| « View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message |
Skins
Wealthy Alum
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 9769
Location: Purgatory
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 2:12 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
you may now return to "stink'n zone talk" 
_________________
ONIONS!
'Stats are relevant until they no longer are...' -TK
'That is what the hell "Mizzou was overrated when we played them" means.' - HPM |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
IndySkin
Wealthy Alum
Joined: 21 Dec 2003
Posts: 1644
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | mollautt Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 1:56 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IndySkin wrote:
Quote:
mollautt Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 1:15 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IndySkin wrote:
Once and for all. I just called Bulter and spoke with asst. coach Jordan and confirmed that they played:
drumroll ...
MAN TO MAN the whole game
A: No you didn't
Yes, I did.
=>A: No you didn't
|
But yes, I did. Nice guy too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
skinhawk99
Wealthy Alum
Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 1882
Location: Cleveland, or driving to/from Oxford
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 3:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
just a reminder for the MAC tourney dates in Cleveland...women start we march 9, men the next day....
plan accordingly...
i am sure that both the local allumni chapter and/or the red and white club will be having an event...and if they don't, I will!!!!!!
_________________
Me: "Go RedHawks!"
my two year old: "Beat the Buckeyes!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hawkgrad'03
Wealthy Alum
Joined: 10 Nov 2003
Posts: 303
Location: The Krazy Streetz of Lebanon
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 4:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mattsledge wrote: | | JohnnyMac wrote: | | DICK, Moll, and Butler lurker: Can we get an answer to if Butler played zone or not? |
Look earlier in the thread for that answer. |
Which part of the thread? The part where somebody said they played a zone. Or the part where somebody said they didn't.
This whole zone defense discussion is ridiculous. Teams run different offenses versus man than they do versus zone. Miami didn't run either very well last year. The fact that Purdue and/or Xavier ran less zone has NOTHING to do with how well Miami played offensively. Miami ran both well against Xavier and Purdue.
The Princeton offense is run against man defense. It is open post and relies mainly on back door cuts. This year, Miami -- against man defense -- has used weakside screens, down screens, and interior passing much more than last year, none of which are major features of the Princeton offense.
Against zone, Miami has moved the ball much better this year (two of Hausfeld's treys against Xavier came off great ball reversals). More inside out passing as well.
To say the main difference in Miami's offensive performance this year is that teams are playing less zone is not only wrong but is so simplistic it is laughable. |
=>Laugh all you want, but it is the truth this year as it was last year. Remember SMS playing man to start the game against Miami? Remember Miami scoring at will? Remember SMS switching to zone late in the first half? Remember Miami being stymied from that point on? |
So you are basing your entire analysis on one game last year. Got it.
As I said, Miami didn't play very well offensively last year against either man or zone. Miami has played better this year against both in three out of four games. They are doing some things differently this year -- as I mentioned above. Miami playing well against SW Mo St's man for part of a half is hardly indicative of how the entire season went. |
=>Where did I base it all on one game? I used SMS as a clear example of where Miami destroyed a man and then struggled against a zone. You overstate an example of evidence as the entire evidence.
The vast majority of teams do not play zone. The vast majority of teams play man. The vast majority of teams play zone against Miami. If Miami sucked against either defense, then why did basically every team Miami play use a zone? What explanation is there for this Miami anomally? Everyone knows my answer. |
Where did you base it all on one game? In your post. It was the only evidence you stated.
Didn't anyone tell Gene Keady and Sean Miller about this "Miami Anomaly?" They must have missed it on film, the fact that all you have to do against Miami is play zone? I guess you can forgive Miller; he's young. What about Keady? How could he be so dumb as to play man against Miami? He's been around a few years.
I am tired of trying to explain this to you. Go ahead and think it is all about teams not playing zone if that make you happy. After all, "Everyone" knows your answer. |
=>1. You are taking this "zone debate" a little too personally. Relax, it is just a debate.
2. As for SMS, I do not have the energy (or the perfect memory) to list out every example from last season. However, SMS was a perfect example to illustrate my point b/c SMS used both defenses and Miami's offensive effectiveness changed like night and day as soon as it happened.
3. Keady, or his assistants, did not do their homework. Sometimes in OOC games you get things like this to happen when the teams are not familiar with each other. That is likely why SMS started playing man last year. Or maybe just stupid pride b/c they are Big Ten school and Miami needs to adjust to them and not the other way around (remember Lloyd Carr having his punter continually punting to Ryne Robinson?).
4. Sean Miller started off playing man. Eventually switched to zone in the X game. Miami hit the outsdie shots and X had to go back to man do to Miami's significant lead. As I am sure you know, zone defense obviously is not effective when you are down 16 points in the 2nd half.
5. Zones can be effective against a cutting offense b/c 1) You cannot lead a man into a screen if said man is not following you, and/or 2) You have a weak inside presence that allows for the defense to not defend the interior and push out on the outside shooters, and/or 3) outside shooting is suspect. 3 is magnified when 2 is in place as it was for Miami last season.
6. I am glad to have worn you down. Rest up, we shall continue this debate tomorrow! |
I am back for more Debate Club (and to extend the quote chain one more time).
Sorry to get chippy, Mollautt. I do enjoy good debates.
| Quote: | | 5. Zones can be effective against a cutting offense b/c 1) You cannot lead a man into a screen if said man is not following you, and/or 2) You have a weak inside presence that allows for the defense to not defend the interior and push out on the outside shooters, and/or 3) outside shooting is suspect. 3 is magnified when 2 is in place as it was for Miami last season. |
Although I agree with you on points 2&3, that is precisely why teams run different offenses against a man than they do against a zone. Man offenses are more motion and cutting oriented; zone offensive are more ball movement oriented. When I played, whenever we weren't sure whether our opponents were playing man or zone -- which is possible with high school kids, I guess -- we would have a wing cut through the lane. If someone followed him, man defense; if no one did; zone. We would then adjust the offense we ran accordingly.
My point is, the last several years, we didn't attack either type of offense very well. There are several reasons, IMHO. No matter what type of defense a team runs, the best way to attack is from the inside out. Good post players that get the ball down low are tough to stop one-on-one. If teams double down, the ball can be kicked out to the shooters, who are in great position to score (receiving a pass from the post is the best way to shoot a jump shot because you pretty much get lined up with the basket receiving the ball).
If you can't get the ball inside, you are going to struggle. The reason the Princeton offense was developed was to find a way -- against a man defense -- to get the ball inside without having big, physical post players to dump it in to. It gets the ball inside on back door cuts, and it is beautiful when it works (one of the most enjoyable games I have ever watched was Princeton beating UCLA in the NCAA's a few years back at the RCA Dome). It is also a good offense if you don't have a real solid point guard, because it spreads the ball handling out. One thing that Princeton usually has the we haven't the past few years is good outside shooters, and that is key in the Princeton offense; if teams don't have to respect your outside shooting, they pack their defense in and the back door cuts aren't there. Which often times last year left Miami last year passing around the perimeter and forcing up a shot late in the clock.
These same weaknesses -- not much inside presence, poor shooting, no true point guard -- caused teams to play a lot of zone against Miami last year as well. Both were effective.
I have seen some very positive changes in Miami this year. First, personnel wise, Hatcher and Troyer are pretty much handling the PG duties. Chet, Peavy and Hausfeld are playing wings (Chet and Haus are not PG's). Danny and Monte and Nate VS are playing post. The roles are much more defined.
Offense wise, Miami has made some changes in their man offense. instead of relying soley on back door cuts, Miami is screening away from the ball and sending the cutters through the lane. Miami is posting up Danny and Monte and even Nate VS at times. If you taped the Xavier game, Miami ran a beautiful down screen to set up Danny for a three late in the first half. Danny was on the weakside low post and Haus was at the point withthe ball. He passed to the wing and went down the lane, setting a screen for Danny just below the foul line. Danny popped up to the top of the key off the screen and hit a wire open three. Perfectly executed, and not a staple of the Princeton offense.
Against zone, at least against Xavier, we executed much better than last year, forcing them back into a man. Two of Haus' treys came from great ball reversal to the weak side wing. It's not just that Miami MADE a couple shots, but they used good ball movement to GET better shots. Once again, much better than what I saw last year.
Miami's weaknesses last year? No true PG, an inability to get the ball inside and poor outside shooting. And poor shooting gets worse when the opponent doesn'r respect you inside game.
Improvements this year. A better point guard and a better job of getting the ball inside -- against either man or zone -- has led to better shooting.
OK, I have said more than enough. Fire away if you wish, although the more I read back, the more I think we agree. |
=>I pretty much agree with you on everything you have wrote above other than 1) I think Miami has been pretty successful the few times teams have tried man and 2) Miami's O vs. the zone has not been as bad as some think (Miami milks clock on offense which tends to keep the score low).
IN order to keep this quote chain going, I submit the following to Debate Club: Miami's improved shooting in 3 of the 4 games is a direct result of the changes the basketball teams have made in the way they are now tying their shoes. In the past, Miami laced the shoes from the outside in. Now, laces come from the inside out. Coupled with triple knots over the previous double knots These changes have created more balance as the players push off the court on the jump shot. |
I couldn't disagree more. It has nothing to do with the shoelaces and everthing to do with Monte's Elvis sideburns. Not really sure why. |
=>A: No it isn't. |
No what isn't?
