Our defense lost the game

[HRE Otto IV]

Um

We only scored 29 points in the first half. Between 7:08 in the 1st until the 11:59 mark of the 2nd half we scored a total of 16 points. That is a 15:09 stretch where we scored about 1 point per minute.

 

[Knicks411]

Like someone said earlier, it seems like our zone has to be perfectly constructed.

Next year we could have 6-6, 6-6, 6-8, 6-8, 7'2. If we can recruit that size, at those positions, every year...Sweet! Zone 24/7 but, can they score and can we recruit that size every year? If not, we're stuck with a coach who refuses to adapt and we try to fit square pegs into round holes all over the place.

We've been the definition of mediocre since joining the ACC. The ACC has smarter coaches, smarter players and better shooters. The Big East had better athletes. Maybe the zone, all day, everyday, isn't going to work in this conference.

I think I had a post eaten, maybe not, so I apologize for the dupe, but I was on the phone in the middle of it and I can't find it so...


We were really good our first year in the league. 14-4, second overall. Yes we fell off down the stretch but I don't think that can wipe away everything we did well prior to that.

I don't disagree with the main thrust that we are way too reliant on the zone, but the bottom line is we just haven't had good enough players the last 2 years period. Boeheim is the coach, he recruits the players, that's on him, so I'm not absolving him, and it would be nice to be a little less devoted to the zone, but we just need better players (and I think we're getting them)

 

[DoctorBombay]

Man to Man is no more effective against long range shooting than the SU zone.

Why switch to something that isn't more effective?

Other than to appease the frustrated amateur coaches on here.

Again, this is not about tossing out the zone to go to a M2M defense- it's about being flexible enough to not ALWAYS revert to " old faithful , even when it's not working.
In yestrday's game we PRESSED and made a comeback. It doesn't take a genius, amateur or otherwise, to recognize that when something is ineffective, it's ok to switch. It's really not that hard a concept.

 

[Chris02M]

we lost the game in last 4 mins of 1st half

 

[patcuse]

100%. We played about as well as we can play offensively. We rebounded with them. DC had his best game of the year IMO.

Some freak plays in the game though. Two or three times, Lydon deflected/blocked the ball and it landed right in Pitts hands for layups.

Some of that was just bad luck.

We had four blocked shots that ended up in the hands of Pitt for easy lay in. There was also a strip in the lane that went to Pitt for a layup. Then if that wasn't bad enough they had two air balls that were put back. 7 What baskets

 

[Townie72]

Again, this is not about tossing out the zone to go to a M2M defense- it's about being flexible enough to not ALWAYS revert to " old faithful , even when it's not working.
In yestrday's game we PRESSED and made a comeback. It doesn't take a genius, amateur or otherwise, to recognize that when something is ineffective, it's ok to switch. It's really not that hard a concept.

In Boehiem's book he talked about the Zone.

He said that there are only 5 or 6 things a team can do against it. So all they have to do is to prepare for those 5 or 6 things. It doesn't mean they can stop the other team every time, but as the statistics prove, the Zone is very good most of the time.

With M2M, Boeheim says, there are 18 or 20 things a team can do to attack it.

So to switch to M2M, a defense, you rarely use, opens you up to the entire playbook of the other team. And it's not like this is unfamiliar to the opponent, as it's the defense they play, practice against and see in 95% of their games.

So the suggestion is that we switch from our defense to one (M2M) that the opponent is absolutely prepared to face and with which we are relatively unfamiliar.

I think when people call for this occasional switch it's because they are both frustrated and because they don't understand the logic behind playing the Zone 100% of the time. Even though the JB gives the explanation, if the frustrated would take the time to read it and could understand it.

But there is among some this crazy belief that SU suddenly switching to a M2M would discombobulate the other team. That's ridiculous as it's the defense they are used to seeing and would prefer we played.

Some even appear to believe that M2M is better against accurate long-range outside shooting. An old theory from the Converse All Star days when teams were force out of Zone defenses by outside shooting.

There just isn't any advantage to an occasional switch to M2M and plenty of obvious downside. Other than to satisfy some frustrated fans.

 

[BostonOrange]

The biggest issue with the 2 point defense I think is really we just don't have any size. We've had some great 2 point defense in years where we've played the zone because of the size we have.

