Zone or Man to Man

[Cusefan10923]

This has absolutely nothing to do with the results of this season just so you all know.

Just curious as to what all your opinions are regarding the defense. If you were running the show would you play strictly the 2-3 zone we have been so successful with the past few years or would you mix in some man to man depending on the scenario and the matchup.

I personally love the zone we play and the last 5 seasons playing it exclusively and recruiting players for it has been great. However with these same players i would also be interested to see some man to man sometimes if the zone is getting beat. I also understand they spend so much time on the zone that taking time away from it could potentially weaken how effective it is.

Thoughts my fellow die hards?

 

[Townie72]

This has absolutely nothing to do with the results of this season just so you all know.

Just curious as to what all your opinions are regarding the defense. If you were running the show would you play strictly the 2-3 zone we have been so successful with the past few years or would you mix in some man to man depending on the scenario and the matchup.

I personally love the zone we play and the last 5 seasons playing it exclusively and recruiting players for it has been great. However with these same players i would also be interested to see some man to man sometimes if the zone is getting beat. I also understand they spend so much time on the zone that taking time away from it could potentially weaken how effective it is.

Thoughts my fellow die hards?

SU plays a Zone with Man-to-Man principles. It's not a typical zone.

So going to M2M isn't going to be as different from the current defense as you seem to be suggesting.

 

[CuseCPT]

If I were running the show I would not play anything exclusively. Being predictable is not a virtue.

 

[Cheriehoop]

Zone is fine, I'd like to see some pressure defenses used to shake teams up for a change of pace and hopefully create some quick fastbreak opportunities/make the opponent at the last use a time out.

 

[OrangeFoo]

My ideal D is what Louisville plays... full court pressure (not a press but what Louisville plays) which collapses into our UNLV style matchup zone. Play 5 minute shifts with two groups of 5. Yeah our offense would suck because no one would be able to get comfortable but our offense sucks anyways so if we're going to go all in on D lets go all in on D. But this would require bench development and dictating tempo something our HC will never do.

 

[orangefan13]

Better on the ball defenders up top, I think Gbinije and Patterson have potential there. We lacked that this year, but had it alot in recent years. We are one of the least physical teams defensively in the country on the perimeter. Although we have guards who are built for the physical nature of the game quite often.

Make teams force a longer pass from the perimeter sometimes and they will turn it over more, and force shots. And give them less time to try to get used to the zone early on, by making them worry about the pressure D up top at the same time. Guys like MCW's and Dion usually would pressure later in games, instead of taking the opportunity to smell blood early on. We haven't had 2 real good on the ball pressure defenders in the game at the same time in a long long time.


I still prefer to win games on the offensive end though, we will never build our team around pressure defenders who can't score first. That's not what JB's teams or the 2-3 is built for.

 

[Trueblue25]

I think zone has helped us, especially in March. I just don't think we should recruit exclusively to the zone. I think it causes the offense to struggle, could be wrong just an opinion.

 

[newmexicuse]

I think zone has helped us, especially in March. I just don't think we should recruit exclusively to the zone. I think it causes the offense to struggle, could be wrong just an opinion.

Helped us to lose in March.

 

[joct]

I'd like to know they have a little man-to-man in their bag...but for a different reason than others. I think that since they don't really practice it, when practicing offense, they aren't getting a good look. Their offense has been bad for 2 years now...supposedly with top PG play. I get that they didn't make shots in long stretches, but in those same stretches they rarely set anyone up for easy baskets in the half court, and many of those shots end up being forced at the end of the clock. They are going against good enough athletes in practice, but they aren't schooled in how most defenses will switch, double, pressure, etc. Plus, they aren't pressured not to make mistakes on man-to-man defense when scrimmaging...since they don't care about those mistakes in games. I think it has inadvertently hurt their offense, not just by a slower tempo in the games.

Could be way off on this...just another way to look at it.

 

[jekelish]

I'm a fan of mixing up your defenses now and then during a game, personally. Have a press or a 1-3-1 or a man defense in the arsenal to throw at the opponent to confuse them or just to keep them on their toes.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Triangle 2, 1-3-1 half court trap, 2-3, man to man, box and 1, full court 1-2-1-1 press.

ALL of it baby!

 

[hallcity]

Doesn't playing zone hurt Syracuse recruiting? They play mostly man to man in the NBA. Rightly or wrongly, recruits may fear that playing zone in college will make it harder for them to make it to the NBA.

 

[cuseincincy]

I'm a fan of mixing up your defenses now and then during a game, personally. Have a press or a 1-3-1 or a man defense in the arsenal to throw at the opponent to confuse them or just to keep them on their toes.

This is where I'm at. Play it all and play them hard.

 

[sandman525]

Generally speaking, I am a fan of the zone, but I think being able to change up the defense to match an opponent is a good thing from time to time. The poster game that comes to mind is the 2012 Sweet 16 game against Wisky. It was frustrating watching Wisconsin get open three after open three simply by moving the ball quickly around the perimeter, without doing anything special. I agree that most of the time the zone is a defensive weapon, but there are times where it seems to play into the hands of the opponent. It's in those moments where a little flexibility would be nice.

 

[Trueblue25]

I guess I'm a fan of offense.

 

[Cuse'91]

The secret is out, every program in the country plays some zone now, with so many bad shooting teams it's stupid not to. The days of not seeing a zone defense until matching up with Syracuse or Temple in the Tournament are gone. To basically tell your opponent that the only defense it will see is zone will not cut it anymore...
Next year we will have basically 10 equal players, play them 20 minutes per game and play a pressing, in your jersey D.

 

[Orangezoo]

i like having it as a weapon but using it exclusively I am not as big a fan of. It was one part weaker defense at the top of the key but the other issue with the zone this year was that it is clear that the ACC has teams who are better coached and do a better job with ball movement than we saw in the Big East. Teams passed it well against the zone and attacked it differently from possession to possession vs trying to isolate a weak spot. This took away the advantage of constantly adjusting the zone. I think that ACC competition may eventually dictate mixing things up a little more due to how well teams move the ball and how many shooters are in the league.