Video Review - Duke at SU

[Fly Rodder]

if bell goes where you want him to go then its an easy dunk as flip goes to the basket.. Edwards is the one who is out of position

Maybe, but Bell got yanked not long after this, so I'll defer to JAB. Jesse has to guard the paint, both corners, and the baseline? Bell was in the paint long Jesse left to help Maliq, and if Bell drops in to guard the paint (itself a head scratcher as he has neither the size or attitude) who is supposed to be out on the wing guarding Whitehead? Jesse?

In any event, I'll give up an easy dunk over an easy three. 50% fewer points.

 

[UnderHisOwnPower]

First play of the game for Duke on offense. Off a rebound, they push down court. I have no idea what is happening here as either Maliq or Bell, I think it's Bell, are on the wrong side of the court. Joe has to guard two people and has a mostly impossible choice. Hindsight being 20/20, I think if he had tried to interrupt the passing lane, Bell and Brown could concievably defend the drive:
View attachment 225185

But, it was a wide open three for Duke with no one within 12 feet of Roach, who splashed it easily and we're off to the races as a harbinger of things to come.

The very next play resulted in two points for SU on shot by Jesse, assisted by Maliq at the FT line (Jesse wasn't doubled which Duke immediately changed). But the beginning of the play is why Joe with the ball drives me batty. He's too slow on passing decisions a lot of time. Here Duke is overloaded to the bench side and he has Judah as wide open as Judah ever will be, he even sees it, but instead does a little stutter step and ball fake and the opportunity is gone. That should be an easy two.
View attachment 225186

View attachment 225187

OK, after this one I'm done picking on Bell, mainly because he didn't play much the rest of the game. Like the rest of the team, he was awful. Here we have four SU players guarding two and half Duke players. Bell is in the paint for some reason hiding behind Jesse thinking that he's guarding Filipowski. Mitchell walks in unimpeded and hits an easy lay up.

View attachment 225188

It’s been said on here, last time I recall it was from kcsu, that JB employs the press if the deficit is greater than 12 at the 12 minute mark. Saturday was a good test of this, as after the initial SU burst to start the second half the lead continued to grow. Sure enough at the 12 minute mark down about 14, out comes the trunk monkey, which led to some easy baskets for Duke. JB has to see this right? He must know he’s as predictable as he is, and it stopped being about analytics a long time ago

 

[PhatOrange]

I think a lot of your assessments (or assumptions) in these stills are wrong.

Taylor for example is not looking at the bench. He’s seeing his man and the ball.

A couple of the Bell crashing the paint and ‘hiding behind Jesse’, that’s his assignment. The offensive player on the backside the furthest from the ball is the least likely to hurt you so you slough in and cover the hole. And if Bell is cheating towards the wing then Flipowski at the foul line has an easy lane for a layup.

 

[Fly Rodder]

I think a lot of your assessments (or assumptions) in these stills are wrong.

Taylor for example is not looking at the bench. He’s seeing his man and the ball.

A couple of the Bell crashing the paint and ‘hiding behind Jesse’, that’s his assignment. The offensive player on the backside the furthest from the ball is the least likely to hurt you so you slough in and cover the hole. And if Bell is cheating towards the wing then Flipowski at the foul line has an easy lane for a layup.

We can agree to disagree if you're suggesting that Syracuse, playing their defense the "right" way, gave up a 50% 3-pt shooting night to an average Duke team and lost on their home court by 22 points.

 

[Dmcnabbrules]

Excellent summary. Expanding the 3 point line was anticipated to help the zone, at first, because of the higher degree of difficulty of the shot being farther out.

But Steph Curry has changed the way people look at taking threes. Everybody seem fairly competent to make them.

On the Curry topic, it’s so true. I was at my sons 8th grade practice this weekend. My son is the center and hits over 35% of his threes. Kids 13yo easily shoot and make shots from 25 feet. Best shooter on his team takes and makes threes from the hash.
To me the next big thing on D will be switching matchup zones. More like lacrosse defense.

 

[MSOrange]

Excellent summary. Expanding the 3 point line was anticipated to help the zone, at first, because of the higher degree of difficulty of the shot being farther out.

But Steph Curry has changed the way people look at taking threes. Everybody seem fairly competent to make them.

Exactly. I read a post in another thread talking about the zone and this poster said the game hasn't changed. Granted I disagree with about everything this poster says, but he's watching a different game than I am if he doesn't think the game has changed as far as shooting 3's,

 

[721Comstock]

Exactly. I read a post in another thread talking about the zone and this poster said the game hasn't changed. Granted I disagree with about everything this poster says, but he's watching a different game than I am if he doesn't think the game has changed as far as shooting 3's,

For the longest time, most teams had a "designated 3pt shooter", either a starter, or a key reserve.
Then, over time, most teams had 2 or 3 guys who could hit 3's.

