Some man-to-man next year? (I know I'm dreaming)

[HyattsCuse]

While watching the All-American game last weekend, I was absolutely giddy watching the Grant/Coleman/Noel frontline in action. I know it's just an all star game, but to me, it seemed like Coleman/Noel were absolutely dominating on the defensive end whether it was grabbing the rebound or blocking/altering a shot.

Assuming both guys are at 'Cuse and get big minutes, I have a hard time seeing Coleman on the wing of the zone given his size, but also worry about Noel having a Rak-like learning curve and may struggle playing the wing of the zone.

With the awful rebounding this year, would Boeheim possibly think about going man-to-man at least a little bit with those two down low? In a man-to-man setting, the 4 and 5 position or pretty much interchangeable and we could play matchups. With Coleman being a below the rim kind of player, it would make it easier for him to get a body on someone where he excels to grab the rebound. I also see Noel blocking a lot of shots with help defense.

I know I'm dreaming, but after watching Kidd-Gilchrist, Davis, and Jones play suffocating defense down low in the tournament and clean the glass, I think we could have the same thing with Noel, Coleman, and Rak/Dirty/Fair. Watching us try to rebound this year was frustrating.

The turnovers that the zone creates are great and all but as has been posted numerous times, that turnover ratio decreases with stiffer competition. The lack of rebounding is also more exposed. Seems like with the players we should have next year, we could be strong on the glass, but the zone makes that hard to do.

 

[BlackSquirrels]

With the awful rebounding this year, would Boeheim possibly think about going man-to-man at least a little bit with those two down low?

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say ... no.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

While watching the All-American game last weekend, I was absolutely giddy watching the Grant/Coleman/Noel frontline in action. I know it's just an all star game, but to me, it seemed like Coleman/Noel were absolutely dominating on the defensive end whether it was grabbing the rebound or blocking/altering a shot.

Assuming both guys are at 'Cuse and get big minutes, I have a hard time seeing Coleman on the wing of the zone given his size, but also worry about Noel having a Rak-like learning curve and may struggle playing the wing of the zone.

With the awful rebounding this year, would Boeheim possibly think about going man-to-man at least a little bit with those two down low? In a man-to-man setting, the 4 and 5 position or pretty much interchangeable and we could play matchups. With Coleman being a below the rim kind of player, it would make it easier for him to get a body on someone where he excels to grab the rebound. I also see Noel blocking a lot of shots with help defense.

I know I'm dreaming, but after watching Kidd-Gilchrist, Davis, and Jones play suffocating defense down low in the tournament and clean the glass, I think we could have the same thing with Noel, Coleman, and Rak/Dirty/Fair. Watching us try to rebound this year was frustrating.

The turnovers that the zone creates are great and all but as has been posted numerous times, that turnover ratio decreases with stiffer competition. The lack of rebounding is also more exposed. Seems like with the players we should have next year, we could be strong on the glass, but the zone makes that hard to do.

I think you will see a very extended zone, inviting the mid range pull up or the drive into our trees. DC will rebound because that's his nature

Sent from my Vortex using Tapatalk

 

[orangepassion]

If Boeheim's coaching, we're zoning

 

[SoBeCuse]

While watching the All-American game last weekend, I was absolutely giddy watching the Grant/Coleman/Noel frontline in action. I know it's just an all star game, but to me, it seemed like Coleman/Noel were absolutely dominating on the defensive end whether it was grabbing the rebound or blocking/altering a shot.

Assuming both guys are at 'Cuse and get big minutes, I have a hard time seeing Coleman on the wing of the zone given his size, but also worry about Noel having a Rak-like learning curve and may struggle playing the wing of the zone.

With the awful rebounding this year, would Boeheim possibly think about going man-to-man at least a little bit with those two down low? In a man-to-man setting, the 4 and 5 position or pretty much interchangeable and we could play matchups. With Coleman being a below the rim kind of player, it would make it easier for him to get a body on someone where he excels to grab the rebound. I also see Noel blocking a lot of shots with help defense.

I know I'm dreaming, but after watching Kidd-Gilchrist, Davis, and Jones play suffocating defense down low in the tournament and clean the glass, I think we could have the same thing with Noel, Coleman, and Rak/Dirty/Fair. Watching us try to rebound this year was frustrating.