_________________
Sincerely,
Your reporter on the street, HG-03 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mollautt
Credible Threat and Board Hussy
Joined: 26 Jun 2002
Posts: 21883
Location: Milford, Ohio
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 5:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hawkgrad'03 wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mattsledge wrote: | | JohnnyMac wrote: | | DICK, Moll, and Butler lurker: Can we get an answer to if Butler played zone or not? |
Look earlier in the thread for that answer. |
Which part of the thread? The part where somebody said they played a zone. Or the part where somebody said they didn't.
This whole zone defense discussion is ridiculous. Teams run different offenses versus man than they do versus zone. Miami didn't run either very well last year. The fact that Purdue and/or Xavier ran less zone has NOTHING to do with how well Miami played offensively. Miami ran both well against Xavier and Purdue.
The Princeton offense is run against man defense. It is open post and relies mainly on back door cuts. This year, Miami -- against man defense -- has used weakside screens, down screens, and interior passing much more than last year, none of which are major features of the Princeton offense.
Against zone, Miami has moved the ball much better this year (two of Hausfeld's treys against Xavier came off great ball reversals). More inside out passing as well.
To say the main difference in Miami's offensive performance this year is that teams are playing less zone is not only wrong but is so simplistic it is laughable. |
=>Laugh all you want, but it is the truth this year as it was last year. Remember SMS playing man to start the game against Miami? Remember Miami scoring at will? Remember SMS switching to zone late in the first half? Remember Miami being stymied from that point on? |
So you are basing your entire analysis on one game last year. Got it.
As I said, Miami didn't play very well offensively last year against either man or zone. Miami has played better this year against both in three out of four games. They are doing some things differently this year -- as I mentioned above. Miami playing well against SW Mo St's man for part of a half is hardly indicative of how the entire season went. |
=>Where did I base it all on one game? I used SMS as a clear example of where Miami destroyed a man and then struggled against a zone. You overstate an example of evidence as the entire evidence.
The vast majority of teams do not play zone. The vast majority of teams play man. The vast majority of teams play zone against Miami. If Miami sucked against either defense, then why did basically every team Miami play use a zone? What explanation is there for this Miami anomally? Everyone knows my answer. |
Where did you base it all on one game? In your post. It was the only evidence you stated.
Didn't anyone tell Gene Keady and Sean Miller about this "Miami Anomaly?" They must have missed it on film, the fact that all you have to do against Miami is play zone? I guess you can forgive Miller; he's young. What about Keady? How could he be so dumb as to play man against Miami? He's been around a few years.
I am tired of trying to explain this to you. Go ahead and think it is all about teams not playing zone if that make you happy. After all, "Everyone" knows your answer. |
=>1. You are taking this "zone debate" a little too personally. Relax, it is just a debate.
2. As for SMS, I do not have the energy (or the perfect memory) to list out every example from last season. However, SMS was a perfect example to illustrate my point b/c SMS used both defenses and Miami's offensive effectiveness changed like night and day as soon as it happened.
3. Keady, or his assistants, did not do their homework. Sometimes in OOC games you get things like this to happen when the teams are not familiar with each other. That is likely why SMS started playing man last year. Or maybe just stupid pride b/c they are Big Ten school and Miami needs to adjust to them and not the other way around (remember Lloyd Carr having his punter continually punting to Ryne Robinson?).
4. Sean Miller started off playing man. Eventually switched to zone in the X game. Miami hit the outsdie shots and X had to go back to man do to Miami's significant lead. As I am sure you know, zone defense obviously is not effective when you are down 16 points in the 2nd half.
5. Zones can be effective against a cutting offense b/c 1) You cannot lead a man into a screen if said man is not following you, and/or 2) You have a weak inside presence that allows for the defense to not defend the interior and push out on the outside shooters, and/or 3) outside shooting is suspect. 3 is magnified when 2 is in place as it was for Miami last season.
6. I am glad to have worn you down. Rest up, we shall continue this debate tomorrow! |
I am back for more Debate Club (and to extend the quote chain one more time).
Sorry to get chippy, Mollautt. I do enjoy good debates.
| Quote: | | 5. Zones can be effective against a cutting offense b/c 1) You cannot lead a man into a screen if said man is not following you, and/or 2) You have a weak inside presence that allows for the defense to not defend the interior and push out on the outside shooters, and/or 3) outside shooting is suspect. 3 is magnified when 2 is in place as it was for Miami last season. |
Although I agree with you on points 2&3, that is precisely why teams run different offenses against a man than they do against a zone. Man offenses are more motion and cutting oriented; zone offensive are more ball movement oriented. When I played, whenever we weren't sure whether our opponents were playing man or zone -- which is possible with high school kids, I guess -- we would have a wing cut through the lane. If someone followed him, man defense; if no one did; zone. We would then adjust the offense we ran accordingly.
My point is, the last several years, we didn't attack either type of offense very well. There are several reasons, IMHO. No matter what type of defense a team runs, the best way to attack is from the inside out. Good post players that get the ball down low are tough to stop one-on-one. If teams double down, the ball can be kicked out to the shooters, who are in great position to score (receiving a pass from the post is the best way to shoot a jump shot because you pretty much get lined up with the basket receiving the ball).
If you can't get the ball inside, you are going to struggle. The reason the Princeton offense was developed was to find a way -- against a man defense -- to get the ball inside without having big, physical post players to dump it in to. It gets the ball inside on back door cuts, and it is beautiful when it works (one of the most enjoyable games I have ever watched was Princeton beating UCLA in the NCAA's a few years back at the RCA Dome). It is also a good offense if you don't have a real solid point guard, because it spreads the ball handling out. One thing that Princeton usually has the we haven't the past few years is good outside shooters, and that is key in the Princeton offense; if teams don't have to respect your outside shooting, they pack their defense in and the back door cuts aren't there. Which often times last year left Miami last year passing around the perimeter and forcing up a shot late in the clock.
These same weaknesses -- not much inside presence, poor shooting, no true point guard -- caused teams to play a lot of zone against Miami last year as well. Both were effective.
I have seen some very positive changes in Miami this year. First, personnel wise, Hatcher and Troyer are pretty much handling the PG duties. Chet, Peavy and Hausfeld are playing wings (Chet and Haus are not PG's). Danny and Monte and Nate VS are playing post. The roles are much more defined.
Offense wise, Miami has made some changes in their man offense. instead of relying soley on back door cuts, Miami is screening away from the ball and sending the cutters through the lane. Miami is posting up Danny and Monte and even Nate VS at times. If you taped the Xavier game, Miami ran a beautiful down screen to set up Danny for a three late in the first half. Danny was on the weakside low post and Haus was at the point withthe ball. He passed to the wing and went down the lane, setting a screen for Danny just below the foul line. Danny popped up to the top of the key off the screen and hit a wire open three. Perfectly executed, and not a staple of the Princeton offense.
Against zone, at least against Xavier, we executed much better than last year, forcing them back into a man. Two of Haus' treys came from great ball reversal to the weak side wing. It's not just that Miami MADE a couple shots, but they used good ball movement to GET better shots. Once again, much better than what I saw last year.
Miami's weaknesses last year? No true PG, an inability to get the ball inside and poor outside shooting. And poor shooting gets worse when the opponent doesn'r respect you inside game.
Improvements this year. A better point guard and a better job of getting the ball inside -- against either man or zone -- has led to better shooting.
OK, I have said more than enough. Fire away if you wish, although the more I read back, the more I think we agree. |
=>I pretty much agree with you on everything you have wrote above other than 1) I think Miami has been pretty successful the few times teams have tried man and 2) Miami's O vs. the zone has not been as bad as some think (Miami milks clock on offense which tends to keep the score low).
IN order to keep this quote chain going, I submit the following to Debate Club: Miami's improved shooting in 3 of the 4 games is a direct result of the changes the basketball teams have made in the way they are now tying their shoes. In the past, Miami laced the shoes from the outside in. Now, laces come from the inside out. Coupled with triple knots over the previous double knots These changes have created more balance as the players push off the court on the jump shot. |
I couldn't disagree more. It has nothing to do with the shoelaces and everthing to do with Monte's Elvis sideburns. Not really sure why. |
=>A: No it isn't. |
No what isn't? |
=>The longest quote train in history.
_________________
@dandakich "Yo Minnesota ..old school IU fans didn't think a state of the art practice facility was necessary either..old school means old results"
TWITTER |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hawkgrad'03
Wealthy Alum
Joined: 10 Nov 2003
Posts: 303
Location: The Krazy Streetz of Lebanon
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mollautt wrote: | | JohnnyMac wrote: | | Beerman wrote: | | hawkgrad'03 wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mattsledge wrote: | | JohnnyMac wrote: | | DICK, Moll, and Butler lurker: Can we get an answer to if Butler played zone or not? |
Look earlier in the thread for that answer. |
Which part of the thread? The part where somebody said they played a zone. Or the part where somebody said they didn't.
This whole zone defense discussion is ridiculous. Teams run different offenses versus man than they do versus zone. Miami didn't run either very well last year. The fact that Purdue and/or Xavier ran less zone has NOTHING to do with how well Miami played offensively. Miami ran both well against Xavier and Purdue.
The Princeton offense is run against man defense. It is open post and relies mainly on back door cuts. This year, Miami -- against man defense -- has used weakside screens, down screens, and interior passing much more than last year, none of which are major features of the Princeton offense.
Against zone, Miami has moved the ball much better this year (two of Hausfeld's treys against Xavier came off great ball reversals). More inside out passing as well.
