People calling for m2m is comical

[rrlbees]

Yes, but in a traditional 2-3, the wing players do not defend the 3 point line like we do at the start of the set, even if the offense starts out in a 4 out offensive set.

If Mali and trob are starting out that high then the other teams forwards must be in the high area.

 

[rrlbees]

You got me thinking so I'm taking this on a tangent. Why does it seem like our trapping is so awful this year as well? Are our defenders not strong enough to prevent the offensive guy from splitting the trap. We have some decent length but I can't remember the last time we got a decent trap in the corner resulting in a turnover or forcing the other team to take a timeout. Or is it because we are too spread out? Curious what others think on this one.

I don't think we've actually tried to trap as much this year. We just don't do a good job of it with this roster. Not sure if it's lack of quickness or lack of understanding the concepts.

 

[Brooky03]

Yeah. Really showed there in that situation.

ha nice. If the players did what they were supposed to, the zone would have been fine. Kenpom actually dedicated an article to the Syracuse zone's ability to hurt opposing teams' 3pt percentages.

So you're clearly not trying to argue that the zone results in a lot of open 3's. That would be a poor argument.

 

[RF2044]

I don't think we've actually tried to trap as much this year. We just don't do a good job of it with this roster. Not sure if it's lack of quickness or lack of understanding the concepts.

The latter, I'd say.

I'm a Roberson fan, but he seems to be out of place a lot in terms of covering his area. Richardson is a frosh, so I am willing to cut him a bit of slack. Lydon is trying to learn two positions, and the wing is much different than what we ask our pivot to do defensively, so he isn't doing either particularly well [although he's a much better shot blocker than Coleman].

 

[FrancoPizza]

I'm not saying it solves anything. I'm saying having that weapon in your arsenal is a good thing to have in desperate situations. People spend so much time prepping for our zone it would be great to surprise them once in a while with a new look that would throw them out of rhythm. That's all.

It's a big reason m2m was so effective in 2003. I don't think it was comparable to izzo-m2m but it had shock value... especially when it was deployed later in the game.

 

[Townie72]

Just because coach will not do it doesn't mean we can't discuss possible benefits of greater flexibility. What's comical are the folks who just blindly repeat JBs mantra, can't think for themselves, and diss alternatives that have never been given a fair chance to succeed.

Having said that I think zone was a smart move vs unc... but the 4-1 crap against big and talented front lines has to stop.

Just because some of us think that JB is right on the Zone doesn't mean we are not thinking for ourselves. We have heard, ad nauseum, all side of the argument and have decided that Boeheim is right (and the M2M fans are wrong). Or at least that it's a silly argument because JB ain't changing.

I have yet to see anyone --- even to self-identified "Thinkers --- argue point by point against the strengths of the Zone JB lists in his book.

 

[FrancoPizza]

If Mali and trob are starting out that high then the other teams forwards must be in the high area.

Watch carefully next game. The wings are coming high and they just sort of hang out there. It often creates a 2-on-1 on the ball for no reason. I understand why they need to hedge on the ball - they have to wait for the guard to slide over. The problem is that they are incredibly lazy about dropping back. Either lazy or they're bring coached differently.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Watch carefully next game. The wings are coming high and they just sort of hang out there. It often creates a 2-on-1 on the ball for no reason. I understand why they need to hedge on the ball - they have to wait for the guard to slide over. The problem is that they are incredibly lazy about dropping back. Either lazy or they're bring coached differently.

I keep wondering which of these two it is. It seems to happen too often to be considered a mental error.

 

[RF2044]

It's a big reason m2m was so effective in 2003. I don't think it was comparable to izzo-m2m but it had shock value... especially when it was deployed later in the game.

We didn't play m2m in 2003.

You just don't know the difference between a full court press--which we employed with an anchor shotblocker in McNeil--and man-to-man, which we did not.

 

[Townie72]

It's a big reason m2m was so effective in 2003. I don't think it was comparable to izzo-m2m but it had shock value... especially when it was deployed later in the game.

\Shock value?

Let's see. Just about every team plays M2M themselves. They practice against every week but one, just about. They play 30 games against M2M during the season.

And they are shocked and discombobulated when the Orange start playing it?

 

[AZOrange]

We didn't play m2m in 2003. You just don't know the difference between a full court press with an anchor shotblocker in McNeil--which we employed--and man-to-man, which we did not.

Oh good. Cuz I was scratching my head here thinking it was just me that didn't remember. Btw it was kind of funny seeing the 2-3 in the 1987 UNC game. The zone has always been!

 

[Scotch]

It's a big reason m2m was so effective in 2003. I don't think it was comparable to izzo-m2m but it had shock value... especially when it was deployed later in the game.

As RF said, we didn't play M2m in 2003.

And all the zone haters are failing to mention that we've been in the top 20 of KenPom's defensive efficiency ratings for the majority of the past decade. The zone works when we have the pieces.

The pieces are lacking this year, but they are lacking to execute M2M as well. This isn't a silver bullet that's going to save our season.

 

[FrancoPizza]

\Shock value?

