What’s not being talked about why the zone doesn’t work

[CuseTG2003]

It's a myth to think that JB's zone is so complex that it takes "multiple seasons to master" or that it is more time consuming to coach. To be clear, I'm not saying that it doesn't take time to learn the rotations and for those rotations to become "instinctual." It does. But...

Just about any coach at any level would tell you that teaching a M2M team concept defense is more complex and time consuming than coaching a zone, even JB's version. I'm not talking about the basic M2M we all played at the Y. Unless you have done it, what you think you see on the court is very different from what the players need to know and execute, and how much time it takes to coach and practice all the players need to know to be really good at it. Things like stance and footwork fundamentals, strong and weak side positioning, how and when to provide help and what all the rotations will look like out of that help - which will vary depending on who is providing help (everyone is responsible) and where on the court it happens, a system for handling cutters, what to do with screens (strong side, weak side, on ball, down screens, back screens, staggered), pick and roll rotations, how to position on post players, how to defend shooters, close outs, when to double, on ball pressure and denial concepts (there are entire systems built around just this one thing - see Pitino), boxing out, defending out of bounds plays (sideline vs baseline), transition defense, and on and on.

Fair enough. This jives w/ JB’s KISS mentality, which clearly served him very well for most of his career. It’s just not working anymore, and it’s frustrating as hell to watch.

 

[RF2044]

Pass to the FT line.
pass recipient gets in triple threat position
Wing defender slumps down to help
Strong side guard drops to area vacated by wing
Area vacated by guard now open wider than the ocean

That’s all it is. That simple to beat. It’s child’s play

Agreed.

I'm the head coach of my daughter's middle school team. Last year, we lost a low scoring game to one opponent that played zone and confused our players a bit.

This year, we implemented a basic 1-3-1 offensive set, with multiple options for attacking [Steve outlines the basic "gaps" above]. We beat that same opponent by 20 last week, and took them apart. It was practically a layup line.

Point being, if the players understand how to attack a zone, all that you need is the same basic principles to carve it up, no matter where you attack it from -- top of the key, short corner, diagonally, baseline.

Same basic concepts run over and over again. And if all else fails on any given play, get the ball back outside, reset and run the same basic concepts again.

 

[kcsu]

The zone typically forces longer shots. In todays game most teams have multiple players that can shoot the 3

It's a myth to think that JB's zone is so complex that it takes "multiple seasons to master" or that it is more time consuming to coach. To be clear, I'm not saying that it doesn't take time to learn the rotations and for those rotations to become "instinctual." It does. But...

Just about any coach at any level would tell you that teaching a M2M team concept defense is more complex and time consuming than coaching a zone, even JB's version. I'm not talking about the basic M2M we all played at the Y. Unless you have done it, what you think you see on the court is very different from what the players need to know and execute, and how much time it takes to coach and practice all the players need to know to be really good at it. Things like stance and footwork fundamentals, strong and weak side positioning, how and when to provide help and what all the rotations will look like out of that help - which will vary depending on who is providing help (everyone is responsible) and where on the court it happens, a system for handling cutters, what to do with screens (strong side, weak side, on ball, down screens, back screens, staggered), pick and roll rotations, how to position on post players, how to defend shooters, close outs, when to double, on ball pressure and denial concepts (there are entire systems built around just this one thing - see Pitino), boxing out, defending out of bounds plays (sideline vs baseline), transition defense, and on and on.

great post. Lets not forget that all of these kids have played man their entire lives.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I'm not willing to say that zone can't work at the college level. The Miami Heat run zone pretty frequently, and it works at that level.

That said, they don't exclusively play zone.

 

[kcsu]

Agreed.

I'm the head coach of my daughter's middle school team. We lost a low scoring game to one opponent that played zone and confused our players a bit.

This year, we implemented a basic 1-3-1 offensive set, with multiple options for attacking. We beat that same opponent by 20 last week.

Point being, if you know how to attack a zone, all that you need is the same basic principles no matter where you attack it from -- top of the key, short corner, diagonally, baseline. Same basic concepts run over and over again. And if all else fails on any given play, reset and do it again.

I used to love playing against the zone. I hated playing against on ball pressure. against the zone you can relax it doesnt mean you will score but there is zero ball pressure. When you play against on ball half or even three Quarter court pressure it wears you down. I wish that Jim would apply pressure as a tool to speed up the game not a full time D. Mix it up and i bet we do much better. Also playing pressure makes you hustle. You have no choice. If you are lazy you get beat for all to see. I like the zone just not all the time

 

[007]

I'm not willing to say that zone can't work at the college level. The Miami Heat run zone pretty frequently, and it works at that level.