To say the main difference in Miami's offensive performance this year is that teams are playing less zone is not only wrong but is so simplistic it is laughable. |
=>Laugh all you want, but it is the truth this year as it was last year. Remember SMS playing man to start the game against Miami? Remember Miami scoring at will? Remember SMS switching to zone late in the first half? Remember Miami being stymied from that point on? |
So you are basing your entire analysis on one game last year. Got it.
As I said, Miami didn't play very well offensively last year against either man or zone. Miami has played better this year against both in three out of four games. They are doing some things differently this year -- as I mentioned above. Miami playing well against SW Mo St's man for part of a half is hardly indicative of how the entire season went. |
=>Where did I base it all on one game? I used SMS as a clear example of where Miami destroyed a man and then struggled against a zone. You overstate an example of evidence as the entire evidence.
The vast majority of teams do not play zone. The vast majority of teams play man. The vast majority of teams play zone against Miami. If Miami sucked against either defense, then why did basically every team Miami play use a zone? What explanation is there for this Miami anomally? Everyone knows my answer. |
Where did you base it all on one game? In your post. It was the only evidence you stated.
Didn't anyone tell Gene Keady and Sean Miller about this "Miami Anomaly?" They must have missed it on film, the fact that all you have to do against Miami is play zone? I guess you can forgive Miller; he's young. What about Keady? How could he be so dumb as to play man against Miami? He's been around a few years.
I am tired of trying to explain this to you. Go ahead and think it is all about teams not playing zone if that make you happy. After all, "Everyone" knows your answer. |
=>1. You are taking this "zone debate" a little too personally. Relax, it is just a debate.
2. As for SMS, I do not have the energy (or the perfect memory) to list out every example from last season. However, SMS was a perfect example to illustrate my point b/c SMS used both defenses and Miami's offensive effectiveness changed like night and day as soon as it happened.
3. Keady, or his assistants, did not do their homework. Sometimes in OOC games you get things like this to happen when the teams are not familiar with each other. That is likely why SMS started playing man last year. Or maybe just stupid pride b/c they are Big Ten school and Miami needs to adjust to them and not the other way around (remember Lloyd Carr having his punter continually punting to Ryne Robinson?).
4. Sean Miller started off playing man. Eventually switched to zone in the X game. Miami hit the outsdie shots and X had to go back to man do to Miami's significant lead. As I am sure you know, zone defense obviously is not effective when you are down 16 points in the 2nd half.
5. Zones can be effective against a cutting offense b/c 1) You cannot lead a man into a screen if said man is not following you, and/or 2) You have a weak inside presence that allows for the defense to not defend the interior and push out on the outside shooters, and/or 3) outside shooting is suspect. 3 is magnified when 2 is in place as it was for Miami last season.
6. I am glad to have worn you down. Rest up, we shall continue this debate tomorrow! |
WE got to keep this quote chain going - AMAZING!!! |
I heard that Gene Seals might be transferring to Michigan State. |
`
Do you see my question in that tiny little box up there? Based on this thread, the Butler board, and other folks PM'ing me, I have come to the conclusion that only molluat saw Butler playing a zone on Saturday. |
=>A. You need to this thread very closely. Our fearless leader Redsteve
| Quote: | | Butler's interior defense had a lot to do with this. The zone stymied our entry passes and saw us passing too much around the perimeter. |
and Chris W
| Quote: | | As to the game, Moll made an excellent point-the Bulldogs were smart enough to play zone against us, and that hurt. |
both posted on this thread that they saw Butler play zone as well. I think that is called a gross visualization. I am willing to sign a sworn affidavit to attest that both of them also went to the Butler as I saw them there in Hinkle Fieldhouse with my own two eyes. Maybe they made it up just to support my position? probably not given that they both posted it before this debate about Butler zoning us came about. Maybe Chris and Steve are just part of the vast right wing zone conspiracy. See first page of this thread.
B. I looked over the Butler board. I did not see where anyone wrote there that Miami did not play a zone.
C. Who is PM'ing you about zones? I would assume it would be someone posting in this thread as it would be silly not to include this info in a thread here.
D. I am glad that you agree that I saw a zone Saturday. 
E. Butler may have played some man during the game. Whenever I made a conscious attempt to see what defense Butler was in, it was a zone. I really cannot say that Butler was in a zone all the time as I was too wrapped up in the game at times to notice. Also, zones can look like man at times when the defense pushes out on the perimeter. This is particularly true with Miami. I can see how someone who is not as basketball enlighted and uniquely intelligent as myself could make such a mistake.  |
| Quote: | hawkgrad'03 wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mattsledge wrote:
JohnnyMac wrote:
DICK, Moll, and Butler lurker: Can we get an answer to if Butler played zone or not?
Look earlier in the thread for that answer.
Which part of the thread? The part where somebody said they played a zone. Or the part where somebody said they didn't.
This whole zone defense discussion is ridiculous. Teams run different offenses versus man than they do versus zone. Miami didn't run either very well last year. The fact that Purdue and/or Xavier ran less zone has NOTHING to do with how well Miami played offensively. Miami ran both well against Xavier and Purdue.
The Princeton offense is run against man defense. It is open post and relies mainly on back door cuts. This year, Miami -- against man defense -- has used weakside screens, down screens, and interior passing much more than last year, none of which are major features of the Princeton offense.
Against zone, Miami has moved the ball much better this year (two of Hausfeld's treys against Xavier came off great ball reversals). More inside out passing as well.
To say the main difference in Miami's offensive performance this year is that teams are playing less zone is not only wrong but is so simplistic it is laughable.
=>Laugh all you want, but it is the truth this year as it was last year. Remember SMS playing man to start the game against Miami? Remember Miami scoring at will? Remember SMS switching to zone late in the first half? Remember Miami being stymied from that point on?
So you are basing your entire analysis on one game last year. Got it.
As I said, Miami didn't play very well offensively last year against either man or zone. Miami has played better this year against both in three out of four games. They are doing some things differently this year -- as I mentioned above. Miami playing well against SW Mo St's man for part of a half is hardly indicative of how the entire season went.
=>Where did I base it all on one game? I used SMS as a clear example of where Miami destroyed a man and then struggled against a zone. You overstate an example of evidence as the entire evidence.
The vast majority of teams do not play zone. The vast majority of teams play man. The vast majority of teams play zone against Miami. If Miami sucked against either defense, then why did basically every team Miami play use a zone? What explanation is there for this Miami anomally? Everyone knows my answer.
Where did you base it all on one game? In your post. It was the only evidence you stated.
Didn't anyone tell Gene Keady and Sean Miller about this "Miami Anomaly?" They must have missed it on film, the fact that all you have to do against Miami is play zone? I guess you can forgive Miller; he's young. What about Keady? How could he be so dumb as to play man against Miami? He's been around a few years.
I am tired of trying to explain this to you. Go ahead and think it is all about teams not playing zone if that make you happy. After all, "Everyone" knows your answer.
=>1. You are taking this "zone debate" a little too personally. Relax, it is just a debate.
2. As for SMS, I do not have the energy (or the perfect memory) to list out every example from last season. However, SMS was a perfect example to illustrate my point b/c SMS used both defenses and Miami's offensive effectiveness changed like night and day as soon as it happened.
3. Keady, or his assistants, did not do their homework. Sometimes in OOC games you get things like this to happen when the teams are not familiar with each other. That is likely why SMS started playing man last year. Or maybe just stupid pride b/c they are Big Ten school and Miami needs to adjust to them and not the other way around (remember Lloyd Carr having his punter continually punting to Ryne Robinson?).
4. Sean Miller started off playing man. Eventually switched to zone in the X game. Miami hit the outsdie shots and X had to go back to man do to Miami's significant lead. As I am sure you know, zone defense obviously is not effective when you are down 16 points in the 2nd half.
5. Zones can be effective against a cutting offense b/c 1) You cannot lead a man into a screen if said man is not following you, and/or 2) You have a weak inside presence that allows for the defense to not defend the interior and push out on the outside shooters, and/or 3) outside shooting is suspect. 3 is magnified when 2 is in place as it was for Miami last season.
6. I am glad to have worn you down. Rest up, we shall continue this debate tomorrow!
I am back for more Debate Club (and to extend the quote chain one more time).
Sorry to get chippy, Mollautt. I do enjoy good debates.
Quote:
5. Zones can be effective against a cutting offense b/c 1) You cannot lead a man into a screen if said man is not following you, and/or 2) You have a weak inside presence that allows for the defense to not defend the interior and push out on the outside shooters, and/or 3) outside shooting is suspect. 3 is magnified when 2 is in place as it was for Miami last season.
Although I agree with you on points 2&3, that is precisely why teams run different offenses against a man than they do against a zone. Man offenses are more motion and cutting oriented; zone offensive are more ball movement oriented. When I played, whenever we weren't sure whether our opponents were playing man or zone -- which is possible with high school kids, I guess -- we would have a wing cut through the lane. If someone followed him, man defense; if no one did; zone. We would then adjust the offense we ran accordingly.
My point is, the last several years, we didn't attack either type of offense very well. There are several reasons, IMHO. No matter what type of defense a team runs, the best way to attack is from the inside out. Good post players that get the ball down low are tough to stop one-on-one. If teams double down, the ball can be kicked out to the shooters, who are in great position to score (receiving a pass from the post is the best way to shoot a jump shot because you pretty much get lined up with the basket receiving the ball).
If you can't get the ball inside, you are going to struggle. The reason the Princeton offense was developed was to find a way -- against a man defense -- to get the ball inside without having big, physical post players to dump it in to. It gets the ball inside on back door cuts, and it is beautiful when it works (one of the most enjoyable games I have ever watched was Princeton beating UCLA in the NCAA's a few years back at the RCA Dome). It is also a good offense if you don't have a real solid point guard, because it spreads the ball handling out. One thing that Princeton usually has the we haven't the past few years is good outside shooters, and that is key in the Princeton offense; if teams don't have to respect your outside shooting, they pack their defense in and the back door cuts aren't there. Which often times last year left Miami last year passing around the perimeter and forcing up a shot late in the clock.
These same weaknesses -- not much inside presence, poor shooting, no true point guard -- caused teams to play a lot of zone against Miami last year as well. Both were effective.
I have seen some very positive changes in Miami this year. First, personnel wise, Hatcher and Troyer are pretty much handling the PG duties. Chet, Peavy and Hausfeld are playing wings (Chet and Haus are not PG's). Danny and Monte and Nate VS are playing post. The roles are much more defined.
Offense wise, Miami has made some changes in their man offense. instead of relying soley on back door cuts, Miami is screening away from the ball and sending the cutters through the lane. Miami is posting up Danny and Monte and even Nate VS at times. If you taped the Xavier game, Miami ran a beautiful down screen to set up Danny for a three late in the first half. Danny was on the weakside low post and Haus was at the point withthe ball. He passed to the wing and went down the lane, setting a screen for Danny just below the foul line. Danny popped up to the top of the key off the screen and hit a wire open three. Perfectly executed, and not a staple of the Princeton offense.
Against zone, at least against Xavier, we executed much better than last year, forcing them back into a man. Two of Haus' treys came from great ball reversal to the weak side wing. It's not just that Miami MADE a couple shots, but they used good ball movement to GET better shots. Once again, much better than what I saw last year.
Miami's weaknesses last year? No true PG, an inability to get the ball inside and poor outside shooting. And poor shooting gets worse when the opponent doesn'r respect you inside game.
Improvements this year. A better point guard and a better job of getting the ball inside -- against either man or zone -- has led to better shooting.
OK, I have said more than enough. Fire away if you wish, although the more I read back, the more I think we agree.
=>I pretty much agree with you on everything you have wrote above other than 1) I think Miami has been pretty successful the few times teams have tried man and 2) Miami's O vs. the zone has not been as bad as some think (Miami milks clock on offense which tends to keep the score low).
IN order to keep this quote chain going, I submit the following to Debate Club: Miami's improved shooting in 3 of the 4 games is a direct result of the changes the basketball teams have made in the way they are now tying their shoes. In the past, Miami laced the shoes from the outside in. Now, laces come from the inside out. Coupled with triple knots over the previous double knots These changes have created more balance as the players push off the court on the jump shot.
I couldn't disagree more. It has nothing to do with the shoelaces and everthing to do with Monte's Elvis sideburns. Not really sure why.
=>A: No it isn't.
No what isn't?
=>The longest quote train in history. |
What is the longest in history?
would Ken Jennings get this question correct?
_________________
Sincerely,
Your reporter on the street, HG-03 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JohnnyMac
Wealthy Alum
Joined: 09 Aug 2004
Posts: 8892
Location: Born and raised in South Detroit (which is Toledo, BTW)
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 10:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hawkgrad'03 wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | JohnnyMac wrote: | | Beerman wrote: | | hawkgrad'03 wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mattsledge wrote: | | JohnnyMac wrote: | | DICK, Moll, and Butler lurker: Can we get an answer to if Butler played zone or not? |
Look earlier in the thread for that answer. |
Which part of the thread? The part where somebody said they played a zone. Or the part where somebody said they didn't.
This whole zone defense discussion is ridiculous. Teams run different offenses versus man than they do versus zone. Miami didn't run either very well last year. The fact that Purdue and/or Xavier ran less zone has NOTHING to do with how well Miami played offensively. Miami ran both well against Xavier and Purdue.
The Princeton offense is run against man defense. It is open post and relies mainly on back door cuts. This year, Miami -- against man defense -- has used weakside screens, down screens, and interior passing much more than last year, none of which are major features of the Princeton offense.
Against zone, Miami has moved the ball much better this year (two of Hausfeld's treys against Xavier came off great ball reversals). More inside out passing as well.
To say the main difference in Miami's offensive performance this year is that teams are playing less zone is not only wrong but is so simplistic it is laughable. |
=>Laugh all you want, but it is the truth this year as it was last year. Remember SMS playing man to start the game against Miami? Remember Miami scoring at will? Remember SMS switching to zone late in the first half? Remember Miami being stymied from that point on? |
So you are basing your entire analysis on one game last year. Got it.
As I said, Miami didn't play very well offensively last year against either man or zone. Miami has played better this year against both in three out of four games. They are doing some things differently this year -- as I mentioned above. Miami playing well against SW Mo St's man for part of a half is hardly indicative of how the entire season went. |
=>Where did I base it all on one game? I used SMS as a clear example of where Miami destroyed a man and then struggled against a zone. You overstate an example of evidence as the entire evidence.
The vast majority of teams do not play zone. The vast majority of teams play man. The vast majority of teams play zone against Miami. If Miami sucked against either defense, then why did basically every team Miami play use a zone? What explanation is there for this Miami anomally? Everyone knows my answer. |
Where did you base it all on one game? In your post. It was the only evidence you stated.
Didn't anyone tell Gene Keady and Sean Miller about this "Miami Anomaly?" They must have missed it on film, the fact that all you have to do against Miami is play zone? I guess you can forgive Miller; he's young. What about Keady? How could he be so dumb as to play man against Miami? He's been around a few years.
I am tired of trying to explain this to you. Go ahead and think it is all about teams not playing zone if that make you happy. After all, "Everyone" knows your answer. |
=>1. You are taking this "zone debate" a little too personally. Relax, it is just a debate.
2. As for SMS, I do not have the energy (or the perfect memory) to list out every example from last season. However, SMS was a perfect example to illustrate my point b/c SMS used both defenses and Miami's offensive effectiveness changed like night and day as soon as it happened.
3. Keady, or his assistants, did not do their homework. Sometimes in OOC games you get things like this to happen when the teams are not familiar with each other. That is likely why SMS started playing man last year. Or maybe just stupid pride b/c they are Big Ten school and Miami needs to adjust to them and not the other way around (remember Lloyd Carr having his punter continually punting to Ryne Robinson?).
4. Sean Miller started off playing man. Eventually switched to zone in the X game. Miami hit the outsdie shots and X had to go back to man do to Miami's significant lead. As I am sure you know, zone defense obviously is not effective when you are down 16 points in the 2nd half.
5. Zones can be effective against a cutting offense b/c 1) You cannot lead a man into a screen if said man is not following you, and/or 2) You have a weak inside presence that allows for the defense to not defend the interior and push out on the outside shooters, and/or 3) outside shooting is suspect. 3 is magnified when 2 is in place as it was for Miami last season.
6. I am glad to have worn you down. Rest up, we shall continue this debate tomorrow! |
WE got to keep this quote chain going - AMAZING!!! |
I heard that Gene Seals might be transferring to Michigan State. |
`
Do you see my question in that tiny little box up there? Based on this thread, the Butler board, and other folks PM'ing me, I have come to the conclusion that only molluat saw Butler playing a zone on Saturday. |
=>A. You need to this thread very closely. Our fearless leader Redsteve
| Quote: | | Butler's interior defense had a lot to do with this. The zone stymied our entry passes and saw us passing too much around the perimeter. |
and Chris W
| Quote: | | As to the game, Moll made an excellent point-the Bulldogs were smart enough to play zone against us, and that hurt. |
both posted on this thread that they saw Butler play zone as well. I think that is called a gross visualization. I am willing to sign a sworn affidavit to attest that both of them also went to the Butler as I saw them there in Hinkle Fieldhouse with my own two eyes. Maybe they made it up just to support my position? probably not given that they both posted it before this debate about Butler zoning us came about. Maybe Chris and Steve are just part of the vast right wing zone conspiracy. See first page of this thread.
B. I looked over the Butler board. I did not see where anyone wrote there that Miami did not play a zone.
C. Who is PM'ing you about zones? I would assume it would be someone posting in this thread as it would be silly not to include this info in a thread here.
D. I am glad that you agree that I saw a zone Saturday.
E. Butler may have played some man during the game. Whenever I made a conscious attempt to see what defense Butler was in, it was a zone. I really cannot say that Butler was in a zone all the time as I was too wrapped up in the game at times to notice. Also, zones can look like man at times when the defense pushes out on the perimeter. This is particularly true with Miami. I can see how someone who is not as basketball enlighted and uniquely intelligent as myself could make such a mistake. |
| Quote: | hawkgrad'03 wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mattsledge wrote:
JohnnyMac wrote:
DICK, Moll, and Butler lurker: Can we get an answer to if Butler played zone or not?
Look earlier in the thread for that answer.
Which part of the thread? The part where somebody said they played a zone. Or the part where somebody said they didn't.
This whole zone defense discussion is ridiculous. Teams run different offenses versus man than they do versus zone. Miami didn't run either very well last year. The fact that Purdue and/or Xavier ran less zone has NOTHING to do with how well Miami played offensively. Miami ran both well against Xavier and Purdue.