I would imagine 2 point defense has a strong correlation with team height, particularly along the back line, plus offensive rebounds allowed (which can frequently turn into easy buckets). We're always going to struggle with allowing offensive rebounds out of the zone, but when we have size, we usually do pretty well defending 2's.

Absolutely. You can't play the zone with 3 guards. Whenever we've played 3 guards we've had crappy zones. Things that lead to crappy zones:

1. A little guy on the wing
2. Little guards
3. No shotblockers.
4. Eric Devendorf

We had 1 and 3 this year.

 

[FrancoPizza]

This team has a collection of poor rebounders regardless of whether they're playing man or zone. They could play man-to-man all season and still get beaten on the boards for most of the year.

And you know this how, Nostradamus? It's absolutely unreal the fantasies they people will buy into if they're told it enough times.

 

[FrancoPizza]

"But our defense is what got us back into it!"

No, our press is what got us back into it. Our defense is the zone, and that is the biggest reason we lost the game, imo. Turnovers obviously hurt us badly down the stretch (shocking), but playing zone against Pittburgh is like playing soft prevent defense against Brady.

47% shooting, 10 threes, 31-30 rebounding. Still lost.

For the stat lovers that defend the zone: in 8 out of 10 ACC games that we lost, the opponent shot 48% or better in the 2nd half. That's atrocious.

Regardless, I'm not a fan of FG% because it completely ignores rebounding deficiencies. The general joe shmoe does not understand fundamental basketball principles when they say rebounding is not part of defense. If the opponent shoots 20% but still scores on every possession, that's not good defense. Same goes for points given up -- it completely ignores the pace of the game. We could hold a team to 50 points but if they scored on every possession, that's still bad defense.

 

[orangenirvana]

And you know this how, Nostradamus? It's absolutely unreal the fantasies they people will buy into if they're told it enough times.

By watching Syracuse basketball for the last 30 years. SU has had good rebounders, average rebounders, and bad rebounders. All played in the 2-3 zone.

Through your peerless logic, there would be no good rebounders at Syracuse during that span of time.

 

[FrancoPizza]

By watching Syracuse basketball for the last 30 years. SU has had good rebounders, average rebounders, and bad rebounders. All played in the 2-3 zone.

Through your peerless logic, there would be no good rebounders at Syracuse during that span of time.

Strawman. You said these guys can't play man, yet we've never seen any dedicated effort to test that theory. Are you suggesting that JB recruits athletes that are inherently incapable of learning m2m... or are you implying that JB himself is incapable of teaching good m2m? If Izzo had these guys over the summer, do you think they would still be inept at m2m?

 

[orangenirvana]

Strawman. You said these guys can't play man, yet we've never seen any dedicated effort to test that theory. Are you suggesting that JB recruits athletes that are inherently incapable of learning m2m... or are you implying that JB himself is incapable of teaching good m2m? If Izzo had these guys over the summer, do you think they would still be inept at m2m?

There's a reason Boeheim chooses to strictly run his 2-3 zone defense year in and year out. You'd have to ask him why that is - but in this discussion, the reason is irrelevant.

A Syracuse fan expecting SU to switch from zone to man-to-man defense in the middle of a game (or season) is similar to a Georgia Tech fan expecting Paul Johnson to switch to a pro-style passing offense.

Every coach has his system for his own reasons and it's not likely he's going to deviate from it. Certainly not in the middle of a game or season.

 

[Townie72]

There's a reason Boeheim chooses to strictly run his 2-3 zone defense year in and year out. You'd have to ask him why that is - but in this discussion, the reason is irrelevant.

A Syracuse fan expecting SU to switch from zone to man-to-man defense in the middle of a game (or season) is similar to a Georgia Tech fan expecting Paul Johnson to switch to a pro-style passing offense.

Every coach has his system for his own reasons and it's not likely he's going to deviate from it. Certainly not in the middle of a game or season.

This isn't about logic. This is about emotion.

They watch the other team scoring and they say, "OMG. We have to do something!"

And the "something" they come up with is M2M.

Forget that it's a bad idea. What they want is change for the sake of change. "Try something else" is the cry of the panicked.

Forget that we don't practice M2M. Forget that the other team see M2M in 98% of their games.

"Just think of the shock and surprise", the say. Some surprise. SU going to the defense they play themselves and see all through the season might cause them to think. But one time-out and 100% of the surprise in gone.

And because JB doesn't listen to this panicked call for change for change's sake, he's stubborn, inflexible, yadda, yadda, yadda.

