zone | Syracusefan.com

zone

CorduroyG said:
it cant continue. the game has changed. maybe if jb would extend it and defend the 3, but hes too stubborn. theyll miss eventually right? oh well, "they made shots"

we need a change
Expand...
the game has passed this defense by.

there arent enough teams that are gonna miss enough 3s to thrive anymore.

baylor doing it should be the wakeup call. they arent good. but they got their season, career (mason) and tourney high in 3s in this game.

they did extend ...they were trying to ...but they cant rotate fast enough...maybe with faster players they could...but the mix has to be perfect..it wasnt with this squad but there was no plan b.

it works with a #1 seed type team cuz they are just that good...but unless the roster is perfect it aint all that anymore...

everyone wants to be steph curry now...all the squads got 3 point bombers now.
 
Stop me if you’ve heard this one...

Two teams walk into a gym.

They both play zone.

Both teams give up a ton of wide open threes as the game goes on.

One team stops playing Zone. The other plays Zone the whole game.

Who wins?
 
It was a lazy zone this season. Stunning that the same group that anchored it last season could perform so poorly in it this year. They didn't close out or rotate as crisp as they did in 2017-18. That's what frustrates me the most about the defense this year; the guys have been there before and they played like they hadn't
 
longislandcuse said:
Stop me if you’ve heard this one...

Two teams walk into a gym.

They both play zone.

Both teams give up a ton of wide open threes as the game goes on.

One team stops playing Zone. The other plays Zone the whole game.

Who wins?
Expand...

tenor.gif
 
cuse10 said:
It was a lazy zone this season. Stunning that the same group that anchored it last season could perform so poorly in it this year. They didn't close out or rotate as crisp as they did in 2017-18. That's what frustrates me the most about the defense this year; the guys have been there before and they played like they hadn't
Expand...
The regression from last year to this year was very disappointing on many levels
 
While there is definitely a solid point to be made on the stubborness about never getting out of the zone that's been made 10000 times and most agree a little bit of change would be good, this year's team was not as solid of a perimeter defensive team as some preivous ones, especially with Frank out and less than 100% most of the year. Also Baylor and UVA were taking and making Steph Curry 3's. Until we start seeing more college teams doing that with any kind of consistency, daring college players to consistently make 3's is not a bad philosophy. I think the team needs a talent upgrade to compete against the teams above the #10 seed in the ACC and teams with at least 19 wins.
 
Maxsumm said:
While there is definitely a solid point to be made on the stubborness about never getting out of the zone that's been made 10000 times and most agree a little bit of change would be good, this year's team was not as solid of a perimeter defensive team as some preivous ones, especially with Frank out and less than 100% most of the year. Also Baylor and UVA were taking and making Steph Curry 3's. Until we start seeing more college teams doing that with any kind of consistency, daring college players to consistently make 3's is not a bad philosophy. I think the team needs a talent upgrade to compete against the teams above the #10 seed in the ACC and teams with at least 19 wins.
Expand...

Basically, we need better player to play against better teams? What we need is a freaking center and a point guard. Chewy was sufficient last night. Tyus isn't and will never be a point guard. And JB didn't take the time to develop Carey at all. Then of course Frank self implodes and we have what we have...I'm still seeing the threes rain down from last night. The vast majority of which were wide open spot ups. I'll stop venting now...See you guys in the fall!
 
The_Slant_Su said:
Being one dimensional is never an asset.
Expand...

It's like, Navy football is a running team. They run the ball the majority of the time, it's what they practice, it's what they do well, and that's their identity. But if they're down 14 with two minutes left, you can't run the ball. You're just being ridiculous at that point.
 
CorduroyG said:
it cant continue. the game has changed. maybe if jb would extend it and defend the 3, but hes too stubborn. theyll miss eventually right? oh well, "they made shots"

we need a change
Expand...

Just stop.
 
The term "Gimmick" used to really bother me when outsiders described our defense.

A gimmick is an idea that is sold as solid but lacks little real backbone and is easily exposed as a farce.

Our zone used to be very hard to play against most of the time and was not easily exposed.

That has changed and is no longer the case. The Va Tech game this year really made me realize that what we were doing defensively has to change.

I hate to say it, but our zone defense is now truly a gimmick, at long last...

There are a few primary reasons for it:
  • The era of the trey. Now, more than ever, long-range shooting skill is at a premium. There are more players coming into all leagues, every year, that are good long range shooters. The zone, by its nature, will provide good long range looks to disciplined teams that move the ball quickly and efficiently through and to the zone weak spots. It's no coincidence we've seen team after team and player after player log career shooting performances against our defense this year. An exclusive zone defense is not an optimal defensive plan in this day and age of college basketball.
  • The cat is out of the bag. Our defense used to be a bit of an enigma because it was so different and there wasn't enough of a body of work/film of other teams/coaches exploiting it successfully, and that made it hard to prepare for. That is no longer the case. Enough opposing coaches have solved it at this point. The blueprints and game film are there for any half-decent coach to replicate and deploy.
  • One-dimensional. When it's exploited and fails, we have no plan b. We saw last night a zone-first team that switched to man once we had successfully carved through their zone repeatedly. They switched to man and beat us. This also is not a coincidence.
  • Best recruits aren't interested? Why can't we land a legit center? Why have we flirted with a number of top 50 players recently but not sealed the deal? Is the exclusive zone system a turn-off for top talent now or is it recruiting deficiencies on our staff since Hop left? It may likely be a combination of both.
Conversely, there is a strong argument to made that this year's team did not and has not played a good version of the Boeheim zone. We've certainly had better versions of this defense in the past with better athletes and skill players.

That said, I think it's hard not to conclude at this point, that this exclusive zone-only defensive plan is now a serious liability and costing us competitiveness and wins in many matchups.

