Zone vs. man to man

[LitlBuck]

I was going to start a thread on this and then saw the following post and thought before every writer was posting in different threads about Ohio State's basketball defense that I would start a thread of its own specifically for that type of discussion.

Anyone else here think we need to scrap the freaking zone defense at one point or another? Every legitimate contender has to be able to MAN up and play real defense. I'm sorry but after watching Northwestern's unathletic shooters just hang in the corner all night knocking down easy wide open 3's on drive and kicks got absolutely irritating.

We have the athletes to man up, so why we stay in this pansy ass zone is beyond me at times. Don't get me wrong I understand that it works great at times...but do we EVER play man defense?

 

[LitlBuck]

I really don't understand it either why Matta continues to play the zone defense when I think we have as many athletes on this team as do others who played man-to-man. I have read where they seldom practice man-to-man during practice sessions and I have heard quotes from Matta similar to that if you think are zone defense is bad you should see them trying to play man-to-man in practice.

I don't know maybe depth is a factor but all of these guys I am sure played man-to-man in high school so they would have to at least know the fundamentals of playing that type of defense. There is a lot of learning to do when you play a zone defense and I just find it hard to believe that the learning curve would be that much steeper.

The problem I have with the zone is that too often it takes our big men away from the basket and no one really has block out responsibilities on an individual player. Sure, everyone is supposed to block out but when you are in a zone defense it is very difficult to block out an opposing player because you have to locate that player first.

I know that Northwestern runs a very difficult offense for a man-to-man defense one our zone certainly did not hold down the scoring there we saw last night and other nights during the season.

Three-point shooting has done us in a couple times during the season and I can't believe to help think that going to a man-to-man for a limited amount of minutes during a game would be a game killer for us.

I know everyone always says trust the coaches so maybe it's just the frustration coming out in me but I would like to see a little man-to-man.

 

[BuckeyeTillIDie]

I agree with your entire post. We have the athletes to play man, and it kills our rebounding, especially given our size.

Perhaps Matta believes that this team just isn't deep enough at some positions and doesn't want to "burn out" his best players by having them play pressure man for the the entire game.

 

[Padraig]

I would love to see us play more Man D to help our poor rebounding if for no other reason. But I figure with the loss of Lighty to injury and Crater to "whatever" that isn't going to happen.

We're lacking numbers to run our point for a full game, so I'm guessing that playing man d would tire out our guards all the more. I'll bet Matta went into this season with more diversity in mind with potential defensive sets, but the loss of those two players changed that drastically.

Just my uneducated guess.

 

[LitlBuck]

The thing about the depth is a little confusing to me because when Xavier went to the ?lite 8 with Matta they did not have much depth at all. I will admit that their starting five were more experienced but they did not go past 7 deep in the games that I saw.

And as far as wearing down, I don't understand why he has a passive press for 3/4 of the court. He could play man-to-man and just fall back into half-court defense.

I guess I would like to see a little change just to see a little change almost. Nothing could be worse than getting killed by three-point shooting when it could be made a little more difficult.

 

[PlanetFrnd]

If a team can't get through its slides in a match-up zone, they are not going to be a good team-man defense either... effectively there shouldn't be much of a difference between good team man and a good matchup anyway, including the rebounding.

 

[OHSportsFan]

I'd never really complained about the zone because we were holding teams under 65 a majority of the time and I feel our offense should be able to get 65+ points, so I thought we'd win a majority of our games. A game like last night is tough to swallow, especially since it's become a common sight.

The thing with a zone D is that I feel like even the best zone D can be broken down through film study and good execution.

The Big 10 is full of good coaches and they are beginning to eat our zone alive it seems.

A good man-to-man defense can't really be prepared for. I guess that sounds weird, but compared to how a team can practice and prepare for a zone (it stays the same pretty much).

