What are your pre season thoughts regarding coach Martin...

#80
#80
Will a Cuonzo coached team still be castrated by zone defense?

That will tell me plenty about his future.
 
#82
#82
bamacheats said:
Will a Cuonzo coached team still be castrated by zone defense?

That will tell me plenty about his future.
Click to expand...


Barton and the new kid will know what to do against the zone and Maymon is a great guy to have receive the ball @ the ft line, where the zone is weak. He can go left or right, draw and dish to Stokes, or kick it out when the d collapses. J rich could do that as well, but we really didn't have anyone last year that wanted to get to that spot, or knew what to do if they ever did.
 
#83
#83
Spartacavolus said:
Barton and the new kid will know what to do against the zone and Maymon is a great guy to have receive the ball @ the ft line, where the zone is weak. He can go left or right, draw and dish to Stokes, or kick it out when the d collapses. J rich could do that as well, but we really didn't have anyone last year that wanted to get to that spot, or knew what to do if they ever did.
Click to expand...

This. Golden was a lost ball in high weeds when it came to attacking zone defenses. Maymon's versatility will help break it down. Of course, having capable outside shooting threats will help too.
 
#84
#84
I agree that the personnel is better to face a zone defense now, but I'm wondering is Cuonzo better at teaching that personnel to attack a zone defense.

Saying Cuonzo doesn't like zone is as understated as saying volmav doesn't like gay, black Muslims.

I think Cuonzo avoids zone for the same reason Bruce avoided zone; they don't fully understand it, so they can't adequately teach it, much less how to defend it.
 
#85
#85
bamacheats said:
I think Cuonzo avoids zone for the same reason Bruce avoided zone; they don't fully understand it, so they can't adequately teach it, much less how to defend it.
Click to expand...

The zone is not hard at all to understand. He completely understands what is going on.

When you don't have the personnel to beat it it may make you look lost, but this year we should have no problems with zone O.
 
#88
#88
ranradVOL said:
The zone is not hard at all to understand. He completely understands what is going on.

When you don't have the personnel to beat it it may make you look lost, but this year we should have no problems with zone O.
Click to expand...

The concept of zone is easy to understand, the nuances are not.

People who think its easy are unknowingly admitting to not fully comprehending it.
 
#89
#89
bamacheats said:
I agree that the personnel is better to face a zone defense now, but I'm wondering is Cuonzo better at teaching that personnel to attack a zone defense.

Saying Cuonzo doesn't like zone is as understated as saying volmav doesn't like gay, black Muslims.

I think Cuonzo avoids zone for the same reason Bruce avoided zone; they don't fully understand it, so they can't adequately teach it, much less how to defend it.
Click to expand...

I've taught children to execute a 2-3 zone. I learned it as a child. It is very elementary, and if our coaching staff doesn't understand it, then we have really lost hope. The only defense easier to teach/understand is man-to-man.

Attacking it isn't very hard either, but you can't dribble the ball 35 feet from the basket like Trae Golden and wait for the Red Sea to part. You have to constantly move the ball around the perimeter and wait for someone to be slow breaking to the pass and flash Maymon to the middle to break it down with a shot, drive, dish to Stokes, or kick-out to McRae.

I hope to goodness CCM and Pearl knew that much. Getting your players to execute it with a PG who is inept is another matter. Hopefully, Barton and DT are smart enough to make it happen.
 
#90
#90
cncchris33 said:
I've taught children to execute a 2-3 zone. I learned it as a child. It is very elementary, and if our coaching staff doesn't understand it, then we have really lost hope. The only defense easier to teach/understand is man-to-man.

Attacking it isn't very hard either, but you can't dribble the ball 35 feet from the basket like Trae Golden and wait for the Red Sea to part. You have to constantly move the ball around the perimeter and wait for someone to be slow breaking to the pass and flash Maymon to the middle to break it down with a shot, drive, dish to Stokes, or kick-out to McRae.

I hope to goodness CCM and Pearl knew that much. Getting your players to execute it with a PG who is inept is another matter. Hopefully, Barton and DT are smart enough to make it happen.
Click to expand...

Missed block out assignments are the main reason it is hard for teams to run. I agree that the basic concept is easy to teach/understand, but if it were easy to run effectively the Cuse wouldn't be the only team you hear about running it. I think the problem is the kids never run it in AAU or high school.(for the most part) And by the time they come to college, coaches don;t have the time to teach them to run it effectively. IMO it requires dicipline, repetition, and communication and these arent necessarily qualities most teenagers possess.

And as far as attacking the zone goes, I think the flasher to the free throw line is as important of a key as the pg.IMO And I remember times last year that Kenny Hall was asked to be that guy for UT. nuff said there... Does CCM have trouble teaching his guys to attack it, I don't think so. I just think he hasn't had the personnel so far(here anyway) to attack it.
 
#91
#91
bamacheats said:
I agree that the personnel is better to face a zone defense now, but I'm wondering is Cuonzo better at teaching that personnel to attack a zone defense.