Moreover, we need a plan B and should develop and play man sets when needed.

Since this will not happen for obvious reasons, we have a serious problem.
 
Last edited:
kingtidge said:
The term "Gimmick" used to really bother me when outsiders described our defense.

A gimmick is an idea that is sold as solid but lacks little real backbone and is easily exposed as a farce.

Our zone used to be very hard to play against most of the time and was not easily exposed.

That has changed and is no longer the case. The Va Tech game this year really made me realize that what we were doing defensively has to change.

I hate to say it, but our zone defense is now truly a gimmick, at long last...

There are a few primary reasons for it:
  • The era of the trey. Now, more than ever, long-range shooting skill is at a premium. There are more players coming into all leagues, every year, that are good long range shooters. The zone, by its nature, will provide good long range looks to disciplined teams that move the ball quickly and efficiently through and to the zone weak spots. It's no coincidence we've seen team after team and player after player log career shooting performances against our defense this year. An exclusive zone defense is not an optimal defensive plan in this day and age of college basketball.
  • The cat is out of the bag. Our defense used to be a bit of an enigma because it was so different and there wasn't enough of a body of work/film of other teams/coaches exploiting it successfully, and that made it hard to prepare for. That is no longer the case. Enough opposing coaches have solved it this point. The blueprints and game film are there for any half-decent coach to replicate and deploy.
  • One-dimensional. When it's exploited and fails, we have no plan b. We saw last night a zone-first team that switched to man once we had successfully carved through there zone repeatedly. They switched to man and beat us. This also is not a coincidence.
Conversely, there is a strong argument to made that this year's team did not and has not played a good version of the Boeheim zone. We've certainly had better versions of this defense in the past with better athletes and skill players.

That said, I think it's hard not to conclude at this point, that this exclusive zone-only defensive plan is now a serious liability and costing us competitiveness and wins in many matchups.

Moreover, we need a plan B and should develop and play man sets when needed.

Since this will not happen for obvious reasons, we have a serious problem.
Expand...
Probably could play it better with more elite athletes, but we can’t recruit those elite athletes anymore, in part because of the zone exclusivity.
 
CorduroyG said:
it cant continue. the game has changed. maybe if jb would extend it and defend the 3, but hes too stubborn. theyll miss eventually right? oh well, "they made shots"

we need a change
Expand...
You can only extend a zone so far. Almost every team has shooters that are comfortable from NBA distance. The zone might be effective in a handful of matchups but it needs to become a complimentary tool, not the only tool. I don't care what the metrics say anymore.
 
Fundamental question that needs to be asked:

Can we win a national championship in today's game using the zone exclusively?

I don't think you can. Rosters of top teams are loaded with shooters. On your way to a championship, you will invariably face a team that can shoot over your zone.
 
kingtidge said:
The term "Gimmick" used to really bother me when outsiders described our defense.

A gimmick is an idea that is sold as solid but lacks little real backbone and is easily exposed as a farce.

Our zone used to be very hard to play against most of the time and was not easily exposed.

That has changed and is no longer the case. The Va Tech game this year really made me realize that what we were doing defensively has to change.

I hate to say it, but our zone defense is now truly a gimmick, at long last...

There are a few primary reasons for it:
  • The era of the trey. Now, more than ever, long-range shooting skill is at a premium. There are more players coming into all leagues, every year, that are good long range shooters. The zone, by its nature, will provide good long range looks to disciplined teams that move the ball quickly and efficiently through and to the zone weak spots. It's no coincidence we've seen team after team and player after player log career shooting performances against our defense this year. An exclusive zone defense is not an optimal defensive plan in this day and age of college basketball.
  • The cat is out of the bag. Our defense used to be a bit of an enigma because it was so different and there wasn't enough of a body of work/film of other teams/coaches exploiting it successfully, and that made it hard to prepare for. That is no longer the case. Enough opposing coaches have solved it this point. The blueprints and game film are there for any half-decent coach to replicate and deploy.
  • One-dimensional. When it's exploited and fails, we have no plan b. We saw last night a zone-first team that switched to man once we had successfully carved through there zone repeatedly. They switched to man and beat us. This also is not a coincidence.
Conversely, there is a strong argument to made that this year's team did not and has not played a good version of the Boeheim zone. We've certainly had better versions of this defense in the past with better athletes and skill players.

That said, I think it's hard not to conclude at this point, that this exclusive zone-only defensive plan is now a serious liability and costing us competitiveness and wins in many matchups.

Moreover, we need a plan B and should develop and play man sets when needed.

Since this will not happen for obvious reasons, we have a serious problem.
Expand...
I agree with you and I’m tired of recruiting tall lanky projects for the zone. I want smart players. I want refuse to lose players. I want Bonafied point guards. I want man to man and zone as needed. Let’s open up the books to other player types
 
Personnel, personnel, personnel.

The zone has been doing it's job, evidenced by our defensive efficiency numbers over the years. Need better players to get back to the elite level it was at before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

newmexicuse
    • Like
Only Reason We Lost......
2
Replies
26
Views
3K
Sbucketball
Sbucketball
IthacaMatt
What changes we might see
Replies
24
Views
3K
MSOrange
MSOrange
SWC75
    • Like
The Upside - Texas Tech
Replies
3
Views
631
domestu
D
kcsu
    • Like
my two cents
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
Zelda Zonk
Zelda Zonk
sutomcat
    • Like
My Take
Replies
10
Views
1K
hoopsupstate
H

Forum statistics

Threads
171,075
Messages
4,927,951
Members
6,015
Latest member
cusejuice4

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
267
Guests online
1,779
Total visitors
2,046
Totals may include hidden visitors.


...
Top Bottom