More zone defenses

[tux]

The first part of this SI article from Seth Davis (http://on.si.com/1G7k8ED) talks about how more teams are playing zone.

Several Duke references (K, Wojo, Dawkins).

I'm also selfishly posting this because I think it supports an argument I made in the Duke/Stanford post-game thread about how changes in offenses over the past 5-10 years (more pick and roll, more ball screens in general, etc) have been effective at attacking and spreading Duke's defense and may help explain some of Duke's struggles on that end... (obviously, some teams are better at D than others, but it's not all about personnel.)

Even if you don't agree with me, the article is worth reading.

[MChambers]

I agree; it's an interesting story.

[Henderson]

Great coaches evolve, in recruiting, in how they motivate players, in teaching style, and in their X's and O's.

K has done this. Cal has done this. Miller has done this. One of the criticisms of Roy over at IC (which I share) is that he has not. Res ipsa loquitur.

That may be why the hot coaches are younger.

[gep]

**********
From the article... Matta says. “Plus, the game has become so reliant on pick-and-roll. In a zone, we don’t have our bigs hedging on ball screens 25 feet from the basket. It’s more of a guard-on-guard switch, which is easier.”
**********

Isn't the guard-on-guard switch what Duke essentially did in the Wisconsin game? Someone also mentioned this was a kind of zone defense. And there were times that 6-1 Tyus was on 7-0 Kaminsky. Not to make the defense "easier", but to keep Jahlil and Amile down low?

[CDu]

**********
From the article... Matta says. “Plus, the game has become so reliant on pick-and-roll. In a zone, we don’t have our bigs hedging on ball screens 25 feet from the basket. It’s more of a guard-on-guard switch, which is easier.”
**********

Isn't the guard-on-guard switch what Duke essentially did in the Wisconsin game? Someone also mentioned this was a kind of zone defense. And there were times that 6-1 Tyus was on 7-0 Kaminsky. Not to make the defense "easier", but to keep Jahlil and Amile down low?

Well, not exactly. We switched every screen, whether big on small, small on small, big on big. Jones guarding Kaminsky wasn't done to allow Okafor to stay down low. It was done because Kaminsky set a screen on Jones. The result was that our big then had to guard on the perimeter and (if Kaminsky posted) Jones had to guard Kaminsky in the post.

What Matta was descibing as the benefit of the zone is to specifically avoid what happened in our game (getting a big stuck defending a guard on the perimeter and a small guarding a big in the post). The zone means that, if a big ventures out to set a screen, he isn't dragging a big out with him. So that screen just sends the ballhandler to the responsibility of the next closest defender, which is likely another wing.

What Coach K did was very risky because it specifically put our guys in bad spots. But it seemed to catch Wisconsin off guard (perhaps because it was so unorthodox) and they struggled to exploit it. If we were to play them again with the same strategy, we probably get abused. But the element of surprise sure worked for us that night.

[gep]

As you can tell (also from my previous posts on DBR), I'm not anywhere when talking technical details of basketball. Just really a big basketball fan. Thanks for your detailed explanation and insight.