ADVERTISEMENT

Zone and 3's

Cardsstink

All-SEC
Mar 20, 2017
7,791
10,434
113
I'm not a fan that wants zone all the time. But I do find it hilarious that Cal jokes about not playing zone because the other team will hit 3's. Well how could anybody hit any more 3's than Vermont today against the man to man? I never understood why he says that.
 
Fundamentally different

for systematic approach to allow a three or failing to guard a three. Doing zone against this team is planning to fail.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SemperFiCat
A zone is not just intended to force the opposing team to take 3's. It can also be used to keep your players in position to better guard their assigned area and allow you to actually guard the permiter better. They got a lot of really wide open looks in the man to man because of switches and help defense. The zone Friday night was extremely effective due to KY's length. I would not have gone zone in the last 5 minutes but some zone should have been implemented in this game starting around the 15:00 mark of the 2nd half at least for a different look and change of pace.
 
Disagree because of our length as well as being able to change their rhythm as they are clearly in a rhythm. Should have tried it for a few minutes.

i always love people who play the if game and always assume the better outcome. its just stupid. it really is.
 
I'm not a fan that wants zone all the time. But I do find it hilarious that Cal jokes about not playing zone because the other team will hit 3's. Well how could anybody hit any more 3's than Vermont today against the man to man? I never understood why he says that.
He doesn’t play zone because it’s his responsibility to teach the guys what they will play in the pros. It’s as simple as that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: westerncat
Zone it almost worked against Utah Valley .
I am not a proponent of zone ONLY defense but when the Vermont pg went out then zone .
 
Zones forces teams to take more threes.

Do we really want that today?

Whether we zone or not this season, it's gonna be used like 5-10% of the time if at all.

We HAVE to play better man to man.

Cal is interested in how we look in March, not November. I think he would rather play man to man and have a close game than go zone and win big. Simply cause he knows that's what we need to improve on if we wanna be where we need to be. And I'm ok with that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 78Gooses
The issue was with our man to man. You throw a zone at what we faced today, it gets shredded. These guys could shoot and they played smart basketball. We won with inexperienced kids because they stuck with man to man and improved over the last game.

The past two games were against the two most skilled basketball teams these kids have ever faced in their lives. The next game will be even worse. Superior individual basketball talent does not translate to instant skilled team basketball. Now we’ve been at this one and done stuff for several years. It takes a awhile to gel and develop team proficiency. Anybody with one eye, half sense and the smallest measure of basketball experience knows that or should by now. Some of you need to keep up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 78Gooses
A zone is not just intended to force the opposing team to take 3's. It can also be used to keep your players in position to better guard their assigned area and allow you to actually guard the permiter better. They got a lot of really wide open looks in the man to man because of switches and help defense. The zone Friday night was extremely effective due to KY's length. I would not have gone zone in the last 5 minutes but some zone should have been implemented in this game starting around the 15:00 mark of the 2nd half at least for a different look and change of pace.
THIS^^^^^^^
Good observation and logic.
 
He doesn’t play zone because it’s his responsibility to teach the guys what they will play in the pros. It’s as simple as that.

I don't care one iota about the "pros".
If playing zone insures a UK win, that's what Cal should use. I'm sure none of the other top college coaches ever play zone either (being facetious here).
 
  • Like
Reactions: BoxterS
I don't care one iota about the "pros".
If playing zone insures a UK win, that's what Cal should use. I'm sure none of the other top college coaches ever play zone either (being facetious here).
Cal does things this way. Not my decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BoxterS
I don't care one iota about the "pros".
If playing zone insures a UK win, that's what Cal should use. I'm sure none of the other top college coaches ever play zone either (being facetious here).

The only way we win in March is if the man to man gets better.

This isn't a "pros" thing. This is a March thing.

I'd rather lose in November because our man to man stinks than to lose in March because our man to man stinks. Only way it gets better is practice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: G-PIP and 78Gooses
The only way we win in March is if the man to man gets better.

This isn't a "pros" thing. This is a March thing.

I'd rather lose in November because our man to man stinks than to lose in March because our man to man stinks. Only way it gets better is practice.

Yeah but 5 minutes of zone here and there doesn't stunt that growth and will save our ass some times.....it's already saved our ass once.
 
Yeah but 5 minutes of zone here and there doesn't stunt that growth and will save our ass some times.....it's already saved our ass once.

I don't deny that. I think switching it up a possession or two wouldn't have been a bad idea.

But I also don't think it would have made some huge difference either.
 
ZONE!!!! Cal needs to either care about UK winning or find another school. He is always too worried about NBA
Cal doesn't care about winning here, yet he is winning. How does that work? A lot of coaches care about winning and are not winning
 
I don't deny that. I think switching it up a possession or two wouldn't have been a bad idea.

But I also don't think it would have made some huge difference either.

I don't either, just think it's funny that Cal said teams hit 3's when we go zone but never seems to have a problem with it when it happens against the man to man. He's dug in on putting NBA first, and its why we get some of the best recruits so the postives outweigh the negatives IMO.
 
The length of this team would be able to shut down a 3 shooting team. That’s the one scenario where it will work. The man defense sure didn’t do it today. What did they have, 11 3’s? I agree in most cases a good shooting team would shred a zone but a long team can push them farther out and neutralize that weapon. Today they were simply moving the ball in UK, and penetrating and kicking out to open shooters. Too easy.
 
I don't either, just think it's funny that Cal said teams hit 3's when we go zone but never seems to have a problem with it when it happens against the man to man. He's dug in on putting NBA first, and its why we get some of the best recruits so the postives outweigh the negatives IMO.

it is kinda funny tho cause he's right. Obviously it's just a small sample but there's a time last season where we zoned and right away teams would hit a 3 lol.

I think he just hates zone and looks for excuses to not use it lol.

FWIW tho since Cal has been here we've actually guard the 3 really well. In 2015, teams only shot 27% on the season from 3 against us. Last season, while our 2pt FG% defending was awful (131rd when we normally rank in the top 10 in that category), the 3pt FG% defense was really good. Teams only shot 30.6% against us.

So overall he's doing some right
 
The only way we win in March is if the man to man gets better.

This isn't a "pros" thing. This is a March thing.

I'd rather lose in November because our man to man stinks than to lose in March because our man to man stinks. Only way it gets better is practice.

This. Well said. Doesn’t take as long to learn zone. Wasn’t the answer today anyway.
 
Even today.......Vermont only shot 34.5% from 3.

Yeah they hit 10 but they did take 29

34.5 is basically the same as shooting 51 from 2 pt land.
that's not great but it's still around average.

So it's not like they went bonkers from 3
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT