Got to admit I've been eagerly awaiting starting this thread. :)

Because of a very unusual schedule we play "MSU" twice this week.

No offense to Sparty, but I propose to refer to Michigan State as MSU(1). Missouri State will be MSU(2). Actually I hope the Missouri State fans don't feel slighted. It has to do with the temporal sequence, we play Michigan State before playing Missouri State. If we played Missouri State first they'd been MSU(1).

Anyway, MSU(1) should be an 11 or 12 point favorite. This doesn't appear to be a great Spartan team anymore then the team which plays 6 miles west of our Convo is a great team (they didn't even look 'good' yesterday. )

MSU(1) plays Oakland tonight. Maybe we'll see if they come ready to play? Maybe they save their "A" game for us since we are #1 in Washtenaw County this morning. Maybe something about a mythical state of Michigan championship? (Sweep Oakland, UofM, MSU(1), WMU and CMU and of course, not to mention Rochester and Marygrove, and Concordia, too. Concordia would give us undisputed championship of Washtenaw County collegiate basketball for 2014/15. Governor Snyder can you get a trophy made. Lol.).

(12-14-2014 05:26 AM)emu steve Wrote:  Got to admit I've been eagerly awaiting starting this thread. :)

Because of a very unusual schedule we play "MSU" twice this week.

No offense to Sparty, but I propose to refer to Michigan State as MSU(1). Missouri State will be MSU(2). Actually I hope the Missouri State fans don't feel slighted. It has to do with the temporal sequence, we play Michigan State before playing Missouri State. If we played Missouri State first they'd been MSU(1).

Anyway, MSU(1) should be an 11 or 12 point favorite. This doesn't appear to be a great Spartan team anymore then the team which plays 6 miles west of our Convo is a great team (they didn't even look 'good' yesterday. )

MSU(1) plays Oakland tonight. Maybe we'll see if they come ready to play? Maybe they save their "A" game for us since we are #1 in Washtenaw County this morning. Maybe something about a mythical state of Michigan championship? (Sweep Oakland, UofM, MSU(1), WMU and CMU and of course, not to mention Rochester and Marygrove, and Concordia, too. Concordia would give us undisputed championship of Washtenaw County collegiate basketball for 2014/15. Governor Snyder can you get a trophy made. Lol.).

Probably not a great MSU team. But a much less likely upset than when EMU played UM. MSU has a decent front court (like Dayton) for breaking up the zone. But you never know.

Ward missed quite a few gimme shots against both Dayton and UM. (he still made some huge and timely shots, and played stellar defense) If Ward's bad streak is over and Lee bounces back from his low scoring performance at UM...

Should be fun to watch. It is nice to be at a point with the program that you can reasonably discuss the possibility of an upset against MSU- however remote.

What I think one of the story lines of this season is the EMU defense. What???

What I'm getting at is that I assumed a large part of last year's defensive prowess was Riley and the shot blocking of GB III.

But as others have mentioned, GB III (and others) were inconsistent defenders.

This team is much, much more consistent defensively (as a team).

Say what you want about UofM, but 42 points for B1G team is shocking.

So. MSU(1) lights up Oakland. Now we get our turn to show our defense can stop an offensive team.

My guess this game will be a lot like Dayton.

Okay, time for our hoops experts (Jim Boeheim are you out there lurking? Lol) to weigh in:

MSU run 3 guards. Isn't a 2 - 3 zone really designed to match up against a typical offense with 3 up front plus 2 guards.

Of course, many teams run 3 guards. So it isn't like we haven't seen a 3 guard offense before...

Does this mean that either Ward or Okoloji slide out to cover the 3rd guard? Will it vary from time to time or it is likely that the same forward has the 3rd guard?

Does the problem occur when the one forward (e.g., Okoloji) has the 3rd guard is too slow to effectively close out? Is this how one of our forwards gets burned?

Or does Price get a lot of Okoloji minutes if he defends one of the wing guards? (essentially we would also be playing 3 guards, even though Price would be a forward).

So pumped for Wednesday! MSU is ranked again, so that should be some added motivation. I don't like our chances that much, but I also didn't like our chances against Michigan, so what do I know?! State is shooting the lights out right now and they got some solid big men. I don't think we will control the glass like we did against Michigan, but I also don't think it'll be a free throw fest like it was against Dayton. Michigan relies heavily on their perimeter players for scoring...if our zone is as disciplined and effective as it was last week, we definitely have a chance.

I'm hoping for a 1-1 split this week, but 0-2 isn't the end of the world. A lot of us, at the beginning of the season, said we'd be happy with 1-3 or 2-2 over this brutal 4 game road stretch.