The Princeton offense is run against man defense. It is open post and relies mainly on back door cuts. This year, Miami -- against man defense -- has used weakside screens, down screens, and interior passing much more than last year, none of which are major features of the Princeton offense.
Against zone, Miami has moved the ball much better this year (two of Hausfeld's treys against Xavier came off great ball reversals). More inside out passing as well.
To say the main difference in Miami's offensive performance this year is that teams are playing less zone is not only wrong but is so simplistic it is laughable.
=>Laugh all you want, but it is the truth this year as it was last year. Remember SMS playing man to start the game against Miami? Remember Miami scoring at will? Remember SMS switching to zone late in the first half? Remember Miami being stymied from that point on?
So you are basing your entire analysis on one game last year. Got it.
As I said, Miami didn't play very well offensively last year against either man or zone. Miami has played better this year against both in three out of four games. They are doing some things differently this year -- as I mentioned above. Miami playing well against SW Mo St's man for part of a half is hardly indicative of how the entire season went.
=>Where did I base it all on one game? I used SMS as a clear example of where Miami destroyed a man and then struggled against a zone. You overstate an example of evidence as the entire evidence.
The vast majority of teams do not play zone. The vast majority of teams play man. The vast majority of teams play zone against Miami. If Miami sucked against either defense, then why did basically every team Miami play use a zone? What explanation is there for this Miami anomally? Everyone knows my answer.
Where did you base it all on one game? In your post. It was the only evidence you stated.
Didn't anyone tell Gene Keady and Sean Miller about this "Miami Anomaly?" They must have missed it on film, the fact that all you have to do against Miami is play zone? I guess you can forgive Miller; he's young. What about Keady? How could he be so dumb as to play man against Miami? He's been around a few years.
I am tired of trying to explain this to you. Go ahead and think it is all about teams not playing zone if that make you happy. After all, "Everyone" knows your answer.
=>1. You are taking this "zone debate" a little too personally. Relax, it is just a debate.
2. As for SMS, I do not have the energy (or the perfect memory) to list out every example from last season. However, SMS was a perfect example to illustrate my point b/c SMS used both defenses and Miami's offensive effectiveness changed like night and day as soon as it happened.
3. Keady, or his assistants, did not do their homework. Sometimes in OOC games you get things like this to happen when the teams are not familiar with each other. That is likely why SMS started playing man last year. Or maybe just stupid pride b/c they are Big Ten school and Miami needs to adjust to them and not the other way around (remember Lloyd Carr having his punter continually punting to Ryne Robinson?).
4. Sean Miller started off playing man. Eventually switched to zone in the X game. Miami hit the outsdie shots and X had to go back to man do to Miami's significant lead. As I am sure you know, zone defense obviously is not effective when you are down 16 points in the 2nd half.
5. Zones can be effective against a cutting offense b/c 1) You cannot lead a man into a screen if said man is not following you, and/or 2) You have a weak inside presence that allows for the defense to not defend the interior and push out on the outside shooters, and/or 3) outside shooting is suspect. 3 is magnified when 2 is in place as it was for Miami last season.
6. I am glad to have worn you down. Rest up, we shall continue this debate tomorrow!
I am back for more Debate Club (and to extend the quote chain one more time).
Sorry to get chippy, Mollautt. I do enjoy good debates.
Quote:
5. Zones can be effective against a cutting offense b/c 1) You cannot lead a man into a screen if said man is not following you, and/or 2) You have a weak inside presence that allows for the defense to not defend the interior and push out on the outside shooters, and/or 3) outside shooting is suspect. 3 is magnified when 2 is in place as it was for Miami last season.
Although I agree with you on points 2&3, that is precisely why teams run different offenses against a man than they do against a zone. Man offenses are more motion and cutting oriented; zone offensive are more ball movement oriented. When I played, whenever we weren't sure whether our opponents were playing man or zone -- which is possible with high school kids, I guess -- we would have a wing cut through the lane. If someone followed him, man defense; if no one did; zone. We would then adjust the offense we ran accordingly.
My point is, the last several years, we didn't attack either type of offense very well. There are several reasons, IMHO. No matter what type of defense a team runs, the best way to attack is from the inside out. Good post players that get the ball down low are tough to stop one-on-one. If teams double down, the ball can be kicked out to the shooters, who are in great position to score (receiving a pass from the post is the best way to shoot a jump shot because you pretty much get lined up with the basket receiving the ball).
If you can't get the ball inside, you are going to struggle. The reason the Princeton offense was developed was to find a way -- against a man defense -- to get the ball inside without having big, physical post players to dump it in to. It gets the ball inside on back door cuts, and it is beautiful when it works (one of the most enjoyable games I have ever watched was Princeton beating UCLA in the NCAA's a few years back at the RCA Dome). It is also a good offense if you don't have a real solid point guard, because it spreads the ball handling out. One thing that Princeton usually has the we haven't the past few years is good outside shooters, and that is key in the Princeton offense; if teams don't have to respect your outside shooting, they pack their defense in and the back door cuts aren't there. Which often times last year left Miami last year passing around the perimeter and forcing up a shot late in the clock.
These same weaknesses -- not much inside presence, poor shooting, no true point guard -- caused teams to play a lot of zone against Miami last year as well. Both were effective.
I have seen some very positive changes in Miami this year. First, personnel wise, Hatcher and Troyer are pretty much handling the PG duties. Chet, Peavy and Hausfeld are playing wings (Chet and Haus are not PG's). Danny and Monte and Nate VS are playing post. The roles are much more defined.
Offense wise, Miami has made some changes in their man offense. instead of relying soley on back door cuts, Miami is screening away from the ball and sending the cutters through the lane. Miami is posting up Danny and Monte and even Nate VS at times. If you taped the Xavier game, Miami ran a beautiful down screen to set up Danny for a three late in the first half. Danny was on the weakside low post and Haus was at the point withthe ball. He passed to the wing and went down the lane, setting a screen for Danny just below the foul line. Danny popped up to the top of the key off the screen and hit a wire open three. Perfectly executed, and not a staple of the Princeton offense.
Against zone, at least against Xavier, we executed much better than last year, forcing them back into a man. Two of Haus' treys came from great ball reversal to the weak side wing. It's not just that Miami MADE a couple shots, but they used good ball movement to GET better shots. Once again, much better than what I saw last year.
Miami's weaknesses last year? No true PG, an inability to get the ball inside and poor outside shooting. And poor shooting gets worse when the opponent doesn'r respect you inside game.
Improvements this year. A better point guard and a better job of getting the ball inside -- against either man or zone -- has led to better shooting.
OK, I have said more than enough. Fire away if you wish, although the more I read back, the more I think we agree.
=>I pretty much agree with you on everything you have wrote above other than 1) I think Miami has been pretty successful the few times teams have tried man and 2) Miami's O vs. the zone has not been as bad as some think (Miami milks clock on offense which tends to keep the score low).
IN order to keep this quote chain going, I submit the following to Debate Club: Miami's improved shooting in 3 of the 4 games is a direct result of the changes the basketball teams have made in the way they are now tying their shoes. In the past, Miami laced the shoes from the outside in. Now, laces come from the inside out. Coupled with triple knots over the previous double knots These changes have created more balance as the players push off the court on the jump shot.
I couldn't disagree more. It has nothing to do with the shoelaces and everthing to do with Monte's Elvis sideburns. Not really sure why.
=>A: No it isn't.
No what isn't?
=>The longest quote train in history. |
What is the longest in history?
would Ken Jennings get this question correct? |
I started this, so it is fitting for me to end it. At an even (baker's)dozen.
Lock this thread in the Archives.
_________________
And the days that I keep my gratitude higher than my expectations
Well, I have really good days |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redhawks1977
Wealthy Alum
Joined: 09 Nov 2003
Posts: 3195
Location: Chicago
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 10:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Anything to get it out of here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RedSteve
Serious Case of the Mondays
Joined: 30 Dec 2001
Posts: 16777
Location: Beautiful Uptown Avondale
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
done!
_________________
[uploading witty .sig failed. reverting to lame .sig] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MUfan
The Doctor
Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 12487
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 11:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I want summaries on that long quote train!
_________________
"You haven't lived until you've closed down the I-Bar at 4 A.M. AST." - thechuck_2112
"And then hit the hot springs the next day all the while searching for pain meds." - skin66 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mollautt
Credible Threat and Board Hussy
Joined: 26 Jun 2002
Posts: 21883
Location: Milford, Ohio
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 02, 2004 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| MUfan wrote: | | I want summaries on that long quote train! |
=>IN SUMMARY:
1. Skins is still gay.
2. Butler may or may not have played zone.
3. Miami offense may or may not have trouble with man.
4. MAC football blows (as evidenced by only 3 DI-A wins), but yet will get to play in at least 5 and probably 6 bowl games.
5. Michael Larkin can't catch.
_________________
@dandakich "Yo Minnesota ..old school IU fans didn't think a state of the art practice facility was necessary either..old school means old results"
TWITTER |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TJWaldo
Wealthy Alum
Joined: 10 Jun 2002
Posts: 1812
Location: Cincinnati
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 02, 2004 5:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mollautt wrote: | | MUfan wrote: | | I want summaries on that long quote train! |
=>IN SUMMARY:
1. Skins is still gay.
2. Butler may or may not have played zone.
3. Miami offense may or may not have trouble with man.
4. MAC football blows (as evidenced by only 3 DI-A wins), but yet will get to play in at least 5 and probably 6 bowl games.
