"we play no other defense"

[andyw715]

2-3 worked well for duke today. With the recent ( past 5-8 years) of lackluster shooting, a sorry trend for CBB, it's interesting more zone isn't played.

 

[MikeSU02]

The issue with playing just one defense, whatever it is, is that if we don't recruit for it and have the kids buy into it, it really limits what we can do.

I think that was most clear between the '09 - 10' team and the '08 - '09.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

2-3 worked well for duke today. With the recent ( past 5-8 years) of lackluster shooting, a sorry trend for CBB, it's interesting more zone isn't played.

Michigan State and Florida play man to man I think. Both got killed today.

 

[tbonezone]

the recruiting myth.
make no mistake that the kids we recruit (and the ones that get away) would all be playing excellent man defense elsewhere.

 

[NKR1978]

According to JB himself that's EXACTLY what we did.

Touché.

 

[NKR1978]

Michigan State and Florida play man to man I think. Both got killed today.

They should have played zone...or played better defense and shot better.

 

[tbonezone]

watch the games. i know michigan state plays both. haven't watched much florida but heres a video showing the 1-3-1.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

watch the games. i know michigan state plays both. haven't watched much florida but heres a video showing the 1-3-1.

Maybe they should stick to one defense then.

 

[tbonezone]

Maybe they should stick to one defense then.

donavan's 49 and has got 2 titles and a 725 winning %. you go tell him how to coach.

 

[SBU72]

wanna bet this weeks top twenty teams can play both ?

And SU has never been in the top playing zone exclusively? Or a team that plays "only: m2m? Is playing both a prerequisite?

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

donavan's 49 and has got 2 titles and a 725 winning %. you go tell him how to coach.

He did it with tons of NBA talent. He's got just got hammered at UGA today. He didn't forget how to coach, did he? I bet it has to do with all the talent he lost from last years team.

 

[tbonezone]

not necessarily a prerequisite but i'd say an advantage. no?

 

[HOFCeluck]

donavan's 49 and has got 2 titles and a 725 winning %. you go tell him how to coach.

Yeah but how many WINS does he have.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

not necessarily a prerequisite but i'd say an advantage. no?

Boeheim says no.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

Yeah but how many WINS does he have.

Not too many this year.

 

[tbonezone]

well about 500 in 20 years.

 

[longtimefan]

wanna bet this weeks top twenty teams can play both ?

You left out a very important word--"well".

How many of the top 25 can play both well? Not so many, if any; which is JB's rationale for defending the way he does. He'd rather play one defense very well, than multiple defenses not so well.

And, by the way, the Syracuse 2-3 zone has multiple iterations. It changes from game to game, and usually during a given game.

 

[tbonezone]

well to each his own. i drive stick . differrent gears for different terrains. 4th gear is great, just not for everywhere.

 

[longtimefan]

I don't think the zone is the reason we lost today.

But I do recall a fine man-to-man defense being employed in 2003 against Pittsburgh (or maybe ND?) to rally from 10 down to win that game.

Pitt. They carved up the zone more than ever that night in the Dome. I think we played man the whole second half.

We also played man vs WVa twice that year, but we were so much better athletically than they were, man was the way to go.
I believe JB's thinking has changed some since then, to the extent that he wouldn't go away from the zone now regardless of how dire the situation.

 

[dollarbill44]

And SU has never been in the top playing zone exclusively? Or a team that plays "only: m2m? Is playing both a prerequisite?

Which is why arguing for or against playing one defense based on success is silly. SU has done very well playing exclusively zone while other teams have been very successful playing different defensive combinations. Winning basketball depends on execution, plain and simple. Whether that is playing a stifling zone or man or full court press or whatever. Teams with talent and coaching are going to win a lot of games. This year's team is not very good because a of a combination of lack of talent and poor execution from the talent we do have.

 

[Brooky03]

JB says it in his post presser like it's a strength. even after this beatdown. i 'd say it's our weakness.

News flash, Clemson didn't win today because of their offense. They won because of our offense.

 

[CusefanATL]

I'm surprised we havne't heard the "no M2M team switches to zone if the other team is hot"

irrational.

If a guy is on fire... m2m teams can go to box and 1.

during an inbounds teams go 2-3

to mix things up teams press

to mix things up teams go to 2-3

to mix things up teams go to 1-3-1

to mix things up teams go to triangle and 2

to mix things up teams go to matchup zone

the 1 thing very few teams, if any do is sit in 1 defense... no matter what the opposition brings. That may be the new definition of insanity.

 

[CusefanATL]

News flash, Clemson didn't win today because of their offense. They won because of our offense.

or because of their offensive rebounds which also led to less points for us.

And their offensive rebounds are partially due to their offense.

7 offensive rebound led to 16 points in the FIRST HALF.

 

[Brooky03]

Clemson shot 45% from the field (average) and 40% from 3pt range (one made 3 pointer better than being average). Yeah, the zone was clearly the problem.

Their turnovers were low, which we certainly wouldn't have caused more of in m2m, and their offensive rebounds were high. You might have an argument about the offensive rebounds...Might... but that's pretty much it. Otherwise, the defense performed as well as you'd expect.

This thread is a joke

 

[Shrmdougluvr]

News flash, Clemson didn't win today because of their offense. They won because of our offense.

You don't think our offense struggles because Boeheim has been recruiting players specifically for the zone for the past 4-5 years? You don't think having a true point guard helps facilitate offense (instead of finding adequate big guards to run point)? And having a few wings who can actually shoot it and are more than just pogo sticks wouldnt be beneficial?

Everything revolves around the zone. This of course says nothing about how playing zone exclusively kills our once prominent fast break because teams always have a guard or two back, and defensive rebounding suffers do to positioning.

Every system loses effectiveness over time. Teams learn to play against it. It seems pretty clear to me that teams are fairly consistently attacking the zone better than they did a few years ago. Spreading the wings and and putting two big men on the blocks; flashing someone to the foul line; screening the top; etc. Even if they are in effective, they are shortening the game and reducing any advantage our better athletes/players provide.

To me, the zone screams complacency. Jump out of it for two or three sets a half and i think the team would benefit (more if something else is working).