That said, they don't exclusively play zone.

JB has proven that his zone can be highly effective at this level, especially with elite athletes with length. The problem is the exclusivity part now that the game has evolved in terms of the number of shooters and their range.

 

[RF2044]

I used to love playing against the zone. I hated playing against on ball pressure. against the zone you can relax it doesnt mean you will score but there is zero ball pressure. When you play against on ball half or even three Quarter court pressure it wears you down. I wish that Jim would apply pressure as a tool to speed up the game not a full time D. Mix it up and i bet we do much better. Also playing pressure makes you hustle. You have no choice. If you are lazy you get beat for all to see. I like the zone just not all the time

That's what Pitino did so effectively at Louisville -- 1-3-1 press after made baskets, sometimes even just token on the ball pressure before falling back, just to make the lead guard expend a little extra energy bringing the ball up the court [to your point] -- otherwise, on a missed shot just hustle back and get into position in the 2-3.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with 2-3 zone being the base / primary defense. I don't even care if we play it ~90% of the time. But when you let teams get comfortable, they can tee off on it.

So mixing things up like Pitino did goes a long way toward keeping the opponent off-balance, and not letting them get into a comfortable groove.

Even if it is just changing things for a few possessions, force the opponent to adjust when they start to roll. Then, switch back and force them to adjust again. Keep them off-balance, don't just let them hit wide open shot after wide open shot with zero on ball pressure.

And it is important to note that no defense is impregnable. That shouldn't be the barometer. But defense is a weapon, and shouldn't be neglected because you have no [or limited] options to switch to when the wheels start to come off.

 

[kcsu]

That's what Pitino did so effectively at Louisville -- 1-3-1 press after made baskets, sometimes even just token on the ball pressure before falling back, just to make the lead guard expend a little extra energy bringing the ball up the court [to your point].

There's absolutely nothing wrong with 2-3 zone being the base / primary defense. But when you let teams get comfortable, they can tee off on it.

So mixing things up like Pitino did goes a long way toward keeping the opponent off-balance, and not letting them get into a comfortable groove.

Even if it is just changing things for a few possessions, force the opponent to adjust when they start to roll. Then, switch back and force them to adjust again. Keep them off-balance, don't just let them hit wide open shot after wide open shot with zero on ball pressure.

And it is important to note that no defense is impregnable. That shouldn't be the barometer. But defense is a weapon, and shouldn't be neglected because you have no [or limited] options to switch to when the wheels start to come off.

spot on. The thing i don't understand is that Jim gets this better than most. Is it just the fact that he is unbelievably stubborn or has he lost a step. Personally, i believe it is him digging in. It's a shame as this team might be making the dance if he mixed up Ds.

 

[OrlandoCuse]

JB is a stubborn old coach that has a philosophy of recruiting for his “system” finding long and lean players that are supposed to fit his beloved zone, yet he has consistently failed at the most important factor: finding players that are capable of playing defense.

 

[tbonezone]

JB has also loaded his teams with offensive shooters who really aren't good defenders.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

Watching Cuse stink up the VT court so I got thinking about the defenses troubles.. and to distract myself.

Everyone likes to talk about the zone being a bad defense for modern day basketball because of the emphasis on shooting, but I’d argue it’s because there’s rarely continuity between seasons. The zone really requires the players to work in unison and that takes time for players to figure out where they should be/what they should be doing in a given situation. This is all new to new players to SU’s program because everyone else plays M2M.

With college basketball how it is now, SU doesn’t seem capable of maintaining a steady roster of players that have been in the system for years that understand how to properly play the zone. I don’t think they’ll ever get to that point again with all the kids transferring and good players leaving early. Boeheim is just so entrenched in his system that he’s not going to change now even though it’s not working for modern college basketball. The results won’t get any better until change occurs.

It’s not good enough because the players, collectively, are not good enough and many seem, at times, disinterested.

 

[Scooch]

Fair enough. This jives w/ JB’s KISS mentality, which clearly served him very well for most of his career. It’s just not working anymore, and it’s frustrating as hell to watch.

KISS was great when we had elite talent. But we haven’t had that in several years, and we see what the results are.

 

[Scooch]

JB has proven that his zone can be highly effective at this level, especially with elite athletes with length. The problem is the exclusivity part now that the game has evolved in terms of the number of shooters and their range.

