MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: jsglow on December 21, 2016, 10:01:56 PM
-
I know it was SIUE but I liked it.
-
Me too!
-
Good to have as a changeup, but shouldn't be our base defense. Nice tool against teams that struggle shooting from three.
-
Think we can use it to surprise, but other teams will shoot over as we are small, will slow game pace and that will work against our offense.
-
Think we can use it to surprise, but other teams will shoot over as we are small, will slow game pace and that will work against our offense.
I'm not so sure. Try this. We reduce a teams FG% and run out of rebounds rather than taking the ball out of the net. Again, it was only a buy game but we boarded well off misses and immediately pushed the ball. I agree it shouldn't be our base D but as a way to protect Luke and get him to play better on the defensive end....
-
Typically it is harder to rebound out of a zone.....at least that is the conventional wisdom.
Not sure if there is statistical info to back that up.
-
If my math is right, they got 1 point from 5 possessions against the zone. It was effective.
Though I did miss 5-7 possessions in second half. Not sure if there was some zone there.
-
If my math is right, they got 1 point from 5 possessions against the zone. It was effective.
Though I did miss 5-7 possessions in second half. Not sure if there was some zone there.
careful...info like that makes sense.
i heard pitino talk before their game yesterday about how defense is all about percentages. there are a few guys on this board that post that data from time to time, and it always interesting to see where MU really stacks up as the number of possessions are a big deal.
many assumed bo ryan teams played good defense because of the low scoring, when in fact, their defense was average at best and it was their offense that essentially limited the possessions of the game.
-
I think the zone is fool's gold. SIUE is a terrible team that can't shoot the three. I posted before the game that Sam Hauser literally had as many threes as their entire roster on the season. It can be useful as an occasional change up against a bad shooting team. But if you look at the Big East, there are no bad shooting teams. The three worst are:
1. Depaul: 60 3PM with 33.7 3P%
2. Seton Hall: 61 3PM with 34.9 3P%
3. Georgetown: 76 3PM with 38.8 3P%
A majority of the Big East would bomb the crap out of any zone that we threw out there. Just like at what cellar dweller St. John's did to Syracuse's zone.
-
I think the zone is fool's gold. SIUE is a terrible team that can't shoot the three. I posted before the game that Sam Hauser literally had as many threes as their entire roster on the season. It can be useful as an occasional change up against a bad shooting team. But if you look at the Big East, there are no bad shooting teams. The three worst are:
1. Depaul: 60 3PM with 33.7 3P%
2. Seton Hall: 61 3PM with 34.9 3P%
3. Georgetown: 76 3PM with 38.8 3P%
A majority of the Big East would bomb the crap out of any zone that we threw out there. Just like at what cellar dweller St. John's did to Syracuse's zone.
I believe Wojo said as much after the game. Essentially, they practice the zone as a situational defense. Given SIUE's inability to shoot well from distance, it was a strategic advantage that they may use in the future....maybe Depaul and Seton Hall, who although not bad, are not great 3-pt shooting teams.
Particularly Seton Hall where matchup wise, they could get Luke/Hauser into foul trouble and really put us in a difficult situation.
-
I believe Wojo said as much after the game. Essentially, they practice the zone as a situational defense. Given SIUE's inability to shoot well from distance, it was a strategic advantage that they may use in the future....maybe Depaul and Seton Hall, who although not bad, are not great 3-pt shooting teams.
Particularly Seton Hall where matchup wise, they could get Luke/Hauser into foul trouble and really put us in a difficult situation.
Zone leaves a team vulnerable to offensive rebounds. I worry that Delgado (and others) from Seton Hall would kill us with put backs if we go zone.
-
I prefer man. The zone looked good against an inferior team. Going forward, it will be a tool when our bigs are in foul trouble.
-
Syracuse plays zone almost exclusively, and they've been successful right up 'til the present time ... um, never mind.
-
I'm not so sure. Try this. We reduce a teams FG% and run out of rebounds rather than taking the ball out of the net. Again, it was only a buy game but we boarded well off misses and immediately pushed the ball. I agree it shouldn't be our base D but as a way to protect Luke and get him to play better on the defensive end....
Understand what you say, but to get rebounds while playing zone you have to be great rebounding team and have length. Two strikes against us. Best to use as resouce when bigs in foul trouble or to surprise as change of pace in D.
-
I prefer man. The zone looked good against an inferior team. Going forward, it will be a tool when our bigs are in foul trouble.
This. Hell even our man defense looked good for the first time last night!!!!
Actually as bad as our man is i dont have a problem with it, unfortunarely in the zone i figure we eill stand around and ball watch until the other team scores. Yep about like our man D.
