Who still hates the Zone?

[pearl31]

Everything is about PPG with the zonies, isn't it?

yeah, that, and winning games I suppose :noidea:

 

[SWC75]

In this game there were 44 offensive rebounds and 47 defensive rebounds, meaning that the teams were rebounding 48% of their own misses. That's a big reason why there were 2- exactly 2 fast break points. (I guess Gbinije's coast to coast runs weren't fast break points). If two good defensive teams are rebounding their own misses, you are going to have a slowly paced game.

 

[rrlbees]

so we might play better defense than notre Dame which isn't saying much of anything. ND historically is a weak defensive team. Everything is about PPG with the zonies, isn't it? Are you forgetting the part where games grind to a halt because teams slow waaay down in their halfcourt sets? Slower tempo, fewer possessions, fewer points to go around. Now that being said our defensive efficiency is climbing. That's trending in the right direction, especially because of the rebounding.

If you don't like ppg, you could use 3pt% defense.

 

[STEVEHOLT]

I can see the argument of mixing defenses, but there are some posters here who are completely anti zone that won't show their face tonight cause we won.

Dude, they lost four straight acc games..they lost to st johns...all playing exclusively zone. they beat duke tonight playing zone. and somehow this now means that zone is great. ?????

 

[SWC75]

There's a reason why we are #1 in the ACC for 3pt% defense at 22% in conference games and 29% for all games. The zone does more than just hope teams miss their 3's. In fact it doesn't hope at all. It's designed to make shooters take them maybe a foot deeper, shooters not getting to their comfort spot, defenders running out at them, etc. People always think we were lucky or hope the other team misses, but somehow we are usually one of the best teams at defending the 3. We must have a lot of luck.

Everyone need s good luck charm. The zone makes us "lucky".

 

[pearl31]

Dude, they lost four straight acc games..they lost to st johns...all playing exclusively zone. they beat duke tonight playing zone. and somehow this now means that zone is great. ?????

yah they totally woulda won all those games in m2m. totally.

 

[djcon57]

It wasnt his night. I didnt see him taking many bad shots. That being said, plumlee was unreal for them. Whats funny is reading comments from the duke board saying he got too many minutes. What?

Scrub centers going off vs us is the new scrub 3 pt shooters going off vs us.

Is what it is. Zone was ok tonight because we boarded great thanks to the Tylers.

FWIW, I'm not a zone hater but I hate when we have a wing Mal's size playing because it kills us on glass. And Tyler isnt big enough to play the C. But we're handcuffed with the team we have. They are doing the best they can, just wish we were able to switch it up when its not working.

 

[SWC75]

Dude, they lost four straight acc games..they lost to st johns...all playing exclusively zone. they beat duke tonight playing zone. and somehow this now means that zone is great. ?????

The zone is great when you play it great. (And if you aren't playing the zone great, you aren't going to play a great man to man either., as it involves even more activity and movement than the zone.)

JB explains it:

 

[FrancoPizza]

If you don't like ppg, you could use 3pt% defense.

I prefer points per possession ratings (efficiency) because it factors in rebounding which many try to evaluate independently. What good is 22% 3pt FG if you give up a layup on the offensive rebound?

We were 65th in defensive before the winning streak. Now someone says we're up to 37. That's a huge jump in large part because the rebounding has dramatically improved. It's very encouraging even if it's against undersized or undermanned front lines.

 

[STEVEHOLT]

yah they totally woulda won all those games in m2m. totally.

Point is completely missed by you. Nobody said they would have won all those games or even one of them playing man. Who said that? Try to actually comprehend what I am saying instead of pounding your agenda. If you havent got it by now, you wont, so im stopping.

 

[cuseattle]

I am just really happy with the win. LGO!

 

[br801]

Great win on paper, nonetheless.

No, that was a great win that actually happened.

And your entire post is incredibly awful on so many levels.

 

[br801]

so we might play better defense than notre Dame which isn't saying much of anything. ND historically is a weak defensive team.

Everything is about PPG with the zonies, isn't it? Are you forgetting the part where games grind to a halt because teams slow waaay down in their halfcourt sets? Slower tempo, fewer possessions, fewer points to go around.

Now that being said our defensive efficiency is climbing. That's trending in the right direction, especially because of the rebounding.

That game was hardly played at a slow tempo, particularly in the second half. SU put up 71 shots and Duke 62 for the game, an incredibly high total these days.