 

[crazybuckfan40]

[quote='BusNative;141242;1]If a team can't get through its slides in a match-up zone, they are not going to be a good team-man defense either... effectively there shouldn't be much of a difference between good team man and a good matchup anyway, including the rebounding.[/quote]

This is so correct...

We do not run a true 3-2 or 1-2-2 what ever you want to call it. It is basically help defense, and you guard the man in your area...

So the difference is that you don't have a specific man and follow him and help off of him, and box that guy out...You have the guy in your area. When they overload an area in a regular zone that is how you beat it, but in the matchup zone you slide the area over and cover that man.

Some examples...last night Buford has help defense as PJ or Simmons got beat off the dribble...He lazily swipes at the ball and the guy gets into the lane with easy...Then late in the game on the last play he lazily slid in and then try to recover on the 3 ball and didn't get there fast enough...

In the zone you are not having to run baseline to baseline, or baseline ot top of the key to follow guys...But you still have to fight thru screens, still have to hedge screens, still have to rotate when a guy gets beat...It is no different...

i am not sure that people truly understand the zone...

And I continue to disagree that if this team played man to man that we would be any better rebounding...You would still have Evan turner trying to box out a PF, BJ/Dallas could very easily get pulled out on pick n rolls and IMO that is scary to think of them trying to defend pick n rolls,and how many careless fouls they would pick up...Remember Oden when he was here...We still struggled rebounding, because he would get pulled out...

And for the defense in general you are still going to have teams getting open looks, because we can't slide our feet and stay in front of people, get thru screens, rotate, etc...


For all the people that truly say they want to see man to man vs the zone, I would like to see their pros and cons and why they like the other...It is all about determination to go get the ball after a miss, or not let someone get around you, etc...PJ Hill is the smallest guy on the team, and he sticks his body in there with more authority than anyone else...

And we can see the team lacks rebounding skills when we see that they seem to not get many offensive rebounds, unless they miss a layup and are already in position and miss it right to themselves...There is no soaring thru the air, getting the better position, etc...

 

[crazybuckfan40]

I'd never really complained about the zone because we were holding teams under 65 a majority of the time and I feel our offense should be able to get 65+ points, so I thought we'd win a majority of our games. A game like last night is tough to swallow, especially since it's become a common sight.

The thing with a zone D is that I feel like even the best zone D can be broken down through film study and good execution.

The Big 10 is full of good coaches and they are beginning to eat our zone alive it seems.

A good man-to-man defense can't really be prepared for. I guess that sounds weird, but compared to how a team can practice and prepare for a zone (it stays the same pretty much).

Totally disagree with this...Basketball is all about matchups, so you just find the matchups different ways...You use pick n rolls, pick n pops, different plays, etc...Spread the team out and get the ball in the hands of the guy were the matchup is...

You can't tell me teams wouldn't pull BJ/Dallas from the basket right off the openeing tap as he is only big guy on the floor, or take Simmons off the dribble and create open looks for guys...Beat us up and down the floor like they do know...

You just have a zone offense vs. a man to man offense...We just hvae some many defensive defecencies playing a 6'7'' wing guy as a PF...Playing a PG that truly can't defend on the dribble drive...Have wing guys that lack the side to side quickness to really get in guys faces and play good defense...Or guys that leave their feet to much and get faked out by ball fakes...

 

[jimotis4heisman]

http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/other-osu-professional-sports/610499-hitchionary.html

word one is compete...

 

[Wingate1217]

And as far as wearing down, I don't understand why he has a passive press for 3/4 of the court. He could play man-to-man and just fall back into half-court defense.

It helps as you force your opponent to take time off his shot clock so instead of having 30+ seconds to set up an offensive he may have only have 20+ seconds. It is extremely difficult to play good sound half court defense for the whole regular shot clock without someone "breaking down".......

 

[BB73]

Totally disagree with this...Basketball is all about matchups, so you just find the matchups different ways...You use pick n rolls, pick n pops, different plays, etc...Spread the team out and get the ball in the hands of the guy were the matchup is...