(12-15-2014 05:57 AM)emu steve Wrote:  Okay, time for our hoops experts (Jim Boeheim are you out there lurking? Lol) to weigh in:

MSU run 3 guards. Isn't a 2 - 3 zone really designed to match up against a typical offense with 3 up front plus 2 guards.

Of course, many teams run 3 guards. So it isn't like we haven't seen a 3 guard offense before...

Does this mean that either Ward or Okoloji slide out to cover the 3rd guard? Will it vary from time to time or it is likely that the same forward has the 3rd guard?

Does the problem occur when the one forward (e.g., Okoloji) has the 3rd guard is too slow to effectively close out? Is this how one of our forwards gets burned?

Or does Price get a lot of Okoloji minutes if he defends one of the wing guards? (essentially we would also be playing 3 guards, even though Price would be a forward).

I think Price, the way he has been playing, will get a lot of minutes regardless. Michigan ran 3 guards most, if not all of the game against us. Our zone does a lot of "switching", where the wings will come to contest the ball handler on the elbow, but fall back as soon as the guard at the top of the zone comes to pick him up. The only time the wing has an exclusive defensive matchup is when the ball is in the corner, so on-ball defense becomes a big deal. Luckily for us, many teams fall in love with the corner three, so they don't try to take advantage of the one-on-one matchup very often.

Our "switching" was borderline flawless last Tuesday. Michigan moved the ball around the perimeter very well, but rarely had an open look. I'm sure State will try to work it inside as often as possible, but neither big man they have is that great of a scorer. They do rebound well though, and that will likely be a problem.

Curious about Cory Alexander's comment that Murphy really plays at 2-2-1 zone because of how far out the forwards come.

At times, it's almost a 4-1...it really just depends on how the opposing offense is setting their players up. People tend to think the zone is simple and easy to teach (I chuckle when I read that on other boards), yet each player has many different responsibilities. The wings have to contest the elbow, and then quickly get back to the corner if someone is down there, and then play solid on ball defense. That's a lot of moving. The guards up top have to take turns taking away the free throw line and guarding the ball, while also picking up the elbow after switching with the wing. Not to mention fighting through countless screens...Mike Talley has made an art of it, despite giving up like 80 pounds to the screeners. The big typically just fronts the post, but they also need to deny baseline passes and help out if someone drives by a wing. When guys are slow getting back or switching, that's when you see open threes or easy layups, and that's typically when Murphy takes you out of the game.

I never appreciated the 2-3 zone until I watched game after game after game of it with Murphy at the helm. For a while, I just wondered if it was because we had a stout 7'0 shot blocker in the middle, but it still a menace without that presence. Murphy just has the athletes that work hard enough to make it successful. Our new guys have a come a long way with it since the first game of the season, and that was only a month ago.

MSU is shooting the ball from the outside more consistently now and that may be the answer to busting down our zone. Dawson definitely presents a problem inside. Still should be a competitive game.

Excellent post.

BTW, isn't a more deliberate offense almost a requirement for a zone DEFENSE?

What I mean. Up and down the court offense is fine for man to man defense - shoot and find your man on the way back.

In a zone, the DEFENSE needs to get set. It requires a lot more coordination, team work, etc. One man who doesn't get back and there is an open trey.

(12-15-2014 02:33 PM)emu79 Wrote:  MSU is shooting the ball from the outside more consistently now and that may be the answer to busting down our zone. Dawson definitely presents a problem inside. Still should be a competitive game.

Agreed on Dawson. He, Costello, and Schilling are very tough down low. They'll present much more of a problem than Michigan's bigs did, that's for sure.

Bryn Forbes, who we played against last year when he was at CSU, has been a nice addition for them. Deadly from three. They also get freshman Javon Bess for the first time, who is supposed to be a solid scorer. We'll see how many minutes he gets.

(12-15-2014 02:35 PM)emu steve Wrote:  Excellent post.

BTW, isn't a more deliberate offense almost a requirement for a zone DEFENSE?

What I mean. Up and down the court offense is fine for man to man defense - shoot and find your man on the way back.

In a zone, the DEFENSE needs to get set. It requires a lot more coordination, team work, etc. One man who doesn't get back and there is an open trey.

Hit the nail on the head. The best way to beat our zone is to not let it get set up. That's why our center is NEVER on the blocks when we are shooting free throws. Murphy practically concedes the chance at an offensive rebound to make sure our defense is set.

In the half court, having bigs that can pass is the best remedy. Oakland did well against it for a half with Petros catching the ball and passing it to a cutter. Dayton did the same type of thing, but we actually defended it well and just never got the benefit of the doubt in terms of foul calls. Michigan never really tried that, for whatever reason. Beilein is a very smart offensive coach...I was surprised he couldn't crack the zone.

