Bruce Pearl just said....

#102
#102
BasketVolKid said:
wrong. good ball movement is key to beating any zone defense. and it's not just zip it around the perimeter at lightning speed as you seem to think. there are seams in the zone that you exploit with proper spacing, ball movement, player movement and penetration. believe it or not you can also set screens in against a zone too. but if you can't grasp the concept of good ball movement and spacing... setting screens is way beyond your compabilities.
Click to expand...

You just don't get it, man. The zone has to extend before there are seams, before there are openings. Having spacing is irrelevant with our personnel on the floor. They simply stay in the paint on Prince; there is no seam when he gets the ball. They extend slightly more on Hopson but they allow him to shoot all day. They double down on the post against Chism and deny the high post.

Typically, if teams are playing a normal zone, ball movement will cause the defenders to move. With us, and our lack of perimeter shooting, ball movement does not move the defenders that would create seams to attack. You essentially have to knock down a few jumpers to beat it. We couldn't do it, and we played no defense in the first half and got our ass beat. It's as simple as that.

This takes a little more than an elementary understanding of a zone; therefore, you might not have the "compabilities" to grasp it.
 
Last edited:
#103
#103
When teams play the 3-2 on us like GA. did we have to be able to hit 3's. At least make them respect it. Scotty is the only one that has hit a 3 the last 2 games I believe and that's just not going to cut it. If they don't respect our outside shot then we have no chance at driving to the basket. If McBee, Wooldrige, Maze and Tatum can all find there shot the next time we go against the zone it will open the lanes for Maze or someone else to drive to the basket to; score, to dish it off underneath or to drive and kick it back out for a open three. But getting them to hit their 3's is the biggest problem.
 
#106
#106
LawVol13 said:
You just don't get it, man. The zone has to extend before there are seams, before there are openings. Having spacing is irrelevant with our personnel on the floor. They simply stay in the paint on Prince; there is no seam when he gets the ball. They extend slightly more on Hopson but they allow him to shoot all day. They double down on the post against Chism and deny the high post.

Typically, if teams are playing a normal zone, ball movement will cause the defenders to move. With us, and our lack of perimeter shooting, ball movement does not move the defenders that would create seams to attack. You essentially have to knock down a few jumpers to beat it. We couldn't do it, and we played no defense in the first half and got our ass beat. It's as simple as that.

This takes a little more than an elementary understanding of a zone; therefore, you might not have the "compabilities" to grasp it.
Click to expand...

this is simply not true. one of the biggest mis-conceptions about offense versus zone defense is that you HAVE to hit outside shots to beat it. this is why you see teams standing around jacking up 3's versus a zone. sure... hitting a few 3's in a row is a sure fire way to get the coach from the opposing team to promptly change his defense. but it is not the only way to beat a zone. it's not "hit 3's or die" versus a zone. i will admit however... it takes much more discipline and patience than standing around jacking up three's. unfortunately, bruce doesn't have much of that... and neither do his players.
 
#107
#107
BasketVolKid said:
this is simply not true. one of the biggest mis-conceptions about offense versus zone defense is that you HAVE to hit outside shots to beat it. this is why you see teams standing around jacking up 3's versus a zone. sure... hitting a few 3's in a row is a sure fire way to get the coach from the opposing team to promptly change his defense. but it is not the only way to beat a zone. it's not "hit 3's or die" versus a zone. i will admit however... it takes much more discipline and patience than standing around jacking up three's. unfortunately, bruce doesn't have much of that... and neither do his players.
Click to expand...

Explain to me the part of what I said that is incorrect.
 
#109
#109
BasketVolKid said:
u are saying... we have to hit 3's to beat a zone. this is false.
Click to expand...

Reading comprehension is tough. But I'll explain again. People don't play straight up zones against us. They simply won't extend on our wings. They pack it in; there are no seams created that we could drive through. They deny the high post and the block. When people play this type of zone, you have to knock down some jump shots to loosen so we would have the ability to do what you originally said, which was to hit the seams and attack the middle. If you can't make a shot, they will pack it in, keep you from driving or hitting the high post. This forces you to shoot jumpers. And if you think that's false, you have no clue what you're talking about.
 
#110
#110
LawVol13 said:
Reading comprehension is tough. But I'll explain again. People don't play straight up zones against us. They simply won't extend on our wings. They pack it in; there are no seams created that we could drive through. They deny the high post and the block. When people play this type of zone, you have to knock down some jump shots to loosen so we would have the ability to do what you originally said, which was to hit the seams and attack the middle. If you can't make a shot, they will pack it in, keep you from driving or hitting the high post. This forces you to shoot jumpers. And if you think that's false, you have no clue what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

i understand what you are saying. it is simply false to say... you have to hit 3's or die versus a zone. i don't care what kinda zone it is. it is a mis-conception. you are not FORCED to do anything. action is faster than reaction... you FORCE the zone to react. yes... its easy to sit back and try to hit jumpers all day. like i said... it takes discipline and patience when you aren't hitting from 3... but it is certainly possible when you have the proper instruction on how to play offense versus a zone. discipline is something that is sorely lacking from our players from year to year. it's generally why we suck overall in the half-court set versus any defense... if we don't have Lofton bombing 3's we generally look rather pathetic in the half-court.
 