Now - every team has a ton of dudes, all the way down to the walk-ons, who can hit an open 3.
And do. Especially against us and our (now) soft zone.

And with the lack of length, skill, and athleticism we've had of late, we do nothing but give up open 3 after open 3.

"hoping they will miss" wiiiide open 3's is not a valid defensive strategy -
but it's pretty much what we do now.

 

[MSOrange]

For the longest time, most teams had a "designated 3pt shooter", either a starter, or a key reserve.
Then, over time, most teams had 2 or 3 guys who could hit 3's.

Now - every team has a ton of dudes, all the way down to the walk-ons, who can hit an open 3.
And do. Especially against us and our (now) soft zone.

And with the lack of length, skill, and athleticism we've had of late, we do nothing but give up open 3 after open 3.

"hoping they will miss" wiiiide open 3's is not a valid defensive strategy -
but it's pretty much what we do now.

Exactly. Just because the object of the game is still to get the ball through the hoop doesn't mean it hasn't changed.

 

[Fly Rodder]

For the longest time, most teams had a "designated 3pt shooter", either a starter, or a key reserve.
Then, over time, most teams had 2 or 3 guys who could hit 3's.

Now - every team has a ton of dudes, all the way down to the walk-ons, who can hit an open 3.
And do. Especially against us and our (now) soft zone.

And with the lack of length, skill, and athleticism we've had of late, we do nothing but give up open 3 after open 3.

"hoping they will miss" wiiiide open 3's is not a valid defensive strategy -
but it's pretty much what we do now.

I think, and I don't know how to refine the statistics to show it, but I don't think that the average league 3P% has changed much, but IMO, like you post, more players are capable of hitting threes, especially wide open ones and teams are taking more or at least good teams are taking more. It's way too much work for me to separate out the non-P5 teams for D1 averages. With 360+ teams there are an awful lot of irrelevant data points.

 

[007]

We can agree to disagree if you're suggesting that Syracuse, playing their defense the "right" way, gave up a 50% 3-pt shooting night to an average Duke team and lost on their home court by 22 points.

I really appreciate the amount of work you put into this, Fly. I can tell you from experience that many, but not all, of the rotations you pointed out as questionable, were technically correct. The players were rotating to cover the correct positions in most cases. They were sometimes late getting there or overextended.

Duke knows the expected rotations and consistently created overloads to free Roach up by having him as the only player on the weak side. All zones and most, if not all, man concepts will rotate help away from the man furthest from the ball. Roach was very good at sliding to spots as the ball was moving and the D was rotating. Textbook stuff.

What jumped out to me from your slides was not so much about SU rotating incorrectly, but how well Duke attacked the zone.

I think the other thing that people underestimate is how much ground our forwards are required to cover in JB's 2-3 - from well above the foul line and past the 3 point line on the strong side to the opposite side low blocks on ball reversals. They often have to match up against guards, forwards, and the 5 on the same possession.

The game, the number of shooters, and advanced scouting have evolved so much, and yet the zone stays the same.

 

[AZOrange]

No wonder Bell never rebounds

 

[Fly Rodder]

They were sometimes late getting there or overextended.

Appreciate your input. I am not a coach, I've never talked with JAB about the finer points of 2-3 zone defense. This is just what I'm looking at and why it wasn't working. This is the key thing to me. It doesn't take much, an extra few steps in any direction, and a player is out of position, even though they are in generally the correct spot. The difference between an open three and a contested three is one stride.

 

[007]

Appreciate your input. I am not a coach, I've never talked with JAB about the finer points of 2-3 zone defense. This is just what I'm looking at and why it wasn't working. This is the key thing to me. It doesn't take much, an extra few steps in any direction, and a player is out of position, even though they are in generally the correct spot. The difference between an open three and a contested three is one stride.

I've heard JB talk about his 2-3 at coaching clinics and I've been fortunate enough to know coaches who knew JB well enough to get into practices (back in the day) or talk with him. JB also has videos about running his 2-3.

I can tell you with certainty that it takes an elite athlete with quickness and length to make all the rotations that are required, especially at the forward position. The guards also have to be long and/or quick enough to be able to pressure the ball AND disrupt passing lanes, especially into the high post area. Teams have more shooters and are shooting from deeper on the court. This has significantly expanded the ground that the players need to cover. To get those types of players, JB has too often, IMO anyway, sacrificed offensive skill sets. Especially at PG and the 5.

