, and study to answer some of these questions?
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?