Saying Cuonzo doesn't like zone is as understated as saying volmav doesn't like gay, black Muslims.

I think Cuonzo avoids zone for the same reason Bruce avoided zone; they don't fully understand it, so they can't adequately teach it, much less how to defend it.
Click to expand...


The way I look at it, if you are a 9th grade pg and someone zones you up, you shouldn't have to look to the coach to get your players lined up and attack. Being a jr in college and having to look at the coach as to what to do when you see a 2-3 zone is absolutely baffling to me.
 
#92
#92
Spartacavolus said:
The way I look at it, if you are a 9th grade pg and someone zones you up, you shouldn't have to look to the coach to get your players lined up and attack. Being a jr in college and having to look at the coach as to what to do when you see a 2-3 zone is absolutely baffling to me.
Click to expand...

If the team has 3 or 4 different sets to run against a zone defense then it is likely the pg is looking to find which one to run. However, I highly doubt UT has 3 different offensive sets to attack a zone defense. In fact, I think we have two. The weeve and put a post player at the free throw line and try to go inside out from there.
 
#93
#93
Spartacavolus said:
The way I look at it, if you are a 9th grade pg and someone zones you up, you shouldn't have to look to the coach to get your players lined up and attack. Being a jr in college and having to look at the coach as to what to do when you see a 2-3 zone is absolutely baffling to me.
Click to expand...

The only place you're going to find a 9th grade pg that can identify and attack a zone is white, rural America, coached by someone 50+ years old.

Racist imo.
 
#94
#94
cncchris33 said:
I've taught children to execute a 2-3 zone. I learned it as a child. It is very elementary, and if our coaching staff doesn't understand it, then we have really lost hope. The only defense easier to teach/understand is man-to-man.

Attacking it isn't very hard either, but you can't dribble the ball 35 feet from the basket like Trae Golden and wait for the Red Sea to part. You have to constantly move the ball around the perimeter and wait for someone to be slow breaking to the pass and flash Maymon to the middle to break it down with a shot, drive, dish to Stokes, or kick-out to McRae.

I hope to goodness CCM and Pearl knew that much. Getting your players to execute it with a PG who is inept is another matter. Hopefully, Barton and DT are smart enough to make it happen.
Click to expand...

Your ability to teach children the 2-3 is probably the same skill set Cuonzo has to teach college kids the 2-3.
 
#96
#96
GoobieVol said:
If the team has 3 or 4 different sets to run against a zone defense then it is likely the pg is looking to find which one to run. However, I highly doubt UT has 3 different offensive sets to attack a zone defense. In fact, I think we have two. The weeve and put a post player at the free throw line and try to go inside out from there.
Click to expand...


you really only need one set with the right players and teams won't zone you more than 2 possessions.
 
#98
#98
GoobieVol said:
Missed block out assignments are the main reason it is hard for teams to run. I agree that the basic concept is easy to teach/understand, but if it were easy to run effectively the Cuse wouldn't be the only team you hear about running it. I think the problem is the kids never run it in AAU or high school.(for the most part) And by the time they come to college, coaches don;t have the time to teach them to run it effectively. IMO it requires dicipline, repetition, and communication and these arent necessarily qualities most teenagers possess.

And as far as attacking the zone goes, I think the flasher to the free throw line is as important of a key as the pg.IMO And I remember times last year that Kenny Hall was asked to be that guy for UT. nuff said there... Does CCM have trouble teaching his guys to attack it, I don't think so. I just think he hasn't had the personnel so far(here anyway) to attack it.
Click to expand...

Most of that is a fair assessment. As to why more teams don't run it like Syracuse, I think it is more of a coach's preference than anything. Similar to why some football coaches run a 4-3 vs a 3-4 defense. Not that either is supremely more difficult to teach or coach. Boeheim just prefers the zone to man-to-man, and having coached it for so long, he is an expert at it.
 
#99
#99
We actually did better against zones with McRae's development.

Really, if you can't shoot, it doesn't matter what you run. Sure you have good sets, but if you can't space the floor, your success will be limited. It's how Michigan beat Syracuse last year. The key is to kick and drive. Burke set it up for Staukas and Hardaway.

Golden lost his shot, McBee was inconsistent, Reese was a freshman with too many weaknesses, and J-Rich can't shoot 3's.

Last thing: our zone offense was stagnant when the ball entered to Jarnell. Nobody moved or cut or reset for an outside look. That's on CCM.
 
#100
#100
cncchris33 said:
Most of that is a fair assessment. As to why more teams don't run it like Syracuse, I think it is more of a coach's preference than anything. Similar to why some football coaches run a 4-3 vs a 3-4 defense. Not that either is supremely more difficult to teach or coach. Boeheim just prefers the zone to man-to-man, and having coached it for so long, he is an expert at it.
Click to expand...

Curious of your opinion on this. Why do you think it is that most prefer man to man, given Boeheim success?

Especially smaller schools would consistantly play against bigger and faster guys.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top