Let's see. Just about every team plays M2M themselves. They practice against every week but one, just about. They play 30 games against M2M during the season.

And they are shocked and discombobulated when the Orange start playing it?

Rewatch the 03 Pitt and ND games. You are missing the forest for the trees. Teams can get into a great rhythm playing against the zone... and that's what they've prepared for. If we played teams straight up m2m it would probably become ineffective. Why? All of a sudden you're getting tendencies and weaknesses on film to study. M2m is more complex than you realize and must be adapted to the opponent.

 

[HOFCeluck]

We didn't play m2m in 2003.

You just don't know the difference between a full court press--which we employed with an anchor shotblocker in McNeil--and man-to-man, which we did not.

We played MTM, that I can remember, for one half against Pitt in Feb 2003.

So I guess he's right...kinda.

 

[FrancoPizza]

As RF said, we didn't play M2m in 2003..

Alrighty then - Rewatch the 2nd half of the Pitt and ND games at the dome. I'm also thinking they did drop back into some m2m vs okla at in the tourney but can't verify. Tell me which of us has dementia.

 

[OrangeDW]

We played MTM, that I can remember, for one half against Pitt in Feb 2003.

So I guess he's right...kinda.

Definitely went man for the entire 2nd half in that Pitt win. We went man against ND for awhile too, in the 2nd half.

 

[AZOrange]

Definitely went man for the entire 2nd half in that Pitt win. We went man against ND for awhile too, in the 2nd half.

man I was hammered at those games. Also why do people remember what defense we played in a game 13 years ago?

 

[Townie72]

As RF said, we didn't play M2m in 2003.

And all the zone haters are failing to mention that we've been in the top 20 of KenPom's defensive efficiency ratings for the majority of the past decade. The zone works when we have the pieces.

The pieces are lacking this year, but they are lacking to execute M2M as well. This isn't a silver bullet that's going to save our season.

M2M or some M2M is, IMO, the cry of the frustrated.

I think these are the same personality types that are hollering for the 2nd string QB after a couple three-and-out series.

I haven't bothered to do the statistical analysis on this, but I think we have held most teams below their season averages this year. Our defense has not been the problems. And we haven't gotten stops at the ends of games we needed. But we needed these stops because of the offense.

 

[FrancoPizza]

We played MTM, that I can remember, for one half against Pitt in Feb 2003.

So I guess he's right...kinda.

Kinda? Either we played it or we didn't.

Sad thing is how ANY so called fan could forget such obvious footnotes from those 2 great dome wins. They were easily 2 of the better games from the title season. Both were rousing comebacks that had the dome rocking like the 80s.

Shame. Shame. That's the equivalent of saying we beat wvu in 87 on a PAT.

 

[rrlbees]

It's a big reason m2m was so effective in 2003. I don't think it was comparable to izzo-m2m but it had shock value... especially when it was deployed later in the game.

You word it like m2m was a commonly used defense. We played it for a short time in one, two at most games during the regular season.

 

[RF2044]

Kinda? Either we played it or we didn't.

Sad thing is how ANY so called fan could forget such obvious footnotes from those 2 great dome wins. They were easily 2 of the better games from the title season. Both were rousing comebacks that had the dome rocking like the 80s.

Shame. Shame. That's the equivalent of saying we beat wvu in 87 on a PAT.

Oh please. You are talking about some one-off as if it were played consistently. It wasn't in 2003--that's the point. I'm sure we used man in some exhibition games to, but it doesn't mean we played it that year.

We also used m-2-m in a game in 2008 agianst Kansas in the second half. Worked out great that game, too. But we didn't play m-2-m as a base defense that season, either, outside of that outlier.

One more thing, John Wooden--we didn't exclusively go to zone in 2010, as you mistakenly try to attribute. We went exclusive zone in 1996. Playing an infinitesimally small handful of possessions of a different defense in the ensuing 20 years doesn't mean that we played man.

 

[FrancoPizza]

man I was hammered at those games. Also why do people remember what defense we played in a game 13 years ago?

Cuz switching out of the zone is kind of a big deal. And because it spurred us to 2 great comeback wins against top 10 opponents. But yeah why would anyone bother to remember that?

 

[FrancoPizza]

You word it like m2m was a commonly used defense. We played it for a short time in one, two at most games during the regular season.

It's no different than other posters claiming we never used it anymore. We're getting into a semantics debate.

Rarely using it is a bit different than not having it as an option under any circumstances. I think my point is that it was surprisingly effective because it was rarely used - but used nonetheless when all zone diplomacy had failed.

 

[OrangeDW]

man I was hammered at those games. Also why do people remember what defense we played in a game 13 years ago?

Because it was the reason why we won? Pitt absolutely shredded our zone in the first half and we locked them down in the 2nd half. Also, that's probably one of our most memorable regular season wins ever, and certainly the best game I was ever at so its very memorable for me.

 

[AZOrange]

Cuz switching out of the zone is kind of a big deal. And because it spurred us to 2 great comeback wins against top 10 opponents. But yeah why would anyone bother to remember that?

what bearing does it have on this team? We probably won a couple games in 1986 with it also. So what?