Every sport has become so incredibly complex over the past decade. The access to video from every angle, advanced analytics, etc. means that teams are remarkably prepared.

So much of sports is the gamesmanship of making your opponent devote time to prepare for a multitude of schemes, formations, etc.

SU is the polar opposite of that. We do what we do, which is ludicrously simple by all accounts. It’s gotta feel like a vacation for coaches and players to “prepare” for us.

Meanwhile, in game we put zero pressure on the opposition. We are the definition of passive and reactive at both ends of the floor.

Honestly it’s a credit to JB’s acumen that we’re a .500 program given all of this. But unless we start landing a bunch of top 50 players again, there ain’t much more upside.

 

[007]

Every sport has become so incredibly complex over the past decade. The access to video from every angle, advanced analytics, etc. means that teams are remarkably prepared.

So much of sports is the gamesmanship of making your opponent devote time to prepare for a multitude of schemes, formations, etc.

SU is the polar opposite of that. We do what we do, which is ludicrously simple by all accounts. It’s gotta feel like a vacation for coaches and players to “prepare” for us.

Meanwhile, in game we put zero pressure on the opposition. We are the definition of passive and reactive at both ends of the floor.

Honestly it’s a credit to JB’s acumen that we’re a .500 program given all of this. But unless we start landing a bunch of top 50 players again, there ain’t much more upside.

Lots of really good points here Scooch

 

[Scooch]

Lots of really good points here Scooch

I have my moments… for a Pitino-hating, Boeheim-apologist.

 

[kcsu]

I wonder if Hop not doing well is his use of the zone as well

 

[IthacaMatt]

Again, JB has never played the 1-3-1. He has played the guards in tandem alignment to try to make the high post entry more difficult. And that alignment looks like a 1-3-1 initially. But all the rotations after the entry pass are the same as JB's "regular" 2-3. The rotations in a traditional 1-3-1 are VERY different. And there is a reason why you almost never see a 1-3-1 at this level. It's too easy to carve up.

I agree with your observation that we pinch our guards together as a first step to defend the foul line entry pass in the 2-3, but that leaves the weakside wing shot open.

They did play the 1-3-1 intermittently the last year or two. They would move Buddy to guard the foul line, with Joe on top (not just pinching the foul line from the weakside - Joe was picking up the PG as they came across half court). Jimmy and Cole on the wings. It was very effective.

Some people called it a 1-1-3 at the time, but it wasn't. The forwards didn't play low along the baseline. The forwards played alongside the foul line on either side, with Jesse lower. That's a 1-3-1.

They don't really play the baseline in our 2-3, either. Our "2-3" is actually a 2-2-1 zone, with the center tasked with covering corner jumpers.

We used the 1-3-1 against teams like ND and Pitt last year, as I recall. There were other times, too, but it was mostly when teams were entering the ball at the foul line effectively, the adjustment is like stacking the guards instead of spreading them out.

You are even starting to see that adjustment this year, with Joe dragging down to the foul line when he's on the weak side in the last few games. Symir or Judah will hound the PG out by the 3 point line, and even a few feet above. That's different than our usual 2-3 with the guards pinching the foul line. If only 1 guard "pinches" from the weak side, and the other stays high, when the ball is above the key, it's a 1-3-1. When the ball moves to the wing, it looks more like a traditional 2-3.

If we played a true 2-3, the forwards wouldn't play so high, and you wouldn't ask the center to cover the corner jump shooter, as well as the post and the foul line.

That's been JB's innovation with the zone, to bring the forwards high to cut off passing angles, force turnovers and spring the fast break. But it asks too much of most centers, and it doesn't leave your forwards in great rebounding position.

 

[hoopsupstate]

I wonder if Hop not doing well is his use of the zone as well

He did go man when they fell behind.

 

[Brooky03]

It's a myth to think that JB's zone is so complex that it takes "multiple seasons to master" or that it is more time consuming to coach. To be clear, I'm not saying that it doesn't take time to learn the rotations and for those rotations to become "instinctual." It does. But...

Just about any coach at any level would tell you that teaching a M2M team concept defense is more complex and time consuming than coaching a zone, even JB's version. I'm not talking about the basic M2M we all played at the Y. Unless you have done it, what you think you see on the court is very different from what the players need to know and execute, and how much time it takes to coach and practice all the players need to know to be really good at it. Things like stance and footwork fundamentals, strong and weak side positioning, how and when to provide help and what all the rotations will look like out of that help - which will vary depending on who is providing help (everyone is responsible) and where on the court it happens, a system for handling cutters, what to do with screens (strong side, weak side, on ball, down screens, back screens, staggered), pick and roll rotations, how to position on post players, how to defend shooters, close outs, when to double, on ball pressure and denial concepts (there are entire systems built around just this one thing - see Pitino), boxing out, defending out of bounds plays (sideline vs baseline), transition defense, and on and on.

