Man to man versus Nova

[Brandon86]

I really wish we would mix it up sometimes against them. I’m m gonna be honest, they just ain’t a good matchup for us. They kill is when they always able to post up. Even their guards be backing ours down, and they get to many easy baskets that way. I think we would have more success against them if we switched up defenses sometimes.

 

[Hurleyman216]

Yes…we should zone one of the best 3 point shooting teams that made 13 3’s tonight….

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

I did not intentionally like this post

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Yes…we should zone one of the best 3 point shooting teams that made 13 3’s tonight….

Are there any teams that play a 1980’s style pack-it-in zone anymore? A lot of teams play stretch 2-3 zones because they are better at defending the 3.

 

[Hurleyman216]

Are there any teams that play a 1980’s style pack-it-in zone anymore? A lot of teams play stretch 2-3 zones because they are better at defending the 3.

The way Nova moves the ball if we had played them zone tonight they would have made 25 threes and we would have lost by 15 points…the fact anyone is suggesting we should have gone zone on them is absurd. You don’t play zone against a team with 5 shooters unless you really want to lose

 

[Brandon86]

Yes…we should zone one of the best 3 point shooting teams that made 13 3’s tonight….

I don’t think some of y’all be understanding basketball sometimes. I think some people on here has watched a lot of basketball, maybe never played it. Helping so much on them backing out players down to the post is the way they be getting all them WIDE open 3’s. Rewatch the game. Watch how they get all the open shots. When your as long and athletic as UConn is, playing a zone can shrink the court. You can use your athleticism as an asset as well when playing zone.

 

[Brandon86]

Are there any teams that play a 1980’s style pack-it-in zone anymore? A lot of teams play stretch 2-3 zones because they are better at defending the 3.

This is exactly what I’m talking about. Nobody is talking about playing and old school packed in zone to force them to shoot open 3’s lol.

 

[WhiteKnight]

Plays of the game?..The Wrenches's man to man post D, and Polley's three...

 

[August_West]

The way Nova moves the ball if we had played them zone tonight they would have made 25 threes and we would have lost by 15 points…the fact anyone is suggesting we should have gone zone on them is absurd. You don’t play zone against a team with 5 shooters unless you really want to lose

Absolutely right.the difference between Philly last month and tonight is our one on one defenders held ground. Especially at rim.

 

[Waquoit]

You have to give Nova credit for making 3's even when they are not totally open. You have to give our guys credit for not cracking when it was happening.

 

[Brandon86]

Absolutely right.the difference between Philly last month and tonight is our one on one defenders held ground. Especially at rim.

The real difference is the kid missed the FT and Polley hit the 3 to give us a chance. If he hits it, we probably lose again. Cause we got hit with a barrage of like 4 straight big 3’s, due to us breaking down on defense playing man to man again. We got great athletes but as of today we don’t play good man to man defense. We get neat off the dribble way to much, and it opens up easy shots. This is my exact point. I’m glad as hell we finally beat them. I’m tired of losing to Nova. We can’t sit here and act like we didn’t escape with a win though.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

I don’t think some of y’all be understanding basketball sometimes. I think some people on here has watched a lot of basketball, maybe never played it. Helping so much on them backing out players down to the post is the way they be getting all them WIDE open 3’s. Rewatch the game. Watch how they get all the open shots. When your as long and athletic as UConn is, playing a zone can shrink the court. You can use your athleticism as an asset as well when playing zone.

The issue is UConn doesn’t play a particularly disciplined or cohesive zone. It’s useful in certain situations just to show the offense a different look but it would have been a blood bath against Nova. They are way too adept at kicking it around the 3 point line and finding the open man. I like the look against teams that don’t have a lot of ball handlers or playmakers because the length can be disruptive, but there is a definite reason you have not seen the zone against Nova.

 

[Dream Jobbed 2.0]

One of the keys of the game was not biting on pump fakes

 

[mauconnfan]

The real difference is the kid missed the FT and Polley hit the 3 to give us a chance. If he hits it, we probably lose again. Cause we got hit with a barrage of like 4 straight big 3’s, due to us breaking down on defense playing man to man again. We got great athletes but as of today we don’t play good man to man defense. We get neat off the dribble way to much, and it opens up easy shots. This is my exact point. I’m glad as hell we finally beat them. I’m tired of losing to Nova. We can’t sit here and act like we didn’t escape with a win though.

The plan worked. They took away what really kills us which is the back down one on one. They flashed the double team, they floated from their guys on the perimeter and quite honestly yeah it’s tough to give them the open 3s. But it ended up working. You say if they made that FT etc etc, but what if they shoot 30 percent from 3 instead of 45? Yep we win by double figures.

Lots of ifs but none on who won this one. They made them work so damn hard to finish on the offensive end for me the plan was a damn good one!