You can't tell me teams wouldn't pull BJ/Dallas from the basket right off the openeing tap as he is only big guy on the floor, or take Simmons off the dribble and create open looks for guys...Beat us up and down the floor like they do know...

Teams would definitely use their big guy to set screens out high. Matta was asked about zone-vs-man a couple of weeks ago, and pointed out that Mullens doesn't yet know how to hedge on screens. If a man defense was tried, tOSU would probably be getting killed with drives down the lane and/or shooters coming around screens.

Multiple guys were slow to close on shooters last night, NW'ern stayed hot, and it made the zone look bad, so folks question its use. But I'm willing to admit that Thad Matta is much more qualified than I am in figuring out which defense to play.

Although I will admit to wondering how a triangle-and-2 would have worked in the second half last night. :tongue2:

 

[LitlBuck]

This is so correct...

We do not run a true 3-2 or 1-2-2 what ever you want to call it. It is basically help defense, and you guard the man in your area...

So the difference is that you don't have a specific man and follow him and help off of him, and box that guy out...You have the guy in your area. When they overload an area in a regular zone that is how you beat it, but in the matchup zone you slide the area over and cover that man.

First, I am not just talking about last night and I will keep my response short because I think you know how I feel. Boxing out an area it is not the same as boxing out a man. You have to find a man in the area to box him out.

In the zone you are not having to run baseline to baseline, or baseline ot top of the key to follow guys...But you still have to fight thru screens, still have to hedge screens, still have to rotate when a guy gets beat...It is no different...

If there is not that much difference between a zone and man-to-man why are we playing zone all of the time and why don't more teams play zone defense I really can't think of one Division I school that plays exclusively zone defense except maybe for 'Cuse and I think JB mixes it up a little.

i am not sure that people truly understand the zone...

I know that I don't

And I continue to disagree that if this team played man to man that we would be any better rebounding

I really don't know how you and other people can make such a general statement when we have not seen this team play man-to-man.

For all the people that truly say they want to see man to man vs the zone, I would like to see their pros and cons and why they like the other...It is all about determination to go get the ball after a miss, or not let someone get around you, etc...PJ Hill is the smallest guy on the team, and he sticks his body in there with more authority than anyone else...

I think I have made some pros and cons for each defense. I am also not saying that we could not play some zone and some man-to-man. You are making statements based on something that we have never seen this season and that is us playing some man-to-man defense. Not the entire game just a little bit. Bolded applies also in a man-to-man.

And we can see the team lacks rebounding skills when we see that they seem to not get many offensive rebounds, unless they miss a layup and are already in position and miss it right to themselves...There is no soaring thru the air, getting the better position, etc...

You sort of just made my point because most of the teams that we have played play man-to-man defense and maybe that is one of the reasons that we are not getting offensive rebounds. I do not want to hear about the athletic ability of some of our guys because some of them really do have some hops.

I know that we both want this team to win. I would just like Coach Matta to try something different once or twice during a game. You know that this has been building up inside me for quite some time.

 

[BuckeyeTillIDie]

Just some stats in re: the zone (for 2008-2009)

OPP PPG: 61.3
OPP FGP%: .403%
OPP 3PT: 184/528 -- .348%
OPP RBs: 35.3/game

In reality, the stats aren't too bad. It seems in the games where the Bucks lose there is a combination of a hot shooting team from behind the arc and a high number of tOSU turnovers.

 

[LitlBuck]

Just some stats in re: the zone (for 2008-2009)

OPP PPG: 61.3
OPP FGP%: .403%
OPP 3PT: 184/528 -- .348%
OPP RBs: 35.3/game

In reality, the stats aren't too bad. It seems in the games where the Bucks lose there is a combination of a hot shooting team from behind the arc and a high number of tOSU turnovers.

The only really telling stat is the PPG and rebounds. You can hold a team down as far as their % of shots made but you really don't know how many shots they have taken. It would be interesting to see Ohio State's same statistics.