Who's ready to watch some Zone D by UD this season?

[lhsgolf19]

David Jablonski‏Verified account @DavidPJablonski 20m20 minutes ago

Anthony Grant says @DaytonMBB focused on individual skill instruction this summer

http://www.mydaytondailynews.com/spo...8AtZpgMtPhtXL/

[springborofan]

I think a little zone defense can be good. It can confuse an offense at critical possession points during a game. I wouldn't want to see the second coming of Syracuse.

[C-time]

And maybe UD can press before the under 4 minute timeout if they are down by over 10 points too!!!!!

[Piqua Flyer '66]

I love to see a chg in
D coming out of a
TO

[ud2]

More defensive flexibility at times, such as more zone and more trapping/pressing, would be nice.

[TommyGola]

There were numerous games we could have won last season, St. Mary's and UMass come to mind, that would have been victories with a press and run. I don't think Archie believed we had the backup horses to execute it. I am anxious to see how Anthony Grant approaches his defense.

	Massachusetts MASSACHUSETTS UMass Amherst, the flagship campus of the University of Massachusetts system, sits on nearly 1,450-acres in the scenic Pioneer Valley of Western Massachusetts, 90 miles from Boston and 175 miles from New York City. The campus provides a rich cultural environment in a rural setting close to major urban centers. UMass enrolls over 20,000 undergraduates and 5,000 post-grad students. Fellow members of the A10 Conference. Nickname is the Minutemen. Women's teams known as the Minutewomen. Sports achievements include NCAA Final Four appearances in men's basketball and women's soccer.

[Alberto Strasse]

played man-to-man under Archie with zone principles as they collapsed 3 to 4 defenders into the paint on opponent dribble penetrations. It was the best combo of "man" and "zone" and usually befuddled the opposition. Archie's "D" resulted in a ton of bad shots by the opponent.

[oldfan]

Originally Posted by C-time And maybe UD can press before the under 4 minute timeout if they are down by over 10 points too!!!!!

Ain't never going to see that. UD will never be down by over 10 points.

[ud2]

I have never understood an absolute stubborn unwillingness by some head coaches to play a different defense every now and then. It makes no sense at all to me.

When you change defenses, you throw the opponent off balance and disrupt their rhythm.

In addition, at times, your regular defense may just simply not be effective against a particular opponent, and switching to a different defense may be the answer.

[rollo]

Originally Posted by ud2 I have never understood an absolute stubborn unwillingness by some head coaches to play a different defense every now and then. It makes no sense at all to me. When you change defenses, you throw the opponent off balance and disrupt their rhythm. In addition, at times, your regular defense may just simply not be effective against a particular opponent, and switching to a different defense may be the answer.

Coaching is limited to 20 hrs/week. Of those hours, most are spent on offense...along with FTs, conditioning, inbound plays, defense, etc... There are dozens of offensive sets that need to be run over and over and over...which takes time. Your main defense also gets attention...as does the full- and half-court presses you may use.

The time to practice a 2-3 or 1-3-1 trap exists, but not enough for it to be perfected...which is a problem when playing against teams with strong and/or deep offenses. In a close game you may be doing your team a disservice by trying to utilize something (zone) you're not good at /don't practice much even though the circumstances demand it. FWIW, well coached teams are not surprised by zones.

On paper a defensive switch may sound good...in reality, it'll probably expose your weaknesses.

[ud2]

Originally Posted by rollo Coaching is limited to 20 hrs/week. Of those hours, most are spent on offense...along with FTs, conditioning, inbound plays, defense, etc... There are dozens of offensive sets that need to be run over and over and over...which takes time. Your main defense also gets attention...as does the full- and half-court presses you may use. The time to practice a 2-3 or 1-3-1 trap exists, but not enough for it to be perfected...which is a problem when playing against teams with strong and/or deep offenses. In a close game you may be doing your team a disservice by trying to utilize something (zone) you're not good at /don't practice much even though the circumstances demand it. FWIW, well coached teams are not surprised by zones. On paper a defensive switch may sound good...in reality, it'll probably expose your weaknesses.

I totally disagree. I think you are really over complicating the situation. IMO, the task is not nearly as difficult as you are making it out to be.