That’s a case for it being AS complex as m2m defense, not LESS complex.

All of those factors apply in the zone, too.

At its core, a zone defense is m2m defense where you switch constantly.

 

[Wrinkle]

Agreed that the biggest problem last night was the wings helping the 5 in the paint. The obvious adjustment was to the leave the 5 on his own, which obviously puts more pressure on him. But they were abusing that help for the most open jumpers we've ever seen.

In past years, the wings helping so aggressively in the paint had often resulted in us being extremely difficult to score on under the basket. But last night it just resulted in wide open 3s, again and again, with no defender in the same general vicinity.

 

[CardiacCuse]

it’s not effort, the kids try. When it’s painfully clear the other team has the passing skills to beat it, mentally we’re beaten.

All the effort in the world won’t enable us to guard 2 players at once on every possession.

for me a fundamental problem is: JB is using a multi-year model he developed over decades in a 1 year max environment

in 2023 and beyond...every year will be a new roster in this version of NCAABB

not adjusting is either stubbornness or incompetence or both. i think thats why a lot of name coaches are retiring now.

players cannot learn the zone in 1 summer...generally takes at least 2 years...makes it look like a talent issue more than it is, imo

and yeah if he could have 5 stars that stick around for 3-4 years again, his system would still work great...

but he's not going to get that again. ever.

one of his "adjustments" has been to get players who stay for 3 or 4 years...but now that means lesser ranked players who arent good enough to make the zone bite, as well. (if he could still get those recruits)

needs to either adjust and adapt his system to be more flexible or ...idk retire...or something...

I wish reporter could get him to honestly answer why he doesnt adapt and adjust his system to the current reality of the sport...i suppose he just thinks his model still works and wants to proove it does...

or


it cold be a number of other reasons

maybe just doesnt have the energy to come up with something new and enjoys the experience of being the coach

maybe an honest answer just wouldnt be "okay"...

i think JB still has a lot to offer as a coach but there are holes in what he is doing that he isnt addressing and Im curious why...

 

[wolfhound]

same thing all the time with the Zone haters.
Try looking at the make up of the teams roster.
Last year was a slow footed team would have given up 100 points a game in man to man, but man to man was the answer
This years team with skinny freshman would be bullied all over the floor in man. Joe would be exposed in man, and you cannot afford to lose his offense on this team (yes I know last night was a stinker but he has been very solid most of the year) The zone can mask some deficiencies that man to man cannot.

 

[FrancoPizza]

same thing all the time with the Zone haters.
Try looking at the make up of the teams roster.
Last year was a slow footed team would have given up 100 points a game in man to man, but man to man was the answer
This years team with skinny freshman would be bullied all over the floor in man. Joe would be exposed in man, and you cannot afford to lose his offense on this team (yes I know last night was a stinker but he has been very solid most of the year) The zone can mask some deficiencies that man to man cannot.

What the heck is the zone masking when we’re getting embarrassed by the same 2 or 3 passes for an open 3 every time down the court? Every single time.

You are really overthinking this.

 

[wolfhound]

What the heck is the zone masking when we’re getting embarrassed by the same 2 or 3 passes for an open 3 every time down the court? Every single time.

You are really overthinking this.

Not overthinking anything.
Va. Tech shot the lights out, SU was a step slow last night and paid the price last game in the first half. Va. Tech was on Syracuse was flat it happens in a season, unless you have a wide talent discrepancy you lose.
10 for 11 on the 3’s is an anomaly no matter what defense you play.
If they were that slow on rotations how bad do you think they would have been on man to man. 3 freshman and a still learning Williams are not the answer in a man to man defense. Jesse would last 15 minutes before having 4 fouls, because of the helping out he would be forced into, and that is a Jesse having a better game. With some more experience and a year for in a strength program I agree this team could play some man to man (with Joe either substituted out unless the other team has similar player he could stay with) but not last years team and not this years team.

 

[CardiacCuse]

I wonder if Hop not doing well is his use of the zone as well

If Hop was doing well...it would be good evidence for SU to keep with 100% zone