5. Michael Larkin can't catch. |
Point 2 is "The Second Defense Conspiracy Theory." They will be featuring it on Entertainment Tonight this weekend. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RedSteve
Serious Case of the Mondays
Joined: 30 Dec 2001
Posts: 16777
Location: Beautiful Uptown Avondale
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 02, 2004 8:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
i swear i saw that lone zone man up on the grassy knoll...
_________________
[uploading witty .sig failed. reverting to lame .sig] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MUfan
The Doctor
Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 12487
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 02, 2004 8:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RedSteve wrote: | | i swear i saw that lone zone man up on the grassy knoll... |
Was it Keith Hernazdez?
_________________
"You haven't lived until you've closed down the I-Bar at 4 A.M. AST." - thechuck_2112
"And then hit the hot springs the next day all the while searching for pain meds." - skin66 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TJWaldo
Wealthy Alum
Joined: 10 Jun 2002
Posts: 1812
Location: Cincinnati
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| MUfan wrote: | | RedSteve wrote: | | i swear i saw that lone zone man up on the grassy knoll... |
Was it Keith
Hernazdez? |
Did he hit George Costanza with a big green lugey? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thechuck_2112
Truck Killah!
Joined: 13 Nov 2002
Posts: 32039
Location: drinking Hennessy with Morrissey on a beach out of reach somewhere very far away
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Bro!
_________________
"Psycho was low on talent. Psycho was low on athleticism. Psycho can play on my team any day. Psycho has the biggest heart of any player I have seen."
--mollautt
"You white people are crazy!" -- Matt Sussman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MUfan
The Doctor
Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 12487
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 02, 2004 11:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Bro!
_________________
"You haven't lived until you've closed down the I-Bar at 4 A.M. AST." - thechuck_2112
"And then hit the hot springs the next day all the while searching for pain meds." - skin66 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CountryRedHawk
Pinky
Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 4469
Location: Georgie's Alibi...
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 10:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hawkgrad'03 wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | JohnnyMac wrote: | | Beerman wrote: | | hawkgrad'03 wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mattsledge wrote: | | JohnnyMac wrote: | | DICK, Moll, and Butler lurker: Can we get an answer to if Butler played zone or not? |
Look earlier in the thread for that answer. |
Which part of the thread? The part where somebody said they played a zone. Or the part where somebody said they didn't.
This whole zone defense discussion is ridiculous. Teams run different offenses versus man than they do versus zone. Miami didn't run either very well last year. The fact that Purdue and/or Xavier ran less zone has NOTHING to do with how well Miami played offensively. Miami ran both well against Xavier and Purdue.
The Princeton offense is run against man defense. It is open post and relies mainly on back door cuts. This year, Miami -- against man defense -- has used weakside screens, down screens, and interior passing much more than last year, none of which are major features of the Princeton offense.
Against zone, Miami has moved the ball much better this year (two of Hausfeld's treys against Xavier came off great ball reversals). More inside out passing as well.
To say the main difference in Miami's offensive performance this year is that teams are playing less zone is not only wrong but is so simplistic it is laughable. |
=>Laugh all you want, but it is the truth this year as it was last year. Remember SMS playing man to start the game against Miami? Remember Miami scoring at will? Remember SMS switching to zone late in the first half? Remember Miami being stymied from that point on? |
So you are basing your entire analysis on one game last year. Got it.
As I said, Miami didn't play very well offensively last year against either man or zone. Miami has played better this year against both in three out of four games. They are doing some things differently this year -- as I mentioned above. Miami playing well against SW Mo St's man for part of a half is hardly indicative of how the entire season went. |
=>Where did I base it all on one game? I used SMS as a clear example of where Miami destroyed a man and then struggled against a zone. You overstate an example of evidence as the entire evidence.
The vast majority of teams do not play zone. The vast majority of teams play man. The vast majority of teams play zone against Miami. If Miami sucked against either defense, then why did basically every team Miami play use a zone? What explanation is there for this Miami anomally? Everyone knows my answer. |
Where did you base it all on one game? In your post. It was the only evidence you stated.
Didn't anyone tell Gene Keady and Sean Miller about this "Miami Anomaly?" They must have missed it on film, the fact that all you have to do against Miami is play zone? I guess you can forgive Miller; he's young. What about Keady? How could he be so dumb as to play man against Miami? He's been around a few years.
I am tired of trying to explain this to you. Go ahead and think it is all about teams not playing zone if that make you happy. After all, "Everyone" knows your answer. |
=>1. You are taking this "zone debate" a little too personally. Relax, it is just a debate.
2. As for SMS, I do not have the energy (or the perfect memory) to list out every example from last season. However, SMS was a perfect example to illustrate my point b/c SMS used both defenses and Miami's offensive effectiveness changed like night and day as soon as it happened.
3. Keady, or his assistants, did not do their homework. Sometimes in OOC games you get things like this to happen when the teams are not familiar with each other. That is likely why SMS started playing man last year. Or maybe just stupid pride b/c they are Big Ten school and Miami needs to adjust to them and not the other way around (remember Lloyd Carr having his punter continually punting to Ryne Robinson?).
4. Sean Miller started off playing man. Eventually switched to zone in the X game. Miami hit the outsdie shots and X had to go back to man do to Miami's significant lead. As I am sure you know, zone defense obviously is not effective when you are down 16 points in the 2nd half.
5. Zones can be effective against a cutting offense b/c 1) You cannot lead a man into a screen if said man is not following you, and/or 2) You have a weak inside presence that allows for the defense to not defend the interior and push out on the outside shooters, and/or 3) outside shooting is suspect. 3 is magnified when 2 is in place as it was for Miami last season.
6. I am glad to have worn you down. Rest up, we shall continue this debate tomorrow! |
WE got to keep this quote chain going - AMAZING!!! |
I heard that Gene Seals might be transferring to Michigan State. |
`
Do you see my question in that tiny little box up there? Based on this thread, the Butler board, and other folks PM'ing me, I have come to the conclusion that only molluat saw Butler playing a zone on Saturday. |
=>A. You need to this thread very closely. Our fearless leader Redsteve
| Quote: | | Butler's interior defense had a lot to do with this. The zone stymied our entry passes and saw us passing too much around the perimeter. |
and Chris W
| Quote: | | As to the game, Moll made an excellent point-the Bulldogs were smart enough to play zone against us, and that hurt. |
both posted on this thread that they saw Butler play zone as well. I think that is called a gross visualization. I am willing to sign a sworn affidavit to attest that both of them also went to the Butler as I saw them there in Hinkle Fieldhouse with my own two eyes. Maybe they made it up just to support my position? probably not given that they both posted it before this debate about Butler zoning us came about. Maybe Chris and Steve are just part of the vast right wing zone conspiracy. See first page of this thread.
B. I looked over the Butler board. I did not see where anyone wrote there that Miami did not play a zone.
C. Who is PM'ing you about zones? I would assume it would be someone posting in this thread as it would be silly not to include this info in a thread here.
D. I am glad that you agree that I saw a zone Saturday.
E. Butler may have played some man during the game. Whenever I made a conscious attempt to see what defense Butler was in, it was a zone. I really cannot say that Butler was in a zone all the time as I was too wrapped up in the game at times to notice. Also, zones can look like man at times when the defense pushes out on the perimeter. This is particularly true with Miami. I can see how someone who is not as basketball enlighted and uniquely intelligent as myself could make such a mistake. |
| Quote: | hawkgrad'03 wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mattsledge wrote:
JohnnyMac wrote:
DICK, Moll, and Butler lurker: Can we get an answer to if Butler played zone or not?
Look earlier in the thread for that answer.
Which part of the thread? The part where somebody said they played a zone. Or the part where somebody said they didn't.
This whole zone defense discussion is ridiculous. Teams run different offenses versus man than they do versus zone. Miami didn't run either very well last year. The fact that Purdue and/or Xavier ran less zone has NOTHING to do with how well Miami played offensively. Miami ran both well against Xavier and Purdue.
The Princeton offense is run against man defense. It is open post and relies mainly on back door cuts. This year, Miami -- against man defense -- has used weakside screens, down screens, and interior passing much more than last year, none of which are major features of the Princeton offense.
Against zone, Miami has moved the ball much better this year (two of Hausfeld's treys against Xavier came off great ball reversals). More inside out passing as well.
To say the main difference in Miami's offensive performance this year is that teams are playing less zone is not only wrong but is so simplistic it is laughable.
=>Laugh all you want, but it is the truth this year as it was last year. Remember SMS playing man to start the game against Miami? Remember Miami scoring at will? Remember SMS switching to zone late in the first half? Remember Miami being stymied from that point on?
So you are basing your entire analysis on one game last year. Got it.
As I said, Miami didn't play very well offensively last year against either man or zone. Miami has played better this year against both in three out of four games. They are doing some things differently this year -- as I mentioned above. Miami playing well against SW Mo St's man for part of a half is hardly indicative of how the entire season went.
=>Where did I base it all on one game? I used SMS as a clear example of where Miami destroyed a man and then struggled against a zone. You overstate an example of evidence as the entire evidence.
The vast majority of teams do not play zone. The vast majority of teams play man. The vast majority of teams play zone against Miami. If Miami sucked against either defense, then why did basically every team Miami play use a zone? What explanation is there for this Miami anomally? Everyone knows my answer.