The other part of the equation is court and game awareness. We have players (without naming names) who are long and fast enough to make the rotations. They know what to do/where to be. But they can't hesitate, it has to become "instinctual."

 

[upperdeck]

I really appreciate the amount of work you put into this, Fly. I can tell you from experience that many, but not all, of the rotations you pointed out as questionable, were technically correct. The players were rotating to cover the correct positions in most cases. They were sometimes late getting there or overextended.

Duke knows the expected rotations and consistently created overloads to free Roach up by having him as the only player on the weak side. All zones and most, if not all, man concepts will rotate help away from the man furthest from the ball. Roach was very good at sliding to spots as the ball was moving and the D was rotating. Textbook stuff.

What jumped out to me from your slides was not so much about SU rotating incorrectly, but how well Duke attacked the zone.

I think the other thing that people underestimate is how much ground our forwards are required to cover in JB's 2-3 - from well above the foul line and past the 3 point line on the strong side to the opposite side low blocks on ball reversals. They often have to match up against guards, forwards, and the 5 on the same possession.

The game, the number of shooters, and advanced scouting have evolved so much, and yet the zone stays the same.

The issue i see is just general lack of awareness of the next pass. One guy is late and the next guy tries to compensate and it just feeds on itself..

Good passing teams can beat a zone, but they can beat man as well. I mean you look at our press and realize we have the same issues. Slowness to be aware.

The game has evolved, guys shoot from longer out.. you can get 50% more pts by literally shooting from 1 inch further.. Just remove the 3pt shot, Guys are still gonna shoot it now because they can.

 

[OrangeFoo]

The real issue I see is that it's way too easy with a few passes or a successful drive to get to the zone into overload situations where one player has to guard multiple players in a ton of space. In 2003 a lot of teams didn't know how to play a zone offense (see Oklahoma) now just about every team we play knows how to "bust" the zone. It's easy to blame players and they do make mistakes, but they are also put into impossible situations. I'm exhausted by the zone vs man debate and I firmly believe that exclusive, 100% zone with no ability to switch has cost JB a wins and maybe an NCAA title or two, but it's impossible to go back in time to know with certainty.

Bigger concern to me is how bad the offense looks against like for like athletes, has looked this year and the past however many. It's all one v one with players who can not and should not being playing 1v1.

It's all just a big, ugly mess that gets completely exposed against teams who have superior athletes and/or run a disciplined system on offense or defense.

IT JUST NEEDS TO END

 

[007]

The issue i see is just general lack of awareness of the next pass. One guy is late and the next guy tries to compensate and it just feeds on itself..

Good passing teams can beat a zone, but they can beat man as well. I mean you look at our press and realize we have the same issues. Slowness to be aware.

The game has evolved, guys shoot from longer out.. you can get 50% more pts by literally shooting from 1 inch further.. Just remove the 3pt shot, Guys are still gonna shoot it now because they can.

Shooting 33.3% from 3 is about the same as shooting 50% from 2. You don't have to have "great" shooters to make 33.3% from 3. You just have to take a lot of 3s

 

[upperdeck]

Shooting 33.3% from 3 is about the same as shooting 50% from 2. You don't have to have "great" shooters to make 33.3% from 3. You just have to take a lot of 3s

yup.. I agree. which is why he reward or bad shooting has gone too far.

 

[ar inj]

Not the most current data but it confirms the number of three pointers taken and made have gone up

 

[ar inj]

And this season in ACC games only:

Made Team G No. Avg
1. Wake Forest 16 157 9.81
2. Pittsburgh 16 150 9.38
3. Notre Dame 16 148 9.25
4. NC State 17 134 7.88
5. Virginia Tech 16 124 7.75
6. Virginia 16 122 7.63
7. Georgia Tech 16 122 7.63
8. Miami (FL) 17 129 7.59
9. Duke 17 125 7.35
10. Louisville 17 125 7.35
11. Clemson 16 116 7.25
12. Florida St. 17 117 6.88
13. North Carolina 16 108 6.75
14. Syracuse 16 99 6.19
15. Boston College 17 104 6.12

 

[STEVEHOLT]

Appreciate your input. I am not a coach, I've never talked with JAB about the finer points of 2-3 zone defense. This is just what I'm looking at and why it wasn't working. This is the key thing to me. It doesn't take much, an extra few steps in any direction, and a player is out of position, even though they are in generally the correct spot. The difference between an open three and a contested three is one stride.

It doesn’t work cause it CANT work. These guys are just particularly bad at it.