[rollo]

Originally Posted by ud2 I totally disagree. I think you are really over complicating the situation. IMO, the task is not nearly as difficult as you are making it out to be.

[shocka43]

Originally Posted by ud2 I totally disagree. I think you are really over complicating the situation. IMO, the task is not nearly as difficult as you are making it out to be.

When playing at a high level, against high level competition...it can be difficult.

Man first. No questions asked. If you have a group of players that can play great man to man defense on a consistent basis, you have the tools in place to run some zone sets. But the focus HAS to be man first.

If a team has perfected man to man principles, then you put in zone defenses that you may need. If a staff brings in athletic players, it is nice to see a team throw man presses in, with traps, at certain times of the game to get a possession...to get the crowd in the game...turn the tables...etc...

Relying on zone defenses on the full court needs to be reserved for times of opportunity.

In the half court, yes you can and need to be able to run some zone against certain teams with certain personnel sets. A opponent has a traditional set with a traditional big. Run a 2-3 or 1-3-1...but in the end...you can accomplish the same thing with man to man defense and having certain defenders sag in the paint and accomplish the same thing as a 1-3-1 or 2-3.

I have not once played for a coach that focused on zone defense every single day. We focused on it days before a certain game in order to prep for certain personnel. Every single coach I have every played for focused on man first, and the zone defenses were more or less gimmicks or bail outs when we didn't have the guys to go man-man against a certain team.

I have seen more teams try and turn the tide of a game by throwing in a wrinkle defense, only to get crushed on 2 or 3 straight possessions which defeats the purpose.

Scenario...you are playing undersized. Run man and use quickness to get steals and get out in transition? Or set back and run a 1-3-1, which you typically rebound poorly against, and run a very high risk of getting hammered in the paint? I like my odds with token man pressure out front and hard pressing man with a post front and good back side rotations. Or better yet, hard full court man pressure with a double and second pass pressure for steals.

More than one way to skin a cat for sure. But if you aren't very competent with your man defense, your zone defense will most likely be lacking...unless you are one of very few high level programs....

[Avid Flyer]

X was trending down to not even making the NCAA last year, then Mack changed to a zone type offense during the tournament and they ended up an elite 8 team.

So some changes at right times are good.

[TXFlyerFan]

Originally Posted by Alberto Strasse played man-to-man under Archie with zone principles as they collapsed 3 to 4 defenders into the paint on opponent dribble penetrations. It was the best combo of "man" and "zone" and usually befuddled the opposition. Archie's "D" resulted in a ton of bad shots by the opponent.

If only our rebounding was better

[shocka43]

Originally Posted by Avid Flyer X was trending down to not even making the NCAA last year, then Mack changed to a zone type offense during the tournament and they ended up an elite 8 team. So some changes at right times are good.

Simply have to have the personnel to run it and be able to rebound out of it.

[Avid Flyer]

Actually meant defense

[ud2]

Originally Posted by rollo On paper a defensive switch may sound good...in reality, it'll probably expose your weaknesses.

Some coaches play man-to-man 99% of the time. I think that is really excessive and inflexible.

Originally Posted by shocka43 Man first. No questions asked. If you have a group of players that can play great man to man defense on a consistent basis, you have the tools in place to run some zone sets. But the focus HAS to be man first. If a team has perfected man to man principles, then you put in zone defenses that you may need. If a staff brings in athletic players, it is nice to see a team throw man presses in, with traps, at certain times of the game to get a possession...to get the crowd in the game...turn the tables...etc... Relying on zone defenses on the full court needs to be reserved for times of opportunity. More than one way to skin a cat for sure. But if you aren't very competent with your man defense, your zone defense will most likely be lacking...unless you are one of very few high level programs....

Agree...almost all teams rely on man-to-man first, and then add in zone/trap/press.

But, some coaches like John Chaney and Jim Boeheim rely on zone defense exclusively and succeed.

[Gazoo]

Originally Posted by ud2 But, some coaches like John Chaney and Jim Boeheim rely on zone defense exclusively and succeed.

So what you're saying is: they have 1 primary go-to defense and rarely change it.