(12-15-2014 02:38 PM)EagleSam Wrote:  

(12-15-2014 02:33 PM)emu79 Wrote:  MSU is shooting the ball from the outside more consistently now and that may be the answer to busting down our zone. Dawson definitely presents a problem inside. Still should be a competitive game.

Agreed on Dawson. He, Costello, and Schilling are very tough down low. They'll present much more of a problem than Michigan's bigs did, that's for sure.

Bryn Forbes, who we played against last year when he was at CSU, has been a nice addition for them. Deadly from three. They also get freshman Javon Bess for the first time, who is supposed to be a solid scorer. We'll see how many minutes he gets.

Also MSU likes a much faster pace game in transition which may make it harder to set up the 2-3 zone. They may be quicker than U of M.

(12-15-2014 05:57 AM)emu steve Wrote:  Okay, time for our hoops experts (Jim Boeheim are you out there lurking? Lol) to weigh in:

MSU run 3 guards. Isn't a 2 - 3 zone really designed to match up against a typical offense with 3 up front plus 2 guards.

Of course, many teams run 3 guards. So it isn't like we haven't seen a 3 guard offense before...

Does this mean that either Ward or Okoloji slide out to cover the 3rd guard? Will it vary from time to time or it is likely that the same forward has the 3rd guard?

Does the problem occur when the one forward (e.g., Okoloji) has the 3rd guard is too slow to effectively close out? Is this how one of our forwards gets burned?

Or does Price get a lot of Okoloji minutes if he defends one of the wing guards? (essentially we would also be playing 3 guards, even though Price would be a forward).

I think we are more of a 2-2-1 zone our center doesn't come of the paint much.

Sam, excellent description of EMU's zone earlier. I look forward to trying to see what you are seeing. Through my sports ignorance, I will just say it looks like a thing of beauty in an aesthetically pleasing way. It is so methodical yet fluid, almost like a ballet.

Steve and 79, interesting exchange you had in another thread. I was just thinking myself if EMU makes NCAA, Murphy is definitely gone. Probably even with an NIT make. Big IF, but EMU is deginitely one of the MAC contenders and ranked in the top 100 in the various computers. So maybe not so big of an if.

(12-15-2014 02:19 PM)EagleSam Wrote:  People tend to think the zone is simple and easy to teach (I chuckle when I read that on other boards), yet each player has many different responsibilities. The wings have to contest the elbow, and then quickly get back to the corner if someone is down there, and then play solid on ball defense. That's a lot of moving. The guards up top have to take turns taking away the free throw line and guarding the ball, while also picking up the elbow after switching with the wing. Not to mention fighting through countless screens...Mike Talley has made an art of it, despite giving up like 80 pounds to the screeners. The big typically just fronts the post, but they also need to deny baseline passes and help out if someone drives by a wing. When guys are slow getting back or switching, that's when you see open threes or easy layups, and that's typically when Murphy takes you out of the game.

Another thing that always impresses me is that the Ward/Okoloji/Nazione/Price role, which is the baseline in the traditional 2-3 and the middle two in what we're starting to refer to as a 2-2-1, is the are responsible for staying in the middle of the passing lane between a ballhandler at the top of the arc and whatever players are lurking behind them (typically forwards). meaning, they have to adjust for a player that they can't see. They're all good at it, but Price seems to have an uncanny ability to keep tabs on the forward while rarely turning to look at the forward. it's impressive.

http://www.mlive.com/spartans/index.ssf/...cart_river

Izzo has a funny quote that some schools play a zone because they have 'lazy' players. Kind of like just stand there, put your arms up, etc.

That is not the EMU zone.

Notes from interview on Jack Ebling (530 AM)show yesterday, I believe they said MSU is one of the top 3 point shooting teams in the nation, they don't think that their point guards can "turn the corner" on EMU however they believe that Dawson will attack the basketball and because he is a good passer that might open the offense up inside. Definite discussion that if EMU wins this game a likely NIT or NCAA bid might be likely. Lots of respect for job EMU did on U of M and the zone.

(12-15-2014 09:27 PM)rayEMU Wrote:  Sam, excellent description of EMU's zone earlier. I look forward to trying to see what you are seeing. Through my sports ignorance, I will just say it looks like a thing of beauty in an aesthetically pleasing way. It is so methodical yet fluid, almost like a ballet.

Steve and 79, interesting exchange you had in another thread. I was just thinking myself if EMU makes NCAA, Murphy is definitely gone. Probably even with an NIT make. Big IF, but EMU is deginitely one of the MAC contenders and ranked in the top 100 in the various computers. So maybe not so big of an if.

The question then would be if Murphy leaves who would replace him? It would have to be a coach that believes and teaches a 2-3 zone since that is what the current personnel are geared for. You don't want to make the same mistake that football has made trying to jam different style of play on players who skill set doesn't match.