The turnovers that the zone creates are great and all but as has been posted numerous times, that turnover ratio decreases with stiffer competition. The lack of rebounding is also more exposed. Seems like with the players we should have next year, we could be strong on the glass, but the zone makes that hard to do.

I would put big bucks on Kentucky rebounding well out of a zone. They just are way more active, aggressive, and ALERT than our bigs.

Part of the reason JB is a great coach is he plays to a team's strengths. I think he knew all along that the HC offense wasn't going to be great since our shooting wasn't very good thus trying to get into transition as much as possible. I suspect our guys also had trouble executing certain offensive sets/plays/concepts all year in practice. That's purely speculation but it could explain why the guards all the time were cheating to leak out for fast breaks when our bigs were getting crushed on the boards. With or without Noel I think it will improve since DC2 seems to have those instincts to go after the ball.

 

[Sgt Cuse]

I thought with Noel, SU could have its best zone ever!

You would have MCW and BT up top. The best two at the top ever. Sure Andy and BT/Scoop were good but I think these two can be better. MCW has the physical length that is just built for the zone, plus MCW has been to all the camps and has coaches as parents. He will know what to do. BT has been a high effort, intelligent guy and that will continue.
NN could give us that Fab like presence. An intimidator, shot blocker. CJ and JS would provide experienced forwards. And DC2, while having a little trouble on the wing could be the designated rebounder, in a Rick Jackson mode.

If you went man to man, small quick guards (which there are plenty of around) could probably take either MCW or BT. You take their length advantage and make it a liability due to the lack of quickness. Plus, foul wise the guards are a little thinner than the bigs. With man to man more foul pressure can be put on the guards, while in the zone the foul pressure is more focused on the bigs in the middle where SU would be deep.

Would you really want to play a mediocre man to man instead of the best SU zone D ever?

 

[KevMonstah]

Why isn't something like what Pitino plays at Louisville possible? A semi M2M for 15 seconds on the shot clock, then dropping back into a zone?

I'm not all that concerned with how the defense will be next year, but it bothers me to see a team with clearly inferior talent than Syracuse walk across halfcourt, look up and see whatever lineup is out there, and proceed to hold the ball for 30 seconds before looking for a shot because they don't want SU to get going. On days that SU is not scoring, that's how you end up with 51-50 games victories, or 58-53 losses, or, even worse, on days the opponent is hitting their prayers, SU falls WAY behind, like Cincy. The zone defense doesn't put any pressure on the opponent, while even a token M2M would at least make them have to think about controlling a dribble. And allowing the guards to swipe at the ball for that extra fifteen seconds has to lead to some steals somewhere.

Kev

 

[newmexicuse]

I thought with Noel, SU could have its best zone ever!

You would have MCW and BT up top. The best two at the top ever. Sure Andy and BT/Scoop were good but I think these two can be better. MCW has the physical length that is just built for the zone, plus MCW has been to all the camps and has coaches as parents. He will know what to do. BT has been a high effort, intelligent guy and that will continue.
NN could give us that Fab like presence. An intimidator, shot blocker. CJ and JS would provide experienced forwards. And DC2, while having a little trouble on the wing could be the designated rebounder, in a Rick Jackson mode.

If you went man to man, small quick guards (which there are plenty of around) could probably take either MCW or BT. You take their length advantage and make it a liability due to the lack of quickness. Plus, foul wise the guards are a little thinner than the bigs. With man to man more foul pressure can be put on the guards, while in the zone the foul pressure is more focused on the bigs in the middle where SU would be deep.

Would you really want to play a mediocre man to man instead of the best SU zone D ever?

Many good points in your post; however, why do you assume that if we legitimately played m-t-m that we would be mediocre. We have better, longer athletes than most of our opponents most years. The only reason our m-t-m appears to stink every season is because there is no commitment by the staff to make it work.

It is easier for Jimmy to throw it out there in a few early season gimme games & say we are crummy at it & then use that as an excuse to never try it at times when we might really need it.

 

[PoppyHart]

It's seems like such a waste to waste superstar talent on the zone.

Anthony Davis singlehandedly dominated games with his defense and rebounding. In a zone, he (or anyone) is a much less effective rebounder obviously. And by playing m-2-m, UK could be aggressive, take away the 3, and funnel teams into the paint. In the zone, we are encouraging 3's, thereby removing the opposing team's fear of penetrating.