Last edited:
#111
#111
BasketVolKid said:
i understand what you are saying. it is simply false to say... you have to hit 3's or die versus a zone. i don't care what kinda zone it is. it is a mis-conception.
Click to expand...

:eek:lol: I'd love to hear you attempt to explain how to beat that type of zone without being able to hit a shot.
 
#112
#112
LawVol13 said:
Reading comprehension is tough. But I'll explain again. People don't play straight up zones against us. They simply won't extend on our wings. They pack it in; there are no seams created that we could drive through. They deny the high post and the block. When people play this type of zone, you have to knock down some jump shots to loosen so we would have the ability to do what you originally said, which was to hit the seams and attack the middle. If you can't make a shot, they will pack it in, keep you from driving or hitting the high post. This forces you to shoot jumpers. And if you think that's false, you have no clue what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

This
 
#113
#113
LawVol13 said:
:eek:lol: I'd love to hear you attempt to explain how to beat that type of zone without being able to hit a shot.
Click to expand...

isn't that funny. you aren't going to beat any defense without hitting ANY shots. that's ridiculous. but you are saying we have to be able to hit 3's to beat a zone and the 3-2 UGA played. and that is false. there are ways to overload the zone, set screens, take advantage of the short corner... especially versus a 3-2. the high post was generally vacant the entire game... a wide open hole in the middle of the zone and chism standing out at the 3 point line.
 
#114
#114
BasketVolKid said:
i understand what you are saying. it is simply false to say... you have to hit 3's or die versus a zone. i don't care what kinda zone it is. it is a mis-conception. you are not FORCED to do anything. action is faster than reaction... you FORCE the zone to react. yes... its easy to sit back and try to hit jumpers all day. like i said... it takes discipline and patience when you aren't hitting from 3... but it is certainly possible when you have the proper instruction on how to play offense versus a zone. discipline is something that is sorely lacking from our players from year to year. it's generally why we suck overall in the half-court set versus any defense... if we don't have Lofton bombing 3's we generally look rather pathetic in the half-court.
Click to expand...
.
 
#115
#115
BasketVolKid said:
isn't that funny. you aren't going to beat any defense without hitting ANY shots. that's ridiculous. but you are saying we have to be able to hit 3's to beat a zone and the 3-2 UGA played. and that is false. there are ways to overload the zone, set screens, take advantage of the short corner... especially versus a 3-2. the high post was generally vacant the entire game... a wide open hole in the middle of the zone and chism standing out at the 3 point line.
Click to expand...

.
 
Last edited:
#116
#116
BasketVolKid said:
isn't that funny. you aren't going to beat any defense without hitting ANY shots. that's ridiculous. but you are saying we have to be able to hit 3's to beat a zone and the 3-2 UGA played. and that is false. there are ways to overload the zone, set screens, take advantage of the short corner... especially versus a 3-2. the high post was generally vacant the entire game... a wide open hole in the middle of the zone and chism standing out at the 3 point line.
Click to expand...

If you overloaded the zone and had Prince in the corner Hopson on the wing and Chism on the block, this is what would happen. The the back post responsible for Prince would simply drop off of him and double Chism. Hopson's man would sluff off of him and not allow him to drive. So, what would you do then?

The short corner was unavailable because the defenders sluffing off our wings made it impossible to enter to the short corner.

You can't set screens for your perimeter guys because no one is guarding them to begin with. You couldn't set screens for the posts because they were essentially doubled the whole game.

The high post was absolutely not wide open the entire game. The gut man in the 3-2 played between Chism and the high post when the ball was on the wing. This, coupled with the wing defender sluffing off our perimeter players made the high post unavailable the entire ball game.

That pretty much shoots down all your points. Again, I'm sorry, but you're wrong on everything you have said about this thus far. This is why you should probably refrain from constant criticism when you don't have the requisite knowledge needed to make a valid criticism.
 
Last edited:
#117
#117
LawVol13 said:
If you overloaded the zone and had Prince in the corner Hopson on the wing and Chism on the block, this is what would happen. The the back post responsible for Prince would simply drop off of him and double Chism. Hopson's man would sluff off of him and not allow him to drive. So, what would you do then?

The short corner was unavailable because the defenders sluffing off our wings made it impossible to enter to the short corner.

You can't set screens for your perimeter guys because no one is guarding them to begin with. You couldn't set screens for the posts because they were essentially doubled the whole game.

The high post was absolutely not wide open the entire game. The gut man in the 3-2 played between Chism and the high post when the ball was on the wing. This, coupled with the wing defender sluffing off our perimeter players made the high post unavailable the entire ball game.

