Would "any" zone defense work today?

[SBU72]

I was reading the post about the 2012 bench vs today's starters and was wondering about the criticism of the zone. I can remember years when the zone shut down teams especially when the team got into the tourny. The length and athleticism dominating teams who were unfamiliar with the it. So the question is, would one of those teams fair today as well as they did then? Or has the b-ball player of today (ie 3 pt shooters) advanced to the point that the zone as the main defense no longer working. Or could one of past team defensively succeed today? Hopefully some of the forum's historians might be able to point out which ones. Obviously too, those teams were better on the offense too but you need defense to succeed.

 

[Brooky03]

Teams put 4 shooters on the floor back in 2012. Heck, they did it in 2010. Kenpom noted a statistically significant trend of the Syracuse zone causing teams to shoot poorly from deep back then. No m2m defensive scheme could match it year in and year out.

Basketball hasn’t changed that much, imo.

That said, flexibility would be nice. And we need prototypical Cuse players at every position. Long, athletic, etc. If we have a weak link, we pay. We have about 2.5, maybe 3, weak links on this roster.

The zone defense is m2m defense that switches everything, essentially. There are some notable m2m defenses out there that switch almost everything. They tend to look like zone a lot of the time.

 

[Orangezoo]

The game has changed. All the data speaks to it. You can't play zone as a sole defense anymore. Not admitting that is failing to look at the numbers.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Sure. The Miami Heat play a fair amount of zone.

 

[djcon57]

Sure. The Miami Heat play a fair amount of zone.

25%

 

[Brooky03]

This supposed monumental shift in 3 point shooting equates to three extra 3-point attempts per game and one more make. Those are the numbers

 

[Brooky03]

Sure. The Miami Heat play a fair amount of zone.

Impossible!!

 

[OttoinGrotto]

25%

25% of the time it works 100% of the time for the Heat of Miami.

 

[Orangezoo]

The game has changed. All the data speaks to it. You can't play zone as a sole defense anymore. Not admitting that is failing to look at the numbers.

They’ve stopped playing for him.

 

[djcon57]

The team we lost to that year, Ohio State averaged 15.3 attempted 3s a game (looks like they were around the 190-200 range that year give or take)

That would be 344th this year, almost dead last.

 

[Orangezoo]

The team we lost to that year, Ohio State averaged 15.3 attempted 3s a game (looks like they were around the 190-200 range that year give or take)

That would be 344th this year, almost dead last.

Every 3 pt metric over the past 20 years speaks to a massive change in the reliance of the 3 pt shot.

More are made, more are attempted, more teams rely on it as a large chunk of their offense and fewer teams play zone.

The below is a great read and this is a couple years old and speaks to why it's a declining defense. The game is changing and the 3pt shot ever growing in usage. The study below points to the obvious directional changes. You have to use it in a multiple defense scenario in today's game vs alone.

The only caveat added is that teams don't practice it as much but that is a weaker and weaker cover for what the obvious trends show.

Zonal Shift - Part 1 — Three-Man-Weave

Over the past seven years of college hoops, zone usage throughout the sport has been on a steady decline. For a sport that thrives on stylistic differences, why has the zone defense been fading from view?

www.google.com

Zonal Shift - Part 2

 

[Brooky03]

The hallmarks of our successful zone teams were players jumping passing lanes and forcing opponents into traps. I don’t remember the last time I saw us successfully trap. We don’t anticipate passes well at all.

 

[Orangezoo]

The hallmarks of our successful zone teams were players jumping passing lanes and forcing opponents into traps. I don’t remember the last time I saw us successfully trap. We don’t anticipate passes well at all.

The reduction in successful trapping is also part of more perimeter oriented play. We often generated turnovers from players attempting to cut to the basket to which we picked off the pass given the defense is all shaded to help on those cuts. Today players are patiently waiting on the cross court pass opening up which with more shooters can make you pay for trapping. Also the the new rules around being in the offensive players cylinder have further reduced the effectiveness of the trap.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I was reading the post about the 2012 bench vs today's starters and was wondering about the criticism of the zone. I can remember years when the zone shut down teams especially when the team got into the tourny. The length and athleticism dominating teams who were unfamiliar with the it. So the question is, would one of those teams fair today as well as they did then? Or has the b-ball player of today (ie 3 pt shooters) advanced to the point that the zone as the main defense no longer working. Or could one of past team defensively succeed today? Hopefully some of the forum's historians might be able to point out which ones. Obviously too, those teams were better on the offense too but you need defense to succeed.

3-1-3

 

[BludOrange]

The three point line being moved back and Steph Curry are what broke the zone.

It just creates too much open space and too much ground to cover. Can't pack the whole zone inside the arc like in the old days. As everyone is forced to extend further out to defend their area in the zone, passing lanes and open spots inside are created. Use to be able to rotate a defender in time, but now they are too far away to get there in time. The top of the zone use to almost be touching hands(when arms extended) that there was no entry pass to the FT line area between them. Now the guards are 10 feet apart most of the time, or if they are both closer to top of the key, they force the forwards to play way up and leave the corners and baseline wide open.

As for the Steph rule, kids didn't practice 30 footers for hours at a time, now they do thanks to him. If they did shoot deep, deep three's back in the day, it was usually out of desperation, now it's a strategy. In today's college game, almost anybody can hit a corner three, or a 30 footer from a spot that they have shot it from 1000 times in practice, mean the less...when left wide open.

Ok, I'll go back to the OT board now.

 

[Fly Rodder]

Every 3 pt metric over the past 20 years speaks to a massive change in the reliance of the 3 pt shot.

More are made, more are attempted, more teams rely on it as a large chunk of their offense and fewer teams play zone.

The below is a great read and this is a couple years old and speaks to why it's a declining defense. The game is changing and the 3pt shot ever growing in usage. The study below points to the obvious directional changes. You have to use it in a multiple defense scenario in today's game vs alone.

The only caveat added is that teams don't practice it as much but that is a weaker and weaker cover for what the obvious trends show.

Zonal Shift - Part 1 — Three-Man-Weave

Over the past seven years of college hoops, zone usage throughout the sport has been on a steady decline. For a sport that thrives on stylistic differences, why has the zone defense been fading from view?

www.google.com

Zonal Shift - Part 2

Holy hell, those are really well done articles.

 

[Orangezoo]

This supposed monumental shift in 3 point shooting equates to three extra 3-point attempts per game and one more make. Those are the numbers

That's not how statistical analysis works. You have to look at it in terms of 3pt percentage of total offense as well. There are multiple metrics you have to look at. Read the 3 man weave studies which do a nice job going beyond just 3pt shooting. What your analysis is doing trying to average it out and saying look no biggie it's one average make... well it's not just one more average make- its an increased reliance which is in every metric.

 

[Cusefannotindc]

A few years ago I was looking at shot location data, one thing that stood out was that SU was giving up less corner 3 shot attempts . The back line of the zone was effective at preventing teams from taking 3s in the most valuable spot.

My theory is that while the Warriors are probably to blame, its the ball movement and patience to find a good shot that is the reason the zone is weaker now rather than just better 3pt shooting overall. You could see the zone was vulnerable to this in the past, the zone rotations would break down with skip passes/quick ball movement to the other side of the court, teams just weren't built to exploit it.

 

[Orangezoo]

Holy hell, those are really well done articles.

Yeah it's my bad for not just dropping them a couple months ago around the zone arguments. That said, and I respect folks like Brooky standing up for the zone, a multiple defense where zone is used but 40-60 pct max is where basketball is today. You recruit for a 100 pct zone defense and you will be fielding a poor offense. Plus if folks are watching AAU ball - its fast breaks and 3pt shooting. That's the game today at the youth levels. Mid range to some extent as well. Overall though zone is ineffective more than effective without a pressure or switching component.

Now there is a Mizzou blog article talking about their effective use of the 1-3-1 zone and the creativity they've built from it. It's a good read, mind you it speaks to innovation not using a dinosaur. Our zone doesn't change enough and is scout well to go with all the other issues we have all pointed out.

Missouri Basketball: How zone defense acts as a vital tool for the Tigers

The Tigers repurposed the system to cordon off the paint, force contested jumpers, and take a necessary step in their defensive evolution.

www.google.com

For the zone lovers I'm sure they will get giddy on this article but it's talking about creativity not just using a 2-3 and saying come at me bro.

 

[Orangezoo]

A few years ago I was looking at shot location data, one thing that stood out was that SU was giving up less corner 3 shot attempts . The back line of the zone was effective at preventing teams from taking 3s in the most valuable spot.

My theory is that while the Warriors are probably to blame, its the ball movement and patience to find a good shot that is the reason the zone is weaker now rather than just better 3pt shooting overall. You could see the zone was vulnerable to this in the past, the zone rotations would break down with skip passes/quick ball movement to the other side of the court, teams just weren't built to exploit it.

Did you share that here? Be curious how likely on the money and relevant to today it is.

 

[Cusefannotindc]

Did you share that here? Be curious how likely on the money and relevant to today it is.

I posted a bunch of stuff about 3pt shooting in this thread, though not specifically that I don't think.

I was looking for updated shot location data a month or two ago, but wasn't having much luck, what i did find was giving it for less than half of the games.

 

[Brooky03]

That's not how statistical analysis works. You have to look at it in terms of 3pt percentage of total offense as well. There are multiple metrics you have to look at. Read the 3 man weave studies which do a nice job going beyond just 3pt shooting. What your analysis is doing trying to average it out and saying look no biggie it's one average make... well it's not just one more average make- its an increased reliance which is in every metric.

Increased reliance would work in our favor. Again, if we had the zone players we need, which we haven’t had. We want shooters shooting contested 3’s. Our good zones feasted on teams with a lot of good shooters because they wanted to shoot. Bad shooters won’t shoot contested shots.

 

[AZOrange]

Increased reliance would work in our favor. Again, if we had the zone players we need, which we haven’t had. We want shooters shooting contested 3’s. Our good zones feasted on teams with a lot of good shooters because they wanted to shoot. Bad shooters won’t shoot contested shots.

Our teams feasted not because we stopped 3 pointers. They feasted because we took everything else away. We no longer do that

 

[AZOrange]

This supposed monumental shift in 3 point shooting equates to three extra 3-point attempts per game and one more make. Those are the numbers

Sounds like JB with his rebounding stats…

 

[AZOrange]

The hallmarks of our successful zone teams were players jumping passing lanes and forcing opponents into traps. I don’t remember the last time I saw us successfully trap. We don’t anticipate passes well at all.

Haha yep exactly. And out of those traps came turnovers. I wonder what our turnover numbers look like year to year….