 

[Cusefan0307]

No offense, but the 2-3 zone didn't win the game for us. Tyler Roberson carried the team to victory. Barring his near-heroic rebounding effort on the offensive end, and his kick-outs for 2nd chance 3's, we aren't remotely in a position to win.

Great win on paper, nonetheless. However, we did everything give the game away at the end. Duke had an off-night, shooting-wise. Period. The Kennard kid dropped 30 pts last game and went 0-9 tonight w/ a goose-egg on wide-open look after wide-open look. Duke came in shooting over 39% from 3, and only shot 27%. The only thing that the zone played a factor in was giving Duke countless open looks from 3 the entire game. The zone didn't make Duke shoot any deep shots, nor induce strongly contested, tough 3's. The zone didn't force hardly any turnovers, nor create transition from it.

I'll say it again... Duke missed WIDE open looks, that they normally make in any other game... We caught a high-scoring offensive team on a bad night, and suddenly our fan base thinks the zone was a mystifying defense that Duke couldnt crack. But they had no inside presence coming into the game w/ Jefferson out! If Duke's open looks went in ala our St. John's or Clemson debacles, you guys would be singing a different tune. The truth is Duke shifted our zone outta position time and time again. If you watched the game, you can't refute that. If Duke had Jefferson back, or a normal shooting output from 3, we'd lose by 10-12 easily. Not to mention, our tremendous defensive effort to end the half which that nearly gave up another uncontested 3, that was luckily a hair after the buzzer.

Please take off the orange shades and call the game for what it was. Duke played like an average team. Tonight's zone wasn't reminisce of some past-NCAA tourney games where our zone could clearly be attributed to mystifying opponents (e.g. top seeded Indiana or OU) where the zone took them out of their rhythm. Duke lost the game on their own.

One last comment, Dajaun Coleman laid one of the biggest eggs of his life. A rotten egg. I have to believe his WF performance was an aberration... a performance unlikely to be seen the rest of the season. Does he have a clue how to go up for a shot, jump for a rebound, or grab the ball and not get it ripped away??? Can we please just start Lydon and bring in DC for fouls. It's disgusting how awful his performance was tonight.

Lol, you wouldn't of said that if we played man.

All I heard coming into this game was how we were going to have to score because Duke was soooo Great on offense, but I suppose our D had nothing to do with their 35 percent shooting. I saw a lot of long contested jumpers and an inability for Duke to go inside besides for Plumlee

Some of you are bigger negative nellies when we win than whe we lose.

 

[Cusefan0307]

I prefer points per possession ratings (efficiency) because it factors in rebounding which many try to evaluate independently. What good is 22% 3pt FG if you give up a layup on the offensive rebound?

We were 65th in defensive before the winning streak. Now someone says we're up to 37. That's a huge jump in large part because the rebounding has dramatically improved. It's very encouraging even if it's against undersized or undermanned front lines.

34th and yes, rebounding out of the zone. Who would of thought?

 

[Cusefan0307]

We are a Top 16 program we shouldn't have to win with a gimmick. The Zone in the current environment of college basketball makes the first team to 60 win. The pace of play makes it hard to watch. Until the game changes, I rather see the Zone go away.

Welcome to the board.

Didn't hurt us Saturday when we scored 83.

 

[Cusefan0307]

I don't get why people are sooo salty after this win. All I did was point out our defense has improved dramatically, but people have to continue the narrative that the zone stinks. False.

 

[jgeorge322]

Scrub centers going off vs us is the new scrub 3 pt shooters going off vs us.

Is what it is. Zone was ok tonight because we boarded great thanks to the Tylers.

FWIW, I'm not a zone hater but I hate when we have a wing Mal's size playing because it kills us on glass. And Tyler isnt big enough to play the C. But we're handcuffed with the team we have. They are doing the best they can, just wish we were able to switch it up when its not working.

Were definitely handcuffed. Id add that coleman isnt athletic enough to play the middle too. You need a great rim protector down there.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

No offense, but the 2-3 zone didn't win the game for us. Tyler Roberson carried the team to victory. Barring his near-heroic rebounding effort on the offensive end, and his kick-outs for 2nd chance 3's, we aren't remotely in a position to win.

Great win on paper, nonetheless. However, we did everything give the game away at the end. Duke had an off-night, shooting-wise. Period. The Kennard kid dropped 30 pts last game and went 0-9 tonight w/ a goose-egg on wide-open look after wide-open look. Duke came in shooting over 39% from 3, and only shot 27%. The only thing that the zone played a factor in was giving Duke countless open looks from 3 the entire game. The zone didn't make Duke shoot any deep shots, nor induce strongly contested, tough 3's. The zone didn't force hardly any turnovers, nor create transition from it.

I'll say it again... Duke missed WIDE open looks, that they normally make in any other game... We caught a high-scoring offensive team on a bad night, and suddenly our fan base thinks the zone was a mystifying defense that Duke couldnt crack. But they had no inside presence coming into the game w/ Jefferson out! If Duke's open looks went in ala our St. John's or Clemson debacles, you guys would be singing a different tune. The truth is Duke shifted our zone outta position time and time again. If you watched the game, you can't refute that. If Duke had Jefferson back, or a normal shooting output from 3, we'd lose by 10-12 easily. Not to mention, our tremendous defensive effort to end the half which that nearly gave up another uncontested 3, that was luckily a hair after the buzzer.

Please take off the orange shades and call the game for what it was. Duke played like an average team. Tonight's zone wasn't reminisce of some past-NCAA tourney games where our zone could clearly be attributed to mystifying opponents (e.g. top seeded Indiana or OU) where the zone took them out of their rhythm. Duke lost the game on their own.

One last comment, Dajaun Coleman laid one of the biggest eggs of his life. A rotten egg. I have to believe his WF performance was an aberration... a performance unlikely to be seen the rest of the season. Does he have a clue how to go up for a shot, jump for a rebound, or grab the ball and not get it ripped away??? Can we please just start Lydon and bring in DC for fouls. It's disgusting how awful his performance was tonight.

Who pissed in your cornflakes?

Lots of you guys are discounting the fact that even when wide open, the Dukies were slightly rushing their shots last night because our zone was so damned active. Just a hint of a rush and you are going to miss. The lefty Kennard was clearly bothered by it. I think everyone needs to understand this. And I'm one of the guys who is a proponent of JB employing a bit of M2M once in a while to switch things up.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Who here is a "zone hater?"

I would prefer the ability to mix up the defense when the zone isn't working (obviously a moot point last night).

 

[RF2044]

I don't get why people are sooo salty after this win. All I did was point out our defense has improved dramatically, but people have to continue the narrative that the zone stinks. False.

Because in their minds the narrative > the outcome.

It takes a special kind of negativity to feel the need to complain after winning on the road @ Duke. The benchmark for satisfaction shouldn't be perfection.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Because in their minds the narrative > the outcome.

It takes a special kind of negativity to feel the need to complain after winning on the road @ Duke. The benchmark for satisfaction shouldn't be perfection.

WHOSE MIND?

Who are these people that are so anti zone? Someone name some names.

And not Igor. He's a caricature.

 

[RF2044]

WHOSE MIND?

Who are these people that are so anti zone? Someone name some names.

And not Igor. He's a caricature.

There is a difference between those who would like a secondary defense situationally utilized and those who feel compelled to hammer the zone, win or lose. There is a difference between objectively assessing the team's flaws, and attacking players that you don't like or actively rooting for them to fail. There is a difference between enjoying a rare win on Duke's floor and feeling compelled to discount it as only being the result of this being the worst Duke team in 40 years.

It's TIRESOME. Howzabout enjoy the win against Duke for 5 minutes before diving back into the normal pattern of incessent griping.

And if you don't know which posters routinely do any or all of the above, I don't know what to tell you.

 

[OttoMets]

With a couple exceptions, it doesn't really matter what type of defense we play, as long as we play hard and smart. Since Boeheim's back, we're better at that part.

Last night we rotated very well, Cooney and Gbinije worked as hard and efficiently as they ever have, and Duke's coach felt he didn't have a player capable of working from the high post (or he simply thought that hoisting 30+ threes was a better strategy).

 

[HOFCeluck]

There is a difference between those who would like a secondary defense situationally utilized and those who feel compelled to hammer the zone, win or lose. There is a difference between objectively assessing the team's flaws, and attacking players that you don't like or actively rooting for them to fail. There is a difference between enjoying a rare win on Duke's floor and feeling compelled to discount it as only being the result of this being the worst Duke team in 40 years.

It's TIRESOME. Howzabout enjoy the win against Duke for 5 minutes before diving back into the normal pattern of incessent griping.

And if you don't know which posters routinely do any or all of the above, I don't know what to tell you.

I can't name a single person who is actively rooting for anyone to fail.

I've seen people say player x should go D2, or that they were a scholarship wasted, but that's not the same thing at all.

There might be like 2 posters who fit your description ...and they happen to come out when we're in a historically bad stretch. I say em.