Ah...the zone defense

Donate To GopherHole
C

CollegeBBallFan

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
564
Reaction score
0
Points
16
The Zone defense - It worked so well that we'll see more 2-3 zone than man-to-man the rest of the season. It saves fouls, saves energy (the big guys can play many minutes), and helps the big guys cover the perimeter while still having two big rebounders close by. Keep the hands up and there's not much room left for passing the ball. Praise the big guys for the way they played defense against NW. Let's hope a team hot-shooting the 3's doesn't come along. I was surprised by the scores with the zone defenses and the pace of the game, but when shooting 53% that helps collect points.
 

When you play three bigs, I am not so sure you can play man, the matchups just wouldn't work.
 

CollegeBBallFan said:
The Zone defense - It worked so well that we'll see more 2-3 zone than man-to-man the rest of the season. It saves fouls, saves energy (the big guys can play many minutes), and helps the big guys cover the perimeter while still having two big rebounders close by. Keep the hands up and there's not much room left for passing the ball. Praise the big guys for the way they played defense against NW. Let's hope a team hot-shooting the 3's doesn't come along. I was surprised by the scores with the zone defenses and the pace of the game, but when shooting 53% that helps collect points.
Click to expand...

The downside of the zone last night was that, with NWU's four good perimeter shooters, it forced Iverson to rotate out and defend the perimeter on a number of occasions. Eventually, the Cats got good at working their motion so as to isolate Thompson on Iverson, which is a tough matchup for Colton. That's when Thompson got his good looks and dropped most of his threes. The Gophs adjusted by going back to the man-to-man late in the game, and that worked except when our guys got confused, lazy or otherwise broke down.
 

Most of thompson's 3's werent on Iverson's side from what I saw. I was really impressed on how he covered. I thought it was a mistake to have Sampson play the middle. Iverson is a more physical player and just as good a shot blocker per minute. Sampson is a step faster on the wing also. I would be shocked if we go 3 bigs against Ohio St.
 

Lets do the math

march madness said:
Most of thompson's 3's werent on Iverson's side from what I saw. I was really impressed on how he covered. I thought it was a mistake to have Sampson play the middle. Iverson is a more physical player and just as good a shot blocker per minute. Sampson is a step faster on the wing also. I would be shocked if we go 3 bigs against Ohio St.
Click to expand...
Given that we only have 8 players, 3 of who are freshman (8-3=5) our most experienced line up inevitably has 3 bigs so I will be shocked if the game against OSU doesn't have significant time with out any frosh on the floor, which = 3 bigs.
Said differently: (Available Players) - freshman = 3 bigs
 


people talk about how great Syracuse's 2-3 zone is because of their length. The Gophers 2-3 could challenge that (we have the length part of it down). The 2-3 doesn't have to give up open threes if you can rotate quick enough and have long arms to disrupt passing lanes.

Many of the 3's Northwestern took in the second half were beyond NBA range.

I like the Gophers running the 2-3 with the bigs for the rest of the season. When one needs a break, while I wouldn't trust him on O. Dawson has the size to be effective in the zone as well, same with Austin and Chip has the quickness. Mav, not sure yet.
 

scher215 said:
people talk about how great Syracuse's 2-3 zone is because of their length. The Gophers 2-3 could challenge that (we have the length part of it down). The 2-3 doesn't have to give up open threes if you can rotate quick enough and have long arms to disrupt passing lanes.

Many of the 3's Northwestern took in the second half were beyond NBA range.

I like the Gophers running the 2-3 with the bigs for the rest of the season. When one needs a break, while I wouldn't trust him on O. Dawson has the size to be effective in the zone as well, same with Austin and Chip has the quickness. Mav, not sure yet.
Click to expand...

A good team will get their shots against a zone, I don't care how good you are at it. If the other team hits their shots there is a good chance you are going to lose. Mixing in a zone on occasion can work very well. When you depend on it you are going to be at a disadvantage against the better teams.
 

From my perspective it seems pretty clear the current Gopher personnel begs for mostly zone. It's not like they weren't giving up good 3 pt looks playing man anyway, and the zone fits their current situation much better.
 

USAFChief said:
From my perspective it seems pretty clear the current Gopher personnel begs for mostly zone. It's not like they weren't giving up good 3 pt looks playing man anyway, and the zone fits their current situation much better.
Click to expand...

You gotta mix it up. The Gophers aren't good enough at any kind of defense that they can play it exclusively the whole game.
 



Moonlight said:
Given that we only have 8 players, 3 of who are freshman (8-3=5) our most experienced line up inevitably has 3 bigs so I will be shocked if the game against OSU doesn't have significant time with out any frosh on the floor, which = 3 bigs.
Said differently: (Available Players) - freshman = 3 bigs
Click to expand...

Slow down, slow down! Moonlight, you're going through that math so quick, how do you expect anyone to keep up?
 

if a team relies on jump shots from 3pt they'll end up like MSU, not going to a final 4
 

I thought that a number of Gopher players - Iverson, Mbakwe, and Williams in particular - were much improved in refusing to bite on the ball fake. That left Northwestern having to work much harder to get open looks on three-pointers.
 

I think a zone that could be successful with the big group on the floor is a 1-2-2. Mbakwe at the point, Rodney and Hoff on the wings and Sampson and Iverson down low. The weakness there would still be Iverson and Sampson getting to the corners to cover the 3 but that is no different than a 2-3. With Mbakwe at the top he would be able to double down on the post or come with a weak side swat when the ball does go to the corner or get dumped inside. Another option would be to have Mbakwe drop all the way down and cover the playside post when the ball goes to the corner. This would leave Iverson/Sampson with weakside help and in good rebounding position. If Mbakwe were to cover the post Hoff/Rodney would have to play denial basketball on the wing to prevent the quick swing and give Mbakwe time to recover back to the point position.

I think we're too slow to play the 1-3-1 much (although as a one time down the court, change of pace, it could be really interesting. Put Rodney at the point with Iverson and Mbakwe on the wings and Hoff on the baseline. those passing lanes would be tough when you're trying to pass through 6-10, 6-7 and 6-8). Obviously any kind of press or half court trap is out of the question.
 



Syracuse plays zone exclusively and has for years. Do they typically struggle against good teams?
 



I am decent at math, and Moonlight's is correct. To sum up, we are shorthanded, and zone takes less energy.

What I noticed the other night was that they clearly knew what they were doing in it (very different than the times they played it last year), and how extended it was. They really did get out and cover the three. A team that can penetrate or has a big guy who can operate around the free throw line might have some success, but this is the Gophers best bet.
 


Iverson and Sampson wouldn't play the outside of Syracuse's 2-3 zone. They have Rodney and Trevor type athletes at usually 4 spots.
 

I say play multiple defenses. box and one teams like penn st. Put chip on Taylor and zone everyone else. Or try the 1-3-1. Rodney out top. Iverson in the middle, Hoff and Sampson on the sides, chip running the baseline or Trevor he is very fast and cant be posted up. At least if we practice playing a 1-3-1 we will have a better offense against it.
 

Zone defenses also give up a lot of offensive rebounds, we lose our height and size advantage to quicker teams.
 

station19 said:
Zone defenses also give up a lot of offensive rebounds, we lose our height and size advantage to quicker teams.
Click to expand...

Especially when Iverson runs out to contest the three ball. Why he does this is beyond me? I know, I know, Tubby instructs him to, but it is pointless since he can't get to the shooter and then we have one less rebounder. Rant over.
 

A better question is why Sampson is in the middle and not Iverson?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom