That defense confused SMU for about 10 seconds in the first half.

As bad as the man defense can be, I've never seen such a combo of poor perimeter and porous interior defense as in that second half.

(02-02-2014 11:40 AM)bubbapt Wrote:  That defense confused SMU for about 10 seconds in the first half.

As bad as the man defense can be, I've never seen such a poor combo of poor perimeter and porous interior defense at the same time as in that second half.

Whether in man or zone we end up chasing the ball rather than defending the goal and the lanes. Our guards allow way too much penetration and too many open shots.

Our guards also refuse to run the offense, reporting to the quick three which ends up shooting us out of the game. It happended in Ok, it happended with Cincy, it happened with UCONN and it happened yesterday.

Running is fine and good and we are good at it. But when it's not there patience will get us good looks with passing inside out. We have shown to be very good at times but our guards are often to interested in scoring to run the team.

I want a pure PG that will run the team.

It's the flash cards fault.

(02-02-2014 12:17 PM)TigerTimmy Wrote:  It's the flash cards fault.

Great TV, though.

(02-02-2014 11:40 AM)bubbapt Wrote:  That defense confused SMU for about 10 seconds in the first half.

As bad as the man defense can be, I've never seen such a combo of poor perimeter and porous interior defense as in that second half.

Totally inaccurate. From the 10:20 mark of the 1st half to the 6:57 mark we forced 5 turnovers and went on an 11-0 run. Turned a 12-15 deficit into a 23-15 lead. We were in the zone the entire time and played it great.

I agree that the wheels fell off in the 2nd half.

(02-02-2014 01:50 PM)3601 Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 11:40 AM)bubbapt Wrote:  That defense confused SMU for about 10 seconds in the first half.

As bad as the man defense can be, I've never seen such a combo of poor perimeter and porous interior defense as in that second half.

Totally inaccurate. From the 10:20 mark of the 1st half to the 6:57 mark we forced 5 turnovers and went on an 11-0 run. Turned a 12-15 deficit into a 23-15 lead. We were in the zone the entire time and played it great.

I agree that the wheels fell off in the 2nd half.

Let's call it an exaggeration, or hyperbole.

It's hard to play a 2-3 zone when one of your back 3 is 6-3.

(02-02-2014 02:32 PM)bubbapt Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 01:50 PM)3601 Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 11:40 AM)bubbapt Wrote:  That defense confused SMU for about 10 seconds in the first half.

As bad as the man defense can be, I've never seen such a combo of poor perimeter and porous interior defense as in that second half.

Totally inaccurate. From the 10:20 mark of the 1st half to the 6:57 mark we forced 5 turnovers and went on an 11-0 run. Turned a 12-15 deficit into a 23-15 lead. We were in the zone the entire time and played it great.

I agree that the wheels fell off in the 2nd half.

Let's call it an exaggeration, or hyperbole.

I'd stick with inaccurate.

(02-02-2014 02:37 PM)cvilletiger Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 02:32 PM)bubbapt Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 01:50 PM)3601 Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 11:40 AM)bubbapt Wrote:  That defense confused SMU for about 10 seconds in the first half.

As bad as the man defense can be, I've never seen such a combo of poor perimeter and porous interior defense as in that second half.

Totally inaccurate. From the 10:20 mark of the 1st half to the 6:57 mark we forced 5 turnovers and went on an 11-0 run. Turned a 12-15 deficit into a 23-15 lead. We were in the zone the entire time and played it great.

I agree that the wheels fell off in the 2nd half.

Let's call it an exaggeration, or hyperbole.

I'd stick with inaccurate.

And yet he agrees with my point, and you probably do, too.

(02-02-2014 02:39 PM)bubbapt Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 02:37 PM)cvilletiger Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 02:32 PM)bubbapt Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 01:50 PM)3601 Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 11:40 AM)bubbapt Wrote:  That defense confused SMU for about 10 seconds in the first half.

As bad as the man defense can be, I've never seen such a combo of poor perimeter and porous interior defense as in that second half.

Totally inaccurate. From the 10:20 mark of the 1st half to the 6:57 mark we forced 5 turnovers and went on an 11-0 run. Turned a 12-15 deficit into a 23-15 lead. We were in the zone the entire time and played it great.

I agree that the wheels fell off in the 2nd half.

Let's call it an exaggeration, or hyperbole.

I'd stick with inaccurate.

And yet he agrees with my point, and you probably do, too.

Absolutely , but bad D is bad D zone or no zone. Can't blame Josh for trying it in 2nd half. Man to man wasn't any better.