-
careful...info like that makes sense.
i heard pitino talk before their game yesterday about how defense is all about percentages. there are a few guys on this board that post that data from time to time, and it always interesting to see where MU really stacks up as the number of possessions are a big deal.
many assumed bo ryan teams played good defense because of the low scoring, when in fact, their defense was average at best and it was their offense that essentially limited the possessions of the game.
Bo's defenses were pretty damn good for the most part. He had some mediocre seasons(ranked in the 50s and 60s) but he had a bunch that were in the top 10-20 and a couple in the top 5 in defensive efficiency as well.
It wasn't the pace.
-
Bo's defenses were pretty damn good for the most part. He had some mediocre seasons(ranked in the 50s and 60s) but he had a bunch that were in the top 10-20 and a couple in the top 5 in defensive efficiency as well.
It wasn't the pace.
Maybe the pace contributed to the defensive efficiency, and, in turn, the defensive efficiency contributed to the pace?
Namaste.
-
Maybe the pace contributed to the defensive efficiency, and, in turn, the defensive efficiency contributed to the pace?
Namaste.
It seems to me the slower the pace, the better your defensive efficiency will be. It seems intuitive that fast breaks and shooting against a not-set defense would result in higher efficiencies, rather than slogging it out in the half court. I think that was the big reason for O'Neill's defensive efficiency when he was here.
-
The challenge with rebounding out of a zone is that teams hoist up a lot of 3's against them, resulting in long, unpredictable rebounds. Box outs need to occur slightly higher than MtM.
I love a good zone. I think of Syracuse and Huggins' old Cindy squads. Plus it can help Luke avoid stupid fouls
-
The challenge with rebounding out of a zone is that teams hoist up a lot of 3's against them, resulting in long, unpredictable rebounds. Box outs need to occur slightly higher than MtM.
I love a good zone. I think of Syracuse and Huggins' old Cindy squads. Plus it can help Luke avoid stupid fouls
When playing zone, you also have to find a man to box out. In m-t-m, you obviously know who you are supposed to box out.
-
Rebounding is tougher in a zone, but I'd like to see a few minutes of zone with Matt and Luke down low and 3 up top - like Duane/JJJ/Cheatham. Go for steals and close out 3's but if the guys get past the bigs are there to plug the middle.
-
Rebounding is tougher in a zone, but I'd like to see a few minutes of zone with Matt and Luke down low and 3 up top - like Duane/JJJ/Cheatham. Go for steals and close out 3's but if the guys get past the bigs are there to plug the middle.
How do you expect that to work on the offensive end?
-
How do you expect that to work on the offensive end?
It wouldn't.
Try this. 5 out, 0 in on offense with Hauser playing C in the 2/3 zone. I think we did that for a few minutes if my memory is correct.
-
I re-watched the game and they scored a single point against the zone in seven possessions.
I know SIUE should not be the proxy for the quality of our zone defense but I think when our man D is getting pick and rolled to death we need to employ it for a few possessions.
-
I re-watched the game and they scored a single point against the zone in seven possessions.
I know SIUE should not be the proxy for the quality of our zone defense but I think when our man D is getting pick and rolled to death we need to employ it for a few possessions.
Reasonable.
Many consider a zone to be "lazy," but if played right it is active and can be very disruptive. Pressure the ball high with a guard, trap the corners, have the big challenge the high post while the wings pinch in, etc.
Syracuse has won a LOT of games with its "lazy" zone, including a national title and several Final Four appearances.
-
Reasonable.
Many consider a zone to be "lazy," but if played right it is active and can be very disruptive. Pressure the ball high with a guard, trap the corners, have the big challenge the high post while the wings pinch in, etc.
Syracuse has won a LOT of games with its "lazy" zone, including a national title and several Final Four appearances.
They also routinely have a roster construct that consists of several 6'6 wings and a center that can rebound.
Our current team is better suited for harassing man defense, which is unfortunate, because they're not particularly good at that either. I agree with News that zone is ok as a change of pace tactic, but better coached teams will adapt quickly.
-
They also routinely have a roster construct that consists of several 6'6 wings and a center that can rebound.
Our current team is better suited for harassing man defense, which is unfortunate, because they're not particularly good at that either. I agree with News that zone is ok as a change of pace tactic, but better coached teams will adapt quickly.
Also reasonable.
Play some man, play some zone. Mix it up, stay longer with what works best on a given night.
-
They also routinely have a roster construct that consists of several 6'6 wings and a center that can rebound.
Our current team is better suited for harassing man defense, which is unfortunate, because they're not particularly good at that either. I agree with News that zone is ok as a change of pace tactic, but better coached teams will adapt quickly.
Yep. Last 8 years for example... Syracuse's average height rank in the NATION: 6, 11, 11, 10, 2, 3, 18
MU this year: 213