Where did you base it all on one game? In your post. It was the only evidence you stated.
Didn't anyone tell Gene Keady and Sean Miller about this "Miami Anomaly?" They must have missed it on film, the fact that all you have to do against Miami is play zone? I guess you can forgive Miller; he's young. What about Keady? How could he be so dumb as to play man against Miami? He's been around a few years.
I am tired of trying to explain this to you. Go ahead and think it is all about teams not playing zone if that make you happy. After all, "Everyone" knows your answer.
=>1. You are taking this "zone debate" a little too personally. Relax, it is just a debate.
2. As for SMS, I do not have the energy (or the perfect memory) to list out every example from last season. However, SMS was a perfect example to illustrate my point b/c SMS used both defenses and Miami's offensive effectiveness changed like night and day as soon as it happened.
3. Keady, or his assistants, did not do their homework. Sometimes in OOC games you get things like this to happen when the teams are not familiar with each other. That is likely why SMS started playing man last year. Or maybe just stupid pride b/c they are Big Ten school and Miami needs to adjust to them and not the other way around (remember Lloyd Carr having his punter continually punting to Ryne Robinson?).
4. Sean Miller started off playing man. Eventually switched to zone in the X game. Miami hit the outsdie shots and X had to go back to man do to Miami's significant lead. As I am sure you know, zone defense obviously is not effective when you are down 16 points in the 2nd half.
5. Zones can be effective against a cutting offense b/c 1) You cannot lead a man into a screen if said man is not following you, and/or 2) You have a weak inside presence that allows for the defense to not defend the interior and push out on the outside shooters, and/or 3) outside shooting is suspect. 3 is magnified when 2 is in place as it was for Miami last season.
6. I am glad to have worn you down. Rest up, we shall continue this debate tomorrow!
I am back for more Debate Club (and to extend the quote chain one more time).
Sorry to get chippy, Mollautt. I do enjoy good debates.
Quote:
5. Zones can be effective against a cutting offense b/c 1) You cannot lead a man into a screen if said man is not following you, and/or 2) You have a weak inside presence that allows for the defense to not defend the interior and push out on the outside shooters, and/or 3) outside shooting is suspect. 3 is magnified when 2 is in place as it was for Miami last season.
Although I agree with you on points 2&3, that is precisely why teams run different offenses against a man than they do against a zone. Man offenses are more motion and cutting oriented; zone offensive are more ball movement oriented. When I played, whenever we weren't sure whether our opponents were playing man or zone -- which is possible with high school kids, I guess -- we would have a wing cut through the lane. If someone followed him, man defense; if no one did; zone. We would then adjust the offense we ran accordingly.
My point is, the last several years, we didn't attack either type of offense very well. There are several reasons, IMHO. No matter what type of defense a team runs, the best way to attack is from the inside out. Good post players that get the ball down low are tough to stop one-on-one. If teams double down, the ball can be kicked out to the shooters, who are in great position to score (receiving a pass from the post is the best way to shoot a jump shot because you pretty much get lined up with the basket receiving the ball).
If you can't get the ball inside, you are going to struggle. The reason the Princeton offense was developed was to find a way -- against a man defense -- to get the ball inside without having big, physical post players to dump it in to. It gets the ball inside on back door cuts, and it is beautiful when it works (one of the most enjoyable games I have ever watched was Princeton beating UCLA in the NCAA's a few years back at the RCA Dome). It is also a good offense if you don't have a real solid point guard, because it spreads the ball handling out. One thing that Princeton usually has the we haven't the past few years is good outside shooters, and that is key in the Princeton offense; if teams don't have to respect your outside shooting, they pack their defense in and the back door cuts aren't there. Which often times last year left Miami last year passing around the perimeter and forcing up a shot late in the clock.
These same weaknesses -- not much inside presence, poor shooting, no true point guard -- caused teams to play a lot of zone against Miami last year as well. Both were effective.
I have seen some very positive changes in Miami this year. First, personnel wise, Hatcher and Troyer are pretty much handling the PG duties. Chet, Peavy and Hausfeld are playing wings (Chet and Haus are not PG's). Danny and Monte and Nate VS are playing post. The roles are much more defined.
Offense wise, Miami has made some changes in their man offense. instead of relying soley on back door cuts, Miami is screening away from the ball and sending the cutters through the lane. Miami is posting up Danny and Monte and even Nate VS at times. If you taped the Xavier game, Miami ran a beautiful down screen to set up Danny for a three late in the first half. Danny was on the weakside low post and Haus was at the point withthe ball. He passed to the wing and went down the lane, setting a screen for Danny just below the foul line. Danny popped up to the top of the key off the screen and hit a wire open three. Perfectly executed, and not a staple of the Princeton offense.
Against zone, at least against Xavier, we executed much better than last year, forcing them back into a man. Two of Haus' treys came from great ball reversal to the weak side wing. It's not just that Miami MADE a couple shots, but they used good ball movement to GET better shots. Once again, much better than what I saw last year.
Miami's weaknesses last year? No true PG, an inability to get the ball inside and poor outside shooting. And poor shooting gets worse when the opponent doesn'r respect you inside game.
Improvements this year. A better point guard and a better job of getting the ball inside -- against either man or zone -- has led to better shooting.
OK, I have said more than enough. Fire away if you wish, although the more I read back, the more I think we agree.
=>I pretty much agree with you on everything you have wrote above other than 1) I think Miami has been pretty successful the few times teams have tried man and 2) Miami's O vs. the zone has not been as bad as some think (Miami milks clock on offense which tends to keep the score low).
IN order to keep this quote chain going, I submit the following to Debate Club: Miami's improved shooting in 3 of the 4 games is a direct result of the changes the basketball teams have made in the way they are now tying their shoes. In the past, Miami laced the shoes from the outside in. Now, laces come from the inside out. Coupled with triple knots over the previous double knots These changes have created more balance as the players push off the court on the jump shot.
I couldn't disagree more. It has nothing to do with the shoelaces and everthing to do with Monte's Elvis sideburns. Not really sure why.
=>A: No it isn't.
No what isn't?
=>The longest quote train in history. |
What is the longest in history?
would Ken Jennings get this question correct? |
I had to do this. Sorry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MUfan
The Doctor
Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 12487
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 10:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Country - how old are you?
_________________
"You haven't lived until you've closed down the I-Bar at 4 A.M. AST." - thechuck_2112
"And then hit the hot springs the next day all the while searching for pain meds." - skin66 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CountryRedHawk
Pinky
Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 4469
Location: Georgie's Alibi...
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| YEARS younger than DG, though that isn't hard to do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thechuck_2112
Truck Killah!
Joined: 13 Nov 2002
Posts: 32039
Location: drinking Hennessy with Morrissey on a beach out of reach somewhere very far away
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CountryRedHawk wrote: | | YEARS younger than DG, though that isn't hard to do. |
I smell impending wrath.
_________________
"Psycho was low on talent. Psycho was low on athleticism. Psycho can play on my team any day. Psycho has the biggest heart of any player I have seen."
--mollautt
"You white people are crazy!" -- Matt Sussman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CountryRedHawk
Pinky
Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 4469
Location: Georgie's Alibi...
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
He can't touch me. The wrath of the South will come down on his head.
Nah. Nah. Nahnanah. Nah!
You can't touch me.
*ducks and runs anyways* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RedHawk65
Wealthy Alum
Joined: 07 Oct 2003
Posts: 8963
Location: College Hill, OH
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 1:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Just out of curiosity- what would happen if I quoted that a 15th(?) time?
_________________
"Why don't we schedule challenging, but not demoralizing?" Mr. 65 to RH65 during Duke game (11/16/10) / JohnnyMac in the NCST game thread (11/9/12) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Syc Brown
Wealthy Alum
Joined: 22 Jul 2002
Posts: 1672
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 1:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Finally, someone did something funny on this board. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CountryRedHawk
Pinky
Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 4469
Location: Georgie's Alibi...
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CountryRedHawk wrote: | | hawkgrad'03 wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | JohnnyMac wrote: | | Beerman wrote: | | hawkgrad'03 wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mollautt wrote: | | TJWaldo wrote: | | mattsledge wrote: | | JohnnyMac wrote: | | DICK, Moll, and Butler lurker: Can we get an answer to if Butler played zone or not? |
Look earlier in the thread for that answer. |
Which part of the thread? The part where somebody said they played a zone. Or the part where somebody said they didn't.
This whole zone defense discussion is ridiculous. Teams run different offenses versus man than they do versus zone. Miami didn't run either very well last year. The fact that Purdue and/or Xavier ran less zone has NOTHING to do with how well Miami played offensively. Miami ran both well against Xavier and Purdue.
The Princeton offense is run against man defense. It is open post and relies mainly on back door cuts. This year, Miami -- against man defense -- has used weakside screens, down screens, and interior passing much more than last year, none of which are major features of the Princeton offense.
Against zone, Miami has moved the ball much better this year (two of Hausfeld's treys against Xavier came off great ball reversals). More inside out passing as well.
To say the main difference in Miami's offensive performance this year is that teams are playing less zone is not only wrong but is so simplistic it is laughable. |
=>Laugh all you want, but it is the truth this year as it was last year. Remember SMS playing man to start the game against Miami? Remember Miami scoring at will? Remember SMS switching to zone late in the first half? Remember Miami being stymied from that point on? |
So you are basing your entire analysis on one game last year. Got it.