By the way this from a guy who thinks they should be mixing in some zone more often so I hear what you’re saying.

 

[husky429]

Yeah, Nova's style is often going to be our cryptonite. Too disciplined. But zone is very far from the answer.

 

[navery12]

This is exactly what I’m talking about. Nobody is talking about playing and old school packed in zone to force them to shoot open 3’s lol.

We would've lost by 30 if we tried playing this defense against them. Even if it was a zone like you wanted and sold out to stop 3's that leaves the FT line jumper wide open for Samuels/Dixon/Daniels. Villanova has way way way too good of a half court offense and are too disciplined to have any shot of that working

 

[nelsonmuntz]

The way Nova moves the ball if we had played them zone tonight they would have made 25 threes and we would have lost by 15 points…the fact anyone is suggesting we should have gone zone on them is absurd. You don’t play zone against a team with 5 shooters unless you really want to lose

A common way to defend a 5-out, 3 point shooting offense is to play a stretch 2-3 zone. The 2-3 zone makes rotations to the outside shooters easier because the outside defenders of the zone kind of match up to where the 5 out offense lines up. Zones are always better at stopping penetration than man-to-man, so it takes that aspect of the offense away because the zone can collapse on the penetrator and there is always a rim protector on every drive to the hoop. The stretch 2-3 leaves a huge hole at the high post, but analytics driven offenses will often not take that shot because many coaches don't really understand the math. It is hard to post up against this offense because the double team will arrive very quickly.

You couldn't play this kind of zone against Calhoun's mid-2000's teams because Calhoun always put a 4 or 5 at the high post against a zone, but many modern teams don't use centers anymore and will try to shoot their way out of a problem opposing defense by jacking a lot of contested corner 3's, which are very poor shots for people that really understand the math because A) they are contested 3's coming from reversals, and B) they lead to so many run outs the other direction when they miss. NBA teams even use this defense to defend 5 out, 3 point shooting offenses. Erik Spoelstra took a mediocre Miami Heat team to the 2020 NBA Finals playing a 2-3 zone against bull-headed coaches like Budenholzer and Stevens that refused to adjust.

Jay Wright is not a bull headed coach, but I don't know what he would do against a stretch 2-3 because he doesn't like mid-range shots. It would be worth it to find out.

 

[Brandon86]

A common way to defend a 5-out, 3 point shooting offense is to play a stretch 2-3 zone. The 2-3 zone makes rotations to the outside shooters easier because the outside defenders of the zone kind of match up to where the 5 out offense lines up. Zones are always better at stopping penetration than man-to-man, so it takes that aspect of the offense away because the zone can collapse on the penetrator and there is always a rim protector on every drive to the hoop. The stretch 2-3 leaves a huge hole at the high post, but analytics driven offenses will often not take that shot because many coaches don't really understand the math. It is hard to post up against this offense because the double team will arrive very quickly.

You couldn't play this kind of zone against Calhoun's mid-2000's teams because Calhoun always put a 4 or 5 at the high post against a zone, but many modern teams don't use centers anymore and will try to shoot their way out of a problem opposing defense by jacking a lot of contested corner 3's, which are very poor shots for people that really understand the math because A) they are contested 3's coming from reversals, and B) they lead to so many run outs the other direction when they miss. NBA teams even use this defense to defend 5 out, 3 point shooting offenses. Erik Spoelstra took a mediocre Miami Heat team to the 2020 NBA Finals playing a 2-3 zone against bull-headed coaches like Budenholzer and Stevens that refused to adjust.

Jay Wright is not a bull headed coach, but I don't know what he would do against a stretch 2-3 because he doesn't like mid-range shots. It would be worth it to find out.

You hit it dead on the head. I can’t believe people actually think playing a stretch 2-3 zone is used cause you think people can’t shoot.

 

[husky429]

You hit it dead on the head. I can’t believe people actually think playing a stretch 2-3 zone is used cause you think people can’t shoot.

I can't believe you think a 2-3 zone would ever be used to limit a team with 4-5 shooters on the floor at any given moment. Middle school coaches know this stuff. It doesn't matter if you "stretch" it or not. A good coach like Wright puts 1 guy up top, 1 at each wing, 1 at the foul line, and a shooter in the corner. Without demolishing the integrity of the 2-3 zone, if you swing the ball fast enough you will ALWAYS have an open man. It's just the nature of it. Those two guys at the top HAVE to guard both wings and the top of the key... one of them will always be able to shoot.

