Insisting on Man Defense

Discussion in 'Vols Football' started by IP, Jan 5, 2012.

  1. IP

    IP Advanced Pruitt Apologetics Bot

    Looking ahead to Florida and some of the other teams ahead on the schedule, one can see why Martin didn't want to do anything but work to get better at man defense. Zone won't do anything against Florida and some of the other shooting teams on the horizon. It is literally a situation of getting better at man defense, or conceding games. Might as well take the lumps this year in hopes that players figure it out and cycle out for the next couple of seasons.
     
  2. LawVol13

    LawVol13 Chieftain

    I actually think zone, obviously modified to contest shooters, could be helpful against Florida. We can't guard their ball screen offense; it's run about as well as anyone's. I don't think it will be a competitive game. Ultimately, I can see what you're saying and agree somewhat that Cuonzo has to show what his brand of basketball is. And, I think that's exactly what he's going to do.
     
  3. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    Yeah, I guess if we're gonna go man, then go man.

    I recently had an epiphany, though. That Jim Boeheim fella is onto something: Run the same defense every year. Run the simplest defense possible...the one everybody learns when they're 9 years old. But run it really well and with constant effort.

    If I woke up tomorrow as a basketball coach, I would put in the Syracuse defense and never look back. 2-3 matchup zone, baby.
     
  4. JZ1124

    JZ1124 Active Member

    I could say the same thing for m2m defense though.
     
  5. bigpapavol

    bigpapavol Chieftain

    I would too. Until shooting, including mid range, and skill come back to the game, I'd zone people up hard and crash with 5.
     
  6. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    And I could reply that zone defense is a superior product to m2m.
     
  7. JZ1124

    JZ1124 Active Member

    You could, but you would be wrong.
     
  8. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    Mid range game is definitely trending in the direction of the dodo bird. Who has had mid range game: Evan Turner, Kevin Durant would have if he hadn't played under a charlatan coach who was unable to so much as draw up a couple goddamn set plays for Durant; Miles Simon for sure, but that's going back to like 1997; .... there have to be several more good examples -- I mean, it isn't completely extinct -- but I'm drawing a blank.
     
  9. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    Okay then, you have the floor. Tell me why man to man defense is a better product than zone defense.
     
  10. JZ1124

    JZ1124 Active Member

    I'll ask one question: There are 3 minutes left in the game, you are down 10 and you are playing a 2-3 zone, what are you going to do?
     
  11. hatvol96

    hatvol96 Well-Known Member

    Plenty of coaches think that. Then, they come to the realization that without specific blockout and man assignments most college kids just stand around aimlessly.
     
  12. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    Phone a friend?
     
  13. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    In a match-up zone, players are playing man to man, but in a zone concept. But more pointedly, referring to these coaches you mentioned: why would players be standing around aimlessly if they'd been properly coached on how to play the defense?

    What if we assumed that the zone defense was coached well and the players bought in and knew what they were doing. A nicely done zone defense. Would you take that over man to man?

    My thoughts are that on a team that is athletic and long, a well-taught, well-coached zone defense can wreak havoc on an offense in ways that a man to man defense can't. There is more flexibility to force the issue and cause the offense to give the ball right back to you.
     
  14. JohnnyQuickkick

    JohnnyQuickkick Great Man

    I think a 2-3 can be really effective IF the guys know what they're doing and do it well, but if it's not done well it can be a disaster, kind of like when my church league team plays it. And you'd definitely have to work on some m2m just for the situation JZ was talking about.

    I don't think the guys we've currently got (no offense to them) process things on their own well enough to do it. The couple of times we've shown it I thought it looked weak.
     
  15. JZ1124

    JZ1124 Active Member

    For the record Syracuse is 34th in the nation in points allowed this season with Wisc number 1 and Virginia 2... both m2m teams.
     
  16. JohnnyQuickkick

    JohnnyQuickkick Great Man

    Great coaching is great, but you've got to have kids that can take coaching on the floor with them.
     
  17. JZ1124

    JZ1124 Active Member

    Because overall, players get lazy playing zone D exclusively.

    No.

    No.
     
  18. hatvol96

    hatvol96 Well-Known Member

    If playing zone were more effective, why has pretty much every great defensive coach in the history of the sport been a man to man guy? Quick: Name five great zone coaches. Why teach some bastardized version of man to man when you can just teach the real thing?
     
  19. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    Poor metric. Depends on the pace of the game. Look to per-possession data.
     
  20. hatvol96

    hatvol96 Well-Known Member

    One of the great weapons Syracuse has, besides the fact they are usually stocked with NBA talent, is the novelty of the zone. If everyone played it, that is lost. Watch how effective their zone in against quality nonconference opponents versus the best in the Big East. Teams that see it all the time have far less trouble against it.
     

Share This Page