Zone

[Statefan10]

I feel like announcers don't know ****. I can barely stand to listen to a lot of them. Walters does a pretty good job on the radio, but that zone is definitely not a hybrid 2-3 zone.

Well it was Robbie Hummel, who knows quite a bit about basketball. But the 1-3-1 can look like weird in certain rotations and who knows, we might've played multiple variations of zone the other night and one of those times it could've been a hybrid 2-3.

 

[moores2]

I rewatched the game and what I think was even more impressive was our hustle on defense. The guys didn’t give up on plays. They fought for the ball. They fought for rebounds. I’m not sure if that was due to the zone.

Heck I even liked that we fouled quite a bit (especially non shooting fouls). That little bit of extra aggression was much needed, especially considering on how few fouls our guards normally have.

 

[MeowingCows]

I rewatched the game and what I think was even more impressive was our hustle on defense. The guys didn’t give up on plays. They fought for the ball. They fought for rebounds. I’m not sure if that was due to the zone.

The effort and speed was more related to personnel I'd say, but the rebounding and a little ball fighting can be attributed to zone as well. That naturally spaces them better for those events.

Heck I even liked that we fouled quite a bit (especially non shooting fouls). That little bit of extra aggression was much needed, especially considering on how few fouls our guards normally have.

I actually noticed and appreciated that, too. A lot of them weren't bad or costly fouls, just disruptive. I'm cool with that a few times. Just as long as you don't give up and-1s, if you're gonna foul someone, make damn sure that shot doesn't have a chance.

 

[moores2]

The effort and speed was more related to personnel I'd say, but the rebounding and a little ball fighting can be attributed to zone as well. That naturally spaces them better for those events.


I actually noticed and appreciated that, too. A lot of them weren't bad or costly fouls, just disruptive. I'm cool with that a few times. Just as long as you don't give up and-1s, if you're gonna foul someone, make damn sure that shot doesn't have a chance.

I think it also helped us get some favorable calls down the stretch. Having the foul count be 8-3 in the final 10 minutes, you can get away with a few things. But if you only have 3, they are going to call everything. (Example: fast break that Nixon swatted ball out of the guys hands and he ends up on the floor trying to draw the foul turned into a no call.)

 

[jsb]

Heck I even liked that we fouled quite a bit (especially non shooting fouls). That little bit of extra aggression was much needed, especially considering on how few fouls our guards normally have.

It seems like there were a few times where we turned the ball over and we got back in time to get the turnover.

 

[Cyinthenorth]

That Austin Reaves character is certainly hate-able. Hummell was spot on in his assessment of him "hand fighting" to push off or push past and away from his defender. Must've graduated from Jordan Bohannon U. Too bad refs never called it.

 

[AuH2O]

We don’t have the dudes to run a zone all the time. Other than the teams who use this as their go to D (Syracuse, Baylor), not many do. We don’t have the dudes to go man-to-man all the time either.

This is why having BOTH defensive options available to implement is important. Keeps offenses guessing. I would personally love to see ya implement more “press” also. Doesn’t have to be the “40 minutes of hell” style, but some full and 3/4 court, with Conditt on the back end.

I believe for this team to be successful defensively, we have to be (as Campbell would say) “multiple”. We just aren’t good enough to give an opposing offense the same look for 40 minutes.

I think this is what Prohm's trying to accomplish, and it makes sense. You really have two options if you are going to employ a zone. The first is that's what you do, and you're damn good at it. The second is you throw in a few different looks throughout the game. You might play man 70% of the possessions, but you're trying to steal some defensive possessions by messing with what the opponent is trying to do offensively. Eventually the offense is going to figure it out, and probably dissect a half-ass executed zone. But you might get them a little out of sorts and chewing up shot clock changing plays and getting guys into position.

I don't think it's that Prohm is trying to figure out a defense that works, it's more about changing looks a few times and getting a few more stops throughout the course of the game than you would've otherwise.

 

[cycfan1]

I feel like announcers don't know ****. I can barely stand to listen to a lot of them. Walters does a pretty good job on the radio, but that zone is definitely not a hybrid 2-3 zone.

If by Hybrid you mean 1-3-1 then they were correct.
The ESPN2 crew was manageable but man the ESPN+ crew was incompetent.