 

[Ward]

This isn't about logic. This is about emotion.

They watch the other team scoring and they say, "OMG. We have to do something!"

And the "something" they come up with is M2M.

Forget that it's a bad idea. What they want is change for the sake of change. "Try something else" is the cry of the panicked.

Forget that we don't practice M2M. Forget that the other team see M2M in 98% of their games.

"Just think of the shock and surprise", the say. Some surprise. SU going to the defense they play themselves and see all through the season might cause them to think. But one time-out and 100% of the surprise in gone.

And because JB doesn't listen to this panicked call for change for change's sake, he's stubborn, inflexible, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Trying something new does not automatically equate to panic, it means making an adjustment based on your personnel or what the game situation calls for. Something that is a pretty basic duty for a coach, not saying JB doesn't do it but moreso just pointing out the absurdity of that point. The fact M2M hasn't been worked on in practice is part of the problem, not a plus to your argument. JB doesn't work on it because he refuses to play it - so it is redundant when you claim that it is a panic move to employ something you've never practiced.

You speak about M2M like if we ever decided to practice or play it it's a foregone conclusion we'll give up 100 and zones just throw teams into this absolute drunken circus on offense. Plenty of teams are successful playing M2M, teams have success playing zone, and plenty have success playing both. It's having options to put your team in the best position to win based on your personnel and how it matches up with your opponent. Coach K was strictly M2M for years and their defense was part of the Duke brand but he will move into a zone if the situation calls for it.

The zone is a great defense and has shown to be potent when we have the right pieces. It's not an emotional response to say we should try something new. It's just a belief that we shouldn't be handcuffed to a defensive strategy because JB effectively decided years ago how he's going to defend whoever our next opponent is regardless of the situation (personnel, matchups, game situations, etc).

 

[NineOneSeven]

Trying something new does not automatically equate to panic, it means making an adjustment based on your personnel or what the game situation calls for. Something that is a pretty basic duty for a coach, not saying JB doesn't do it but moreso just pointing out the absurdity of that point. The fact M2M hasn't been worked on in practice is part of the problem, not a plus to your argument. JB doesn't work on it because he refuses to play it - so it is redundant when you claim that it is a panic move to employ something you've never practiced.

You speak about M2M like it is this leaking sieve of a defense and only a clueless coach would play it and zones just throw teams into this absolute drunken circus on offense. Plenty of teams are successful playing M2M, teams have success playing zone, and plenty have success playing both. It's having options to put your team in the best position to win based on your personnel and how it matches up with your opponent. Coach K was strictly M2M for years and their defense was part of the Duke brand but he will move into a zone if the situation calls for it.

The zone is a great defense and has shown to be potent when we have the right pieces. It's not an emotional response to say we should try something new. It's just a belief that we shouldn't be handcuffed to a defensive strategy because JB effectively decided years ago how he's going to defend whoever our next opponent is regardless of the situation (personnel, matchups, game situations, etc).

Don't bother.

 

[orangefan13]

Our defense hasn't been good this year sliding in the backline dajuan, roberson and malachi have a ways to go in that reguard. That is 3 of our 4 backline players. On top of that we go a tall 6'9 as our tallest man in the backline.

On the offensive end we are missing a 2nd true sf to go with the tall lineup, Howard came on late in the year, and many times we were lacking 2nd 3rd and 4th options, a couple other times we not only had a 1st 2nd 3rd option but also three fourth options.

Inconsistany has been our achilles heel.

Pitt three times, 4.wisconsin 5.Gtown, 6.st Johns 7-8. North Carolina 9 clemson were more on the defense.
9-10 of our 13 losses on the defense, miami was on the offense, virginia we weren't going to win, North carolina the second time was also aruguably more on the defense as well but anyones game, and I missed the second fla state..

The press is a great thing , its like playing a entirely different team when you can run it, imo that being said we should run it for more minutes to be effective as multidimentionality and making others adjust gives teams obvious advantages and ends grinding basketball. However that could kill the presses effectiveness late in games doing so. This team was actually a very strong pressing team imo, it nearly won the gtwon st johns pitt game, and probably stole one or two wins. If we had a deepeer bench to press more(BJ,Ron), had diagne, or jb all year we probably win another 1-2 games and are easily in. The ncaa totally snubbed us on those three, meanwhile I wish them luck but a team named kansas has a one seed because a player got released to play. Anyone else find it funny how all these sanctions happened the minute we left the big east, as if they want the tide to change from syracuse ville to the virginia and ncstates. UNC is just a smokescreen. Kinda wish we would jump on the big 10 and ville would head out to the big 12 and say forget you acc, then they could enjoy the mediocrity of nc state, wake, gt, and virginia all they want.

