Zone Defense

Gopher73

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
118
Reaction score
7
Points
18
I'm hoping that the Gophers will be working on some type of zone defenses for the BIG season. The main reasons I see the need for at least switching to some type of zone are as follows:
1. It will keep Reggie closer to the basket. Teams have been running the high ball screens pulling Reggie away from the hoop.
2. It should help protect our bigs from getting into foul trouble.
3. Zones played effectively can cause issues and don't necessarily lead to teams shooting lights out at the three point line.
4. It may be a better opportunity for our bench to be more effective and contribute more.
5. Switching defenses can confuse and force the opponent to adjust. Who knows how the opponent will react?
6. Successful zones (see Syracuse) can be very frustrating to figure out.
7. Changing defenses after time outs gives the opponent something to try to figure out and deviate from what was just planned in the time out with their coach.
I always liked to switch between odd and even front zones. An aggressive match-up zone can be made to look like a man-man and throw the opponent off. Even if it works a few times a game it just may help us gain some confidence. The past 4-5 games teams have run the same high-ball pick and roll and we have not adjusted or stopped it. Just my two cents worth.
 

I'm not sure what the macho stubbornness among college coaches is about not playing zone but not many teams do. Syracuse has proven it's effective. Middle Tennessee stymied us. Iowa darn near beat us with it. We have enough length and mobility to be very effective. We want to run...playing zone makes it easier, quicker to outlet and go.
I agree with all your points. Disguising defenses is a legitimate weapon. I had several games where coaches complimented us for our defense, thinking we were doing something else. Major underdogs, played a switching triangle and two and they never figured it out. Matchup zones are especially difficult to attack if you aren't sure what they are doing. But, it's different in D1 too, every game gets broken down on tape. Not very easy to fool people for more than a couple possessions, like you said. But that can be the difference.
I think it's more fun for the players, too. To know they have secret weapons. They beg to play certain defenses that create turnovers, which is fun. "Now coach, now! Let's run Buzz Black!!" ha Kinda hard not to be good at it when they are excited to play it.
They have so much more practice time than high school...that ain't the excuse.
Seems like Fitzgerald would excel in a zone defense and Hurt would have help. Maybe we'll see it after Christmas.
 

Our biggest issue as a team right now is inconsistency of effort and focus imo

So I’m not sure playing a defense that naturally makes you more passive is the answer. Maybe I’m wrong, but I think our personnel would lead us to being an awful zone team.
 


Our biggest issue as a team right now is inconsistency of effort and focus imo

So I’m not sure playing a defense that naturally makes you more passive is the answer. Maybe I’m wrong, but I think our personnel would lead us to being an awful zone team.

Well, if zone defense naturally makes you more passive, you are not doing a very good job coaching it. If you are trapping out of it your intensity totally rises, you gotta hustle to fulfill your responsibilities. It's easier to create turnovers and easy baskets and as a result guys naturally work harder.
I guess I get your point, if your man to man is bad because of lack of effort, your zone will probably be worse...I'd agree. But if your man is bad because guys are getting beat because your personnel is limited and help is late because the other team is quicker or your guys don't get the concepts, and/or your guys are just not confident in your team defense or the other team's scheme confuses you...you can more easily cover for one another in a zone...feel more confident that you have help...more easily build a team defense belief imo.
You are 100% right...no defense will work without hustle but I think it's easier to motivate, build a more confident feeling that your teammates will be there to help if you do get beat...so you can pressure the ball harder, contest shots and not watch people shoot and as a result be more effective in a zone.
It comes down to coaching... Virginia with Bennett plays packline defense...why everybody doesn't I'm not sure. Is packline really a combination man/zone defense? For sure, 100% the intensity they play with is several levels higher...that's coaching. Teach packline...use the same principles to disguise your zone...trap in certain situations or calls in all looks and the other team will be exhausted trying to get good shots. And you are 100% consistent in your principles. Players enjoy it because you can be really good at it.
 


I guess from my elementary knowledge of hoops, when you play a zone you're essentially daring the other team to shoot threes right? If that is already a problem for us, why would we encourage it?
 

I guess from my elementary knowledge of hoops, when you play a zone you're essentially daring the other team to shoot threes right? If that is already a problem for us, why would we encourage it?

Depends on the kind of zone and only if your defense doesn't have their hands up.

Some schools in the Big Ten have struggled this year against the zone (see MSU vs Duke).
 

Gophers have mixed in some zone occasionally this year. I believe the most the played it was against UMass and Coach Pitino was literally up off the bench going down the sideline with his hands in the air trying to get his guys to play with their hands up. While I am not against using some zone or even being a zone defensive team, here are my concerns as it pertains to the Gophers:

1. They are doing the simple things poorly: The guards (Dupree to an extent, but especially Nate Mason) have taken a big step back in their on ball defense and are allowing too much dribble penetration. The guards are also not fighting through high screen and rolls and just allowing the switch to a mismatch to occur (Isaiah is the biggest offender here). The bigs are also doing a poor job in the pick and roll game and are not moving their feet well enough to cut off drives or getting a hand up in the pick and pop game allowing open jumpers. If we are going to stay primarily a man team, then these issues need to be fixed before we worry about adding another defensive option. It's alarming to me that guys who have been in the program as long as Nate, Dupree, Jordan, and Reggie need to either re-learn things they knew how to do last year or (in many cases unfortunately) simply be forced (not sure how, can't put them on the bench) to start playing with the same effort they previously did on the defensive end of the floor.

2. Zone will likely minimize Lynch as a shot blocker. In most cases, a zone will end up with teams taking fewer shots in the paint which means fewer opportunities for Reggie to block shots. Those blocked shots have lead to transition opportunities which the Gophers really thrived on last season.

3. Jordan Murphy: A zone will likely leave Murphy with the responsibility of defending one of the corners. I don't think we are a very strong rebounding team if Jordan is contesting a 3 in the corner (or not contesting as has been his m.o. this year) and we've only got Reggie to rebound the miss. I don't think this is a good rebounding team at all without Murph in the paint battling.

4. Size: we're not that long, especially when Isaiah is in the game for Dupree and I worry about how disruptive this team could be in a zone and the very likely possibility that we give up 3's at even a higher rate if our fundamentals/effort in defending the jumper don't improve.

I do like that a zone could help limit foul trouble for Reggie (fewer drives to the paint, fewer one one one post defense possessions) and would minimize opponents going to the ball screen that draws Reggie out to the perimeter.
 




Top Bottom