As I said, Miami didn't play very well offensively last year against either man or zone. Miami has played better this year against both in three out of four games. They are doing some things differently this year -- as I mentioned above. Miami playing well against SW Mo St's man for part of a half is hardly indicative of how the entire season went. |
=>Where did I base it all on one game? I used SMS as a clear example of where Miami destroyed a man and then struggled against a zone. You overstate an example of evidence as the entire evidence.
The vast majority of teams do not play zone. The vast majority of teams play man. The vast majority of teams play zone against Miami. If Miami sucked against either defense, then why did basically every team Miami play use a zone? What explanation is there for this Miami anomally? Everyone knows my answer. |
Where did you base it all on one game? In your post. It was the only evidence you stated.
Didn't anyone tell Gene Keady and Sean Miller about this "Miami Anomaly?" They must have missed it on film, the fact that all you have to do against Miami is play zone? I guess you can forgive Miller; he's young. What about Keady? How could he be so dumb as to play man against Miami? He's been around a few years.
I am tired of trying to explain this to you. Go ahead and think it is all about teams not playing zone if that make you happy. After all, "Everyone" knows your answer. |
=>1. You are taking this "zone debate" a little too personally. Relax, it is just a debate.
2. As for SMS, I do not have the energy (or the perfect memory) to list out every example from last season. However, SMS was a perfect example to illustrate my point b/c SMS used both defenses and Miami's offensive effectiveness changed like night and day as soon as it happened.
3. Keady, or his assistants, did not do their homework. Sometimes in OOC games you get things like this to happen when the teams are not familiar with each other. That is likely why SMS started playing man last year. Or maybe just stupid pride b/c they are Big Ten school and Miami needs to adjust to them and not the other way around (remember Lloyd Carr having his punter continually punting to Ryne Robinson?).
4. Sean Miller started off playing man. Eventually switched to zone in the X game. Miami hit the outsdie shots and X had to go back to man do to Miami's significant lead. As I am sure you know, zone defense obviously is not effective when you are down 16 points in the 2nd half.
5. Zones can be effective against a cutting offense b/c 1) You cannot lead a man into a screen if said man is not following you, and/or 2) You have a weak inside presence that allows for the defense to not defend the interior and push out on the outside shooters, and/or 3) outside shooting is suspect. 3 is magnified when 2 is in place as it was for Miami last season.
6. I am glad to have worn you down. Rest up, we shall continue this debate tomorrow! |
WE got to keep this quote chain going - AMAZING!!! |
I heard that Gene Seals might be transferring to Michigan State. |
`
Do you see my question in that tiny little box up there? Based on this thread, the Butler board, and other folks PM'ing me, I have come to the conclusion that only molluat saw Butler playing a zone on Saturday. |
=>A. You need to this thread very closely. Our fearless leader Redsteve
| Quote: | | Butler's interior defense had a lot to do with this. The zone stymied our entry passes and saw us passing too much around the perimeter. |
and Chris W
| Quote: | | As to the game, Moll made an excellent point-the Bulldogs were smart enough to play zone against us, and that hurt. |
both posted on this thread that they saw Butler play zone as well. I think that is called a gross visualization. I am willing to sign a sworn affidavit to attest that both of them also went to the Butler as I saw them there in Hinkle Fieldhouse with my own two eyes. Maybe they made it up just to support my position? probably not given that they both posted it before this debate about Butler zoning us came about. Maybe Chris and Steve are just part of the vast right wing zone conspiracy. See first page of this thread.
B. I looked over the Butler board. I did not see where anyone wrote there that Miami did not play a zone.
C. Who is PM'ing you about zones? I would assume it would be someone posting in this thread as it would be silly not to include this info in a thread here.
D. I am glad that you agree that I saw a zone Saturday.
E. Butler may have played some man during the game. Whenever I made a conscious attempt to see what defense Butler was in, it was a zone. I really cannot say that Butler was in a zone all the time as I was too wrapped up in the game at times to notice. Also, zones can look like man at times when the defense pushes out on the perimeter. This is particularly true with Miami. I can see how someone who is not as basketball enlighted and uniquely intelligent as myself could make such a mistake. |
| Quote: | hawkgrad'03 wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mollautt wrote:
TJWaldo wrote:
mattsledge wrote:
JohnnyMac wrote:
DICK, Moll, and Butler lurker: Can we get an answer to if Butler played zone or not?
Look earlier in the thread for that answer.
Which part of the thread? The part where somebody said they played a zone. Or the part where somebody said they didn't.
This whole zone defense discussion is ridiculous. Teams run different offenses versus man than they do versus zone. Miami didn't run either very well last year. The fact that Purdue and/or Xavier ran less zone has NOTHING to do with how well Miami played offensively. Miami ran both well against Xavier and Purdue.
The Princeton offense is run against man defense. It is open post and relies mainly on back door cuts. This year, Miami -- against man defense -- has used weakside screens, down screens, and interior passing much more than last year, none of which are major features of the Princeton offense.
Against zone, Miami has moved the ball much better this year (two of Hausfeld's treys against Xavier came off great ball reversals). More inside out passing as well.
To say the main difference in Miami's offensive performance this year is that teams are playing less zone is not only wrong but is so simplistic it is laughable.
=>Laugh all you want, but it is the truth this year as it was last year. Remember SMS playing man to start the game against Miami? Remember Miami scoring at will? Remember SMS switching to zone late in the first half? Remember Miami being stymied from that point on?
So you are basing your entire analysis on one game last year. Got it.
As I said, Miami didn't play very well offensively last year against either man or zone. Miami has played better this year against both in three out of four games. They are doing some things differently this year -- as I mentioned above. Miami playing well against SW Mo St's man for part of a half is hardly indicative of how the entire season went.
=>Where did I base it all on one game? I used SMS as a clear example of where Miami destroyed a man and then struggled against a zone. You overstate an example of evidence as the entire evidence.
The vast majority of teams do not play zone. The vast majority of teams play man. The vast majority of teams play zone against Miami. If Miami sucked against either defense, then why did basically every team Miami play use a zone? What explanation is there for this Miami anomally? Everyone knows my answer.
Where did you base it all on one game? In your post. It was the only evidence you stated.
Didn't anyone tell Gene Keady and Sean Miller about this "Miami Anomaly?" They must have missed it on film, the fact that all you have to do against Miami is play zone? I guess you can forgive Miller; he's young. What about Keady? How could he be so dumb as to play man against Miami? He's been around a few years.
I am tired of trying to explain this to you. Go ahead and think it is all about teams not playing zone if that make you happy. After all, "Everyone" knows your answer.
=>1. You are taking this "zone debate" a little too personally. Relax, it is just a debate.
2. As for SMS, I do not have the energy (or the perfect memory) to list out every example from last season. However, SMS was a perfect example to illustrate my point b/c SMS used both defenses and Miami's offensive effectiveness changed like night and day as soon as it happened.
3. Keady, or his assistants, did not do their homework. Sometimes in OOC games you get things like this to happen when the teams are not familiar with each other. That is likely why SMS started playing man last year. Or maybe just stupid pride b/c they are Big Ten school and Miami needs to adjust to them and not the other way around (remember Lloyd Carr having his punter continually punting to Ryne Robinson?).
4. Sean Miller started off playing man. Eventually switched to zone in the X game. Miami hit the outsdie shots and X had to go back to man do to Miami's significant lead. As I am sure you know, zone defense obviously is not effective when you are down 16 points in the 2nd half.
5. Zones can be effective against a cutting offense b/c 1) You cannot lead a man into a screen if said man is not following you, and/or 2) You have a weak inside presence that allows for the defense to not defend the interior and push out on the outside shooters, and/or 3) outside shooting is suspect. 3 is magnified when 2 is in place as it was for Miami last season.
6. I am glad to have worn you down. Rest up, we shall continue this debate tomorrow!
I am back for more Debate Club (and to extend the quote chain one more time).
Sorry to get chippy, Mollautt. I do enjoy good debates.
Quote:
5. Zones can be effective against a cutting offense b/c 1) You cannot lead a man into a screen if said man is not following you, and/or 2) You have a weak inside presence that allows for the defense to not defend the interior and push out on the outside shooters, and/or 3) outside shooting is suspect. 3 is magnified when 2 is in place as it was for Miami last season.
Although I agree with you on points 2&3, that is precisely why teams run different offenses against a man than they do against a zone. Man offenses are more motion and cutting oriented; zone offensive are more ball movement oriented. When I played, whenever we weren't sure whether our opponents were playing man or zone -- which is possible with high school kids, I guess -- we would have a wing cut through the lane. If someone followed him, man defense; if no one did; zone. We would then adjust the offense we ran accordingly.
My point is, the last several years, we didn't attack either type of offense very well. There are several reasons, IMHO. No matter what type of defense a team runs, the best way to attack is from the inside out. Good post players that get the ball down low are tough to stop one-on-one. If teams double down, the ball can be kicked out to the shooters, who are in great position to score (receiving a pass from the post is the best way to shoot a jump shot because you pretty much get lined up with the basket receiving the ball).
If you can't get the ball inside, you are going to struggle. The reason the Princeton offense was developed was to find a way -- against a man defense -- to get the ball inside without having big, physical post players to dump it in to. It gets the ball inside on back door cuts, and it is beautiful when it works (one of the most enjoyable games I have ever watched was Princeton beating UCLA in the NCAA's a few years back at the RCA