The zone stops the drives better, but when your best player isn't rebounding, the zone isn't effective either.

(02-02-2014 02:35 PM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  It's hard to play a 2-3 zone when one of your back 3 is 6-3.

That is problem with us trying to play zone. Teams that play it well almost always have taller perimeter players-look at Syracuse over the years.

It's not something we want to do exclusively. I'm just saying that it has been and still can be a very effective weapon in the arsenal.

our zone stinks. If any team runs a half decent set against it they get all sorts of open looks. SMU had all sorts of open 3s in the 1st half against our zone, they just missed them. And we did get a few steals on lazy passes as well. But never have I seen our zone look great. This has been the case with other teams like UConnas well. They were getting tons of open looks, they just missed a lot of them.

Our back line doesn't watch for off ball screeners and baseline movement. Our guards are constantly letting the zone get penetrated

The depressing part is our man defense isn't good either. One screen up top and it's disaster time. Maybe we need to trap off of the picks more and try to create turnovers there so as to discourage the use of it.

(02-02-2014 04:49 PM)jgardne Wrote:  our zone stinks. If any team runs a half decent set against it they get all sorts of open looks. SMU had all sorts of open 3s in the 1st half against our zone, they just missed them. And we did get a few steals on lazy passes as well. But never have I seen our zone look great. This has been the case with other teams like UConnas well. They were getting tons of open looks, they just missed a lot of them.

Our back line doesn't watch for off ball screeners and baseline movement. Our guards are constantly letting the zone get penetrated

The depressing part is our man defense isn't good either. One screen up top and it's disaster time. Maybe we need to trap off of the picks more and try to create turnovers there so as to discourage the use of it.

I though it looked very good against USF, Houston and the 1st half against SMU. Like I said, we forced 5 turnovers and 2 missed shots during a 7 possession stretch. I don't recall a ton of open looks.

Our guards at the top of the zone get to far out beyond the 3 pt line. That creates huge lanes for the opposing teams guards to drive in to the basket which pulls the back line into the paint allowing shooters to be wide open in the corners. They have to stay inside the 3 pt line and keep the zone tight. It is very obvious on the tape or if you pay attention to that sort of thing.

Google Syracuse zone defense drills and watch the you tube videos. Their guards never get more than about a foot beyond the 3 pt line. and all the players rotate. Watch those videos and then go back and watch the tigers zone defense. It's eye popping the difference in the driving lanes allowed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCpMi0bVii8

here you go

(02-02-2014 05:42 PM)3601 Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 04:49 PM)jgardne Wrote:  our zone stinks. If any team runs a half decent set against it they get all sorts of open looks. SMU had all sorts of open 3s in the 1st half against our zone, they just missed them. And we did get a few steals on lazy passes as well. But never have I seen our zone look great. This has been the case with other teams like UConnas well. They were getting tons of open looks, they just missed a lot of them.

Our back line doesn't watch for off ball screeners and baseline movement. Our guards are constantly letting the zone get penetrated

The depressing part is our man defense isn't good either. One screen up top and it's disaster time. Maybe we need to trap off of the picks more and try to create turnovers there so as to discourage the use of it.

I though it looked very good against USF, Houston and the 1st half against SMU. Like I said, we forced 5 turnovers and 2 missed shots during a 7 possession stretch. I don't recall a ton of open looks.

Brown made an adjustment at the under 4 timeout before the half.

(02-02-2014 02:35 PM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  It's hard to play a 2-3 zone when one of your back 3 is 6-3.

Oh for the days of a back three of Holmes, Bedford, and Lee

(02-02-2014 05:42 PM)3601 Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 04:49 PM)jgardne Wrote:  our zone stinks. If any team runs a half decent set against it they get all sorts of open looks. SMU had all sorts of open 3s in the 1st half against our zone, they just missed them. And we did get a few steals on lazy passes as well. But never have I seen our zone look great. This has been the case with other teams like UConnas well. They were getting tons of open looks, they just missed a lot of them.

Our back line doesn't watch for off ball screeners and baseline movement. Our guards are constantly letting the zone get penetrated

The depressing part is our man defense isn't good either. One screen up top and it's disaster time. Maybe we need to trap off of the picks more and try to create turnovers there so as to discourage the use of it.

I though it looked very good against USF, Houston and the 1st half against SMU. Like I said, we forced 5 turnovers and 2 missed shots during a 7 possession stretch. I don't recall a ton of open looks.

It looked good against Houston and USF because they were laying bricks the whole game and are undisciplined, poorly coached teams. I agree with the above post that our zone gets way too stretched