That pretty much shoots down all your points. Again, I'm sorry, but you're wrong on everything you have said about this thus far. This is why you should probably refrain from constant criticism when you don't have the requisite knowledge needed to make a valid criticism.
Click to expand...

u sound just like pearl. you're right. we can't win against a zone. it's impossible. i guess every team will copy the uga 3-2 and we won't win another game. this is ridiculous. the guys won't train... they won't play hard... he won't coach effort... he can't press with them... this isn't tennessee basketball... blah blah blah.

everything you just said was happening because our player movement and ball movement sucked. when everyone stands around in the same spots and tosses the ball around with lost looks on their face... the zone doesn't have to react to anything and u get zero production. but apparently we have no other options against a good zone. we should just call the game when they come out in a zone. WTF?

the thing is... i can understand us looking so lost the first time a team zones us... but our guys still don't know how to attack a zone. we didn't have a field goal in 12 minutes versus memphis... and we still think all we can do against a zone is jack up outside shots.
 
Last edited:
#118
#118
BasketVolKid said:
u sound just like pearl. you're right. we can't win against a zone. it's impossible. i guess every team will copy the uga 3-2 and we won't win another game. this is ridiculous.

everything you just said was happening because our player movement and ball movement sucked. when everyone stands around in the same spots and tosses the ball around with lost looks on their face... the zone doesn't have to react to anything and u get zero production. but apparently we have no other options against a good zone. we should just call the game when they come out in a zone. WTF?
Click to expand...

If I was playing Tennessee, I sure would copy that 3-2 zone. Again, it had nothing to do with player movement, ball movement, it had to do with our inability to make them respect our wings' shot. Until we do that, expect us to struggle scoring. Of course, had we played defense against UGA, it still would have been a competitive game. But we will absolutely will continue to struggle scoring against the zone if we don't start shooting the ball better.

And again, your points are 100% wrong about ball movement and player movement in the zone.
 
#119
#119
LawVol13 said:
If I was playing Tennessee, I sure would copy that 3-2 zone. Again, it had nothing to do with player movement, ball movement, it had to do with our inability to make them respect our wings' shot. Until we do that, expect us to struggle scoring. Of course, had we played defense against UGA, it still would have been a competitive game. But we will absolutely will continue to struggle scoring against the zone if we don't start shooting the ball better.

And again, your points are 100% wrong about ball movement and player movement in the zone.
Click to expand...

FAIL. anyone with a JV IQ knows you can't stand around and expect any production versus any defense. ball movement and player movement (screens, overloads, penetration etc... ) is the foundation for good sound, fundamental basketball. standing around and jacking up 3's is a good sound fundamental way of getting blown out.
 
#120
#120
BasketVolKid said:
FAIL. anyone with a JV IQ knows you can't stand around and expect any production versus any defense. ball movement and player movement (screens, overloads, penetration etc... ) is the foundation for good sound, fundamental basketball. standing around and jacking up 3's is a good sound fundamental way of getting blown out.
Click to expand...

I'm quite confident that you don't have this requirement.
 
#121
#121
LawVol13 said:
I'm quite confident that you don't have this requirement.
Click to expand...

cuz i don't think standing around jacking up 3's is a winning strategy. you've clearly made your point. you musta had some kinda whacked red-neck as a coach down there in juco. :finger3:
 
#123
#123
LawVol13 said:
You just don't get it, man. The zone has to extend before there are seams, before there are openings. Having spacing is irrelevant with our personnel on the floor. They simply stay in the paint on Prince; there is no seam when he gets the ball. They extend slightly more on Hopson but they allow him to shoot all day. They double down on the post against Chism and deny the high post.

Typically, if teams are playing a normal zone, ball movement will cause the defenders to move. With us, and our lack of perimeter shooting, ball movement does not move the defenders that would create seams to attack. You essentially have to knock down a few jumpers to beat it. We couldn't do it, and we played no defense in the first half and got our ass beat. It's as simple as that.

This takes a little more than an elementary understanding of a zone; therefore, you might not have the "compabilities" to grasp it.
Click to expand...
There are always seams in a 3-2. You just have to move to the baseline and post either the 4 or 5 man or cut from backside to high post or middle and kill the defender that's sloughing back. That, or a wing can always drive to the seam and force the defense to react. At that point, either the high or low post, if they've done anything to get open or seal a man, is available for the ball. If the low defenders are fronting and we can't find lobs or backdoor cutters, we suck.
 
#124
#124
I live in Nashville and all that talk radio here is talking about is how good Vandy is. I'm certainly not saying they're not, but one of the guys actually said they're an Elite 8 or possibly a Final 4 team. I hope we bring our A game tomorrow so I don't have to listen to this hype for the next week. And, as much as I'd like to see Kentucky with a few losses, I hope they pound them by 30 too.
 
#125
#125
the man that called Vandy a final 4 team should be removed from the air and considered a candidate for initiation of population control.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top