 

[Townie72]

Trying something new does not automatically equate to panic, it means making an adjustment based on your personnel or what the game situation calls for. Something that is a pretty basic duty for a coach, not saying JB doesn't do it but moreso just pointing out the absurdity of that point. The fact M2M hasn't been worked on in practice is part of the problem, not a plus to your argument. JB doesn't work on it because he refuses to play it - so it is redundant when you claim that it is a panic move to employ something you've never practiced.

You speak about M2M like if we ever decided to practice or play it it's a foregone conclusion we'll give up 100 and zones just throw teams into this absolute drunken circus on offense. Plenty of teams are successful playing M2M, teams have success playing zone, and plenty have success playing both. It's having options to put your team in the best position to win based on your personnel and how it matches up with your opponent. Coach K was strictly M2M for years and their defense was part of the Duke brand but he will move into a zone if the situation calls for it.

The zone is a great defense and has shown to be potent when we have the right pieces. It's not an emotional response to say we should try something new. It's just a belief that we shouldn't be handcuffed to a defensive strategy because JB effectively decided years ago how he's going to defend whoever our next opponent is regardless of the situation (personnel, matchups, game situations, etc).

And he refuses to work on it in practice or use it in games, because he he believes that a Zone with M2M principles is superior. And he believes that staying with a single defensive strategy allows him to do more in every other area.

You are stuck on the "JB is stubborn" argument. Or that he can't see what you see.

Now I don't know what your credentials are. But I know what his are.

You want to see M2M occasionally because you are frustrated and emotional and it's the reason you are where you are and he is where he is.

Dop yourself a favor. Buy "Bleeding Orange" and read the book and get the entire explanation.

 

[orangefan13]

And he refuses to work on it in practice or use it in games, because he he believes that a Zone with M2M principles is superior. And he believes that staying with a single defensive strategy allows him to do more in every other area.

You are stuck on the "JB is stubborn" argument. Or that he can't see what you see.

Now I don't know what your credentials are. But I know what his are.

You want to see M2M occasionally because you are frustrated and emotional and it's the reason you are where you are and he is where he is.

Dop yourself a favor. Buy "Bleeding Orange" and read the book and get the entire explanation.

Not to dissagree but its like playing a entirely different team when you have a second defense to go. Its like bench scoring or a 6th man on the offensive end.

Teams play m2m the same way, they tweek it like they do the zone sagging off some players putting a extra rebouner in the paint, playing other shooters tight because they can't dribble. And they also switch to that aggressive physical m2m defense on the perimeter where they can ride our body while we drive the lane; and jump while still rubing up against us in midflight if we haven't seperate from them by the time we reach the mid-post. Its like having 2 different defenses, and playing 2 different teams. That's how Miami beat us, and thats why many top 16 teams have a advantage because they can just turn the pressure up and negate grinding baksetball, we never will be able to without changing something, but Cuse's zone is usually above average so it balences out. A good cuse zone is the equivilent of playing that extra aggressive m2m defense, but will still grind out for long periods. It usually brings the luxary to press for 5-7 minutes a game as well.

 

[two3zone]

And he refuses to work on it in practice or use it in games, because he he believes that a Zone with M2M principles is superior. And he believes that staying with a single defensive strategy allows him to do more in every other area.

You are stuck on the "JB is stubborn" argument. Or that he can't see what you see.

Now I don't know what your credentials are. But I know what his are.

You want to see M2M occasionally because you are frustrated and emotional and it's the reason you are where you are and he is where he is.

Dop yourself a favor. Buy "Bleeding Orange" and read the book and get the entire explanation.

What explanation is given when a team that has literally 1% to beat you beats you with the ONLY way they can which is bombing threes from 30 feet? Lucky or not you can't stop it and from the zone. Yes the zone is usually good at defending the 3, but not when the can drain them from far out. St. John's isn't beating us inside no matter what but we let them beat us by staying in the zone and giving them 30 footer after 30 footer. At what point do you try and stop their luck? We play man and face guard their shooters and they have no chance because that was the only possibly way they beat us.

 

[two3zone]

Townie, you defend JB and the zone based on the book. What does the book say about the putrid offense? If our offense is a master plan then we may want to go back to the drawing board and come up with a new one.

 

[Ward]

And he refuses to work on it in practice or use it in games, because he he believes that a Zone with M2M principles is superior. And he believes that staying with a single defensive strategy allows him to do more in every other area.

You are stuck on the "JB is stubborn" argument. Or that he can't see what you see.

Now I don't know what your credentials are. But I know what his are.

You want to see M2M occasionally because you are frustrated and emotional and it's the reason you are where you are and he is where he is.

Dop yourself a favor. Buy "Bleeding Orange" and read the book and get the entire explanation.

I know what he believes, that isn't the issue. My problem is it is difficult for me to follow your lead and think he is infallible when there are plenty of examples that contradict the line of thinking that playing one defense no matter what is the optimal approach.

Please, stop with the credential line. I'm begging you to be better than that. Do you know Coach K's credentials? Are his good enough for you? Because he game plans and has the temerity to not handcuff himself to one defensive plan regardless of what the current game situation, his personnel, match ups, etc are showing.

Also, I fundamentally do not understand this weird claim you keep making that anyone who thinks playing the zone exclusively has hindered us at times is "being emotional". It's just an odd stance to take. Again, you do know that the other 35-40+ years JB didn't win the national championship it was won by a team who played something other than a 2-3 zone exclusively, right? So it isn't this irrational thought that something else might work.

I have already done myself the favor of reading "Bleeding Orange" and I understand his explanation, but understanding what he is trying to say and blindly accepting it as fact are different things.

 

[NineOneSeven]

I know what he believes, that isn't the issue. My problem is it is difficult for me to follow your lead and think he is infallible when there are plenty of examples that contradict the line of thinking that playing one defense no matter what is the optimal approach.

Please, stop with the credential line. I'm begging you to be better than that. Do you know Coach K's credentials? Are his good enough for you? Because he game plans and has the temerity to not handcuff himself to one defensive plan regardless of what the current game situation, his personnel, match ups, etc are showing.

Also, I fundamentally do not understand this weird claim you keep making that anyone who thinks playing the zone exclusively has hindered us at times is "being emotional". It's just an odd stance to take. Again, you do know that the other 35-40+ years JB didn't win the national championship it was won by a team who played something other than a 2-3 zone exclusively, right? So it isn't this irrational thought that something else might work.

I have already done myself the favor of reading "Bleeding Orange" and I understand his explanation, but understanding what he is trying to say and blindly accepting it as fact are different things.

Seriously my man...don't bother

 

[CaptainJ]

Wow. Great post. Actually, dumbest post I've seen so far today.

Was I bitching about zone defense? Did I demand we play man defense? Did I say, over the course of the season, our defense is terrible? I can only assume by the dinosaur comment you are insinuating age (I'm 25). Just an absolute trash reply. Not surprising though.

It's also possible he either directed the dinosaur comment to the poster above him who had the dinosaur avatar, or that at least could have subconsciously influenced him to choose that word.

 

[pulaski74]

Wow. Great post. Actually, dumbest post I've seen so far today.

Was I bitching about zone defense? Did I demand we play man defense? Did I say, over the course of the season, our defense is terrible? I can only assume by the dinosaur comment you are insinuating age (I'm 25). Just an absolute trash reply. Not surprising though.

Didn't see anything refering to your age, so i'm assuming you don't read well for 25 yrs old.

 

[Townie72]

Townie, you defend JB and the zone based on the book. What does the book say about the putrid offense? If our offense is a master plan then we may want to go back to the drawing board and come up with a new one.

Here's a suggestion.

Instead of spending hours on here reading and posting. get the book and read it.

That way you might understand and I won't have to summarize all the JB's points on why he plqays the zone exclusively as well as why he plays it exclusively.

He makes a very clear and compelling case.

Your complaint against the offense is exactloy like the M2M'ers on here. It's all emotion. They say to themselves in frustration, "OMG the defense isn't working. The other team is scoring. We must need to cahnge. We must try something different.

And when they don't get something different, they go to their second strategy, whining about JB (He's stubborn, etc)

When Duke was getting beat the other night, did Mike K. switch to a zone. After all, the other team was scoring. The M2M must not be working.