'Nova eats zones for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and a little bit of their dessert. They are too skilled, too composed, and too disciplined to play a zone against with any consistency.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

A common way to defend a 5-out, 3 point shooting offense is to play a stretch 2-3 zone. The 2-3 zone makes rotations to the outside shooters easier because the outside defenders of the zone kind of match up to where the 5 out offense lines up. Zones are always better at stopping penetration than man-to-man, so it takes that aspect of the offense away because the zone can collapse on the penetrator and there is always a rim protector on every drive to the hoop. The stretch 2-3 leaves a huge hole at the high post, but analytics driven offenses will often not take that shot because many coaches don't really understand the math. It is hard to post up against this offense because the double team will arrive very quickly.

You couldn't play this kind of zone against Calhoun's mid-2000's teams because Calhoun always put a 4 or 5 at the high post against a zone, but many modern teams don't use centers anymore and will try to shoot their way out of a problem opposing defense by jacking a lot of contested corner 3's, which are very poor shots for people that really understand the math because A) they are contested 3's coming from reversals, and B) they lead to so many run outs the other direction when they miss. NBA teams even use this defense to defend 5 out, 3 point shooting offenses. Erik Spoelstra took a mediocre Miami Heat team to the 2020 NBA Finals playing a 2-3 zone against bull-headed coaches like Budenholzer and Stevens that refused to adjust.

Jay Wright is not a bull headed coach, but I don't know what he would do against a stretch 2-3 because he doesn't like mid-range shots. It would be worth it to find out.

Have you paid attention to our zone defense this year? I don't have an issue with yours or @Brandon86 's hypothetical, but that hypothetical assumes a good zone defense. UConn's is decent as a show-me defense in certain situations, but there is a reason it's rarely used. It's not that disciplined and they over-extend the zone on close-outs and end up getting spun around and out of position because of it. The length is disruptive enough that it's been somewhat effective to get the offense out of rhythm when its been used in the past, but Nova is one of the best teams in the country at finding the open man and playing that 5-out offense. It would have been a bloodbath in this matchup, which I'm sure is the reason we didn't see it at all yesterday.

 

[Brandon86]

Have you paid attention to our zone defense this year? I don't have an issue with yours or @Brandon86 's hypothetical, but that hypothetical assumes a good zone defense. UConn's is decent as a show-me defense in certain situations, but there is a reason it's rarely used. It's not that disciplined and they over-extend the zone on close-outs and end up getting spun around and out of position because of it. The length is disruptive enough that it's been somewhat effective to get the offense out of rhythm when its been used in the past, but Nova is one of the best teams in the country at finding the open man and playing that 5-out offense. It would have been a bloodbath in this matchup, which I'm sure is the reason we didn't see it at all yesterday.

We hardly ever play zone at all, no matter who it is. The reality is Nova bully’s us a lot playing man to man defense. Everything you saying they do well, they do to us playing them man to man too. I’m happy we won. IMO though if that’s our best. We gotta be better. If that kid hits that free throw, we lose again to them. They got way to many easy baskets at the rim backing us down, just like last time we played them. We remember watching 1 play, and Gillespie blew by Cole. I was thinking dang, we can’t even stay in front of a kid that’s coming off of an ACL injury. Nova is big and strong. Literally every player they have can bully most of our players in the post. They always got a mismatch strength wise and they know it. That’s what they use to always exploit us. We try to help on the post, and there goes then open 3’s. All of Samuels 3’s came directly off plays like that.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

We hardly ever play zone at all, no matter who it is. The reality is Nova bully’s us a lot playing man to man defense. Everything you saying they do well, they do to us playing them man to man too. I’m happy we won. IMO though if that’s our best. We gotta be better. If that kid hits that free throw, we lose again to them. They got way to many easy baskets at the rim backing us down, just like last time we played them. We remember watching 1 play, and Gillespie blew by Cole. I was thinking dang, we can’t even stay in front of a kid that’s coming off of an ACL injury. Nova is big and strong. Literally every player they have can bully most of our players in the post. They always got a mismatch strength wise and they know it. That’s what they use to always exploit us. We try to help on the post, and there goes then open 3’s. All of Samuels 3’s came directly off plays like that.

The “we hardly play zone at all” is not helping the argument that we should have brought this out against a team like Nova. And for all the talk of getting bullied in the paint, UConn outscored Nova 28-16 in the paint. The defense inside was actually very good and disciplined yesterday.

 

[Conndog]

You hit it dead on the head. I can’t believe people actually think playing a stretch 2-3 zone is used cause you think people can’t shoot.

In a 2-3 zone, are the two men closer to basket and the three others out on the perimeter? I used the term “2-3” zone in another thread but was referring to two on perimeter and three closer to basket.

 

[Brandon86]

In a 2-3 zone, are the two men closer to basket and the three others out on the perimeter? I used the term “2-3” zone in another thread but was referring to two on perimeter and three closer to basket.

No that a 3-2 zone.

 

[Brandon86]

No that a 3-2 zone.

You got it right, you can play a 2-3 zone many different ways.