With NN, if he's an AD-type and we get him, we should milk his abilities to the fullest, which I believe would be via m-2-m.

 

[pfister1]

While watching the All-American game last weekend, I was absolutely giddy watching the Grant/Coleman/Noel frontline in action. I know it's just an all star game, but to me, it seemed like Coleman/Noel were absolutely dominating on the defensive end whether it was grabbing the rebound or blocking/altering a shot.

Assuming both guys are at 'Cuse and get big minutes, I have a hard time seeing Coleman on the wing of the zone given his size, but also worry about Noel having a Rak-like learning curve and may struggle playing the wing of the zone.

With the awful rebounding this year, would Boeheim possibly think about going man-to-man at least a little bit with those two down low? In a man-to-man setting, the 4 and 5 position or pretty much interchangeable and we could play matchups. With Coleman being a below the rim kind of player, it would make it easier for him to get a body on someone where he excels to grab the rebound. I also see Noel blocking a lot of shots with help defense.

I know I'm dreaming, but after watching Kidd-Gilchrist, Davis, and Jones play suffocating defense down low in the tournament and clean the glass, I think we could have the same thing with Noel, Coleman, and Rak/Dirty/Fair. Watching us try to rebound this year was frustrating.

The turnovers that the zone creates are great and all but as has been posted numerous times, that turnover ratio decreases with stiffer competition. The lack of rebounding is also more exposed. Seems like with the players we should have next year, we could be strong on the glass, but the zone makes that hard to do.

I don't care what you saw in an All Star game, these kids are really just not capable of playing good man to man defense (unless of course they choose to go somewhere else).

We don't play man to man because its not JB's preferred defense, has little to do with the personnel...except to the extent that JB has convinced himself that he has recruited personnel to play the zone more effectively ie. taller guards.

I've always felt this is one of JB's personality flaws coming through. Instead of just being confident in his decision to employ the strategy of playing zone defense he often responds to the criticism that he doesn't play man to man, by trying to blame it on the personnel. In my view it's really not the personnel, the players could have gone to any other program in the country and played man defense...it's just his chosen defensive style/strategy. If he truly wanted to play man to man and forced the players to play defense, they would play it fine.

 

[zeekay]

Have you seen our man-to-man? JB hasn't taught it well in 30 years and he's not gonna become an expert over night.

Bottom line is our coaching staff is good at teaching zone and bad at teaching man-to-man. So switching won't make us better even if the players are "more suited" for it.

Plus we did pretty well this season before we lost Fab.

 

[Madbiker]

Why do people think if SU played some m2m they would play it well? When we play m2m in the pre-season exhibition games is that good m2m? No. We would play a pick-up ball lousy m2m because JB doesn't teach m2m. It's not what his expertise is. We don't practice it. It's a complicated defense and takes precision and practice to play it well. SU just switching to m2m for few minutes in a game isn't going to produce good m2m defense. Yikes, I hate this stupid debate.

 

[Sgt Cuse]

Many good points in your post; however, why do you assume that if we legitimately played m-t-m that we would be mediocre. We have better, longer athletes than most of our opponents most years. The only reason our m-t-m appears to stink every season is because there is no commitment by the staff to make it work.

It is easier for Jimmy to throw it out there in a few early season gimme games & say we are crummy at it & then use that as an excuse to never try it at times when we might really need it.

True, if there were a different coach with the same players the team would probably still be good.

It's just that the zone is clearly JBs choice of defense. I don't see that changing soon, and certainly not this season. Not with the potential to have his best zone ever. So while someone will call for this every year, this year in particular it seems silly.

I seem to be in the minority because I like the zone. I don't want him to switch out of it. I don't want him to employ man to man as a change up. I just want the zone.

 

[Fly Rodder]

Boeheim has said before that the zone was effective in bridging the talent gap between Syracuse and big name schools that got all the blue chippers. Well, guess what. Syracuse is getting the blue chippers now.

I'm not against the zone, I think it's a maddening defense for opponents. But sticking to it exclusively, especially when you've got the athletes to play man, seems stubborn. As posted upthread, Louisville had one of the best defenses in the country with less talent than Syracuse and they played a nice mix. When another team starts burying threes, all Syracuse can do is dig in and hope that the barrage ends. It'd be nice if the defense was flexible.

 

[zeekay]

It'd be nice if the defense was flexible.

It is flexible, we do have the press. It just we don't practice it much and don't use it unless we're down 10+ as a rule. It would be awesome for us to switch up defenses every other possession to start the game and then slowly playing more of the one that's giving the opponent the most trouble.

Never gonan happen though. Live and die by the zone SUball

 

[Garbs]

pretty sure they played zone in that game a bunch

 

[pfister1]

Why do people think if SU played some m2m they would play it well? When we play m2m in the pre-season exhibition games is that good m2m? No. We would play a pick-up ball lousy m2m because JB doesn't teach m2m. It's not what his expertise is. We don't practice it. It's a complicated defense and takes precision and practice to play it well. SU just switching to m2m for few minutes in a game isn't going to produce good m2m defense. Yikes, I hate this stupid debate.

So 99% of the coaches in college basketball can teach man defense well enough for their teams to execute it, but JB a HOF caliber coach can't understand man to man well enough to teach it...and has no one on his staff that is capable of doing so either. Hogwash.

He thinks playing zone defense is a better defensive strategy so he plays it. He is capable of teaching man to man ..... and has in some years (granted its been a long time), he just doesn't invest the effort or time in doing it because he believes that zone defense is the better strategy.

 

[SoBeCuse]

It's seems like such a waste to waste superstar talent on the zone.

Anthony Davis singlehandedly dominated games with his defense and rebounding. In a zone, he (or anyone) is a much less effective rebounder obviously. And by playing m-2-m, UK could be aggressive, take away the 3, and funnel teams into the paint. In the zone, we are encouraging 3's, thereby removing the opposing team's fear of penetrating.

With NN, if he's an AD-type and we get him, we should milk his abilities to the fullest, which I believe would be via m-2-m.

I agree mostly. What about Ricky? He was a very good rebounder. I really think it just boils down to desire, effort, hands, etc. Davis would've been a double-digit rebounder here in a zone, imo.

 

[Charlie]

I must have watched a different game because it appeared to me that DC was playing horrible defense... Not that I am all that worried since it was an all-star game. I did think he rebounded pretty well though

 

[General20]

There is really no difference between playing a good man D and playing a good zone D. The end result of both is forcing low percentage shots. Switching between zone and man-to-man is the only bad idea. To win in college you have to pick one defense and master it. There is just not enough practice time to master several defenses.

That said, SU will be playing zone exclusively, and they will do it well and force a lot of low percentage shots.

That said, SU's zone can morph to fit its strength's or its opponents weaknesses.

This year with Fab in the middle Syracuse's "2-3" was played a lot more like a 3-2 and sometimes even a 4-1.

What I think you will see with two very good big men in the game at all times is Syracuse's zone looking a lot more like a 3-2 with three guys covering the perimeter and two guys handling the paint and rebounding duties than the typical 2-3 formation.

 

[igor]

While watching the All-American game last weekend, I was absolutely giddy watching the Grant/Coleman/Noel frontline in action. I know it's just an all star game, but to me, it seemed like Coleman/Noel were absolutely dominating on the defensive end whether it was grabbing the rebound or blocking/altering a shot.

Assuming both guys are at 'Cuse and get big minutes, I have a hard time seeing Coleman on the wing of the zone given his size, but also worry about Noel having a Rak-like learning curve and may struggle playing the wing of the zone.

With the awful rebounding this year, would Boeheim possibly think about going man-to-man at least a little bit with those two down low? In a man-to-man setting, the 4 and 5 position or pretty much interchangeable and we could play matchups. With Coleman being a below the rim kind of player, it would make it easier for him to get a body on someone where he excels to grab the rebound. I also see Noel blocking a lot of shots with help defense.

I know I'm dreaming, but after watching Kidd-Gilchrist, Davis, and Jones play suffocating defense down low in the tournament and clean the glass, I think we could have the same thing with Noel, Coleman, and Rak/Dirty/Fair. Watching us try to rebound this year was frustrating.

The turnovers that the zone creates are great and all but as has been posted numerous times, that turnover ratio decreases with stiffer competition. The lack of rebounding is also more exposed. Seems like with the players we should have next year, we could be strong on the glass, but the zone makes that hard to do.

no boeheim has no clue how to ploay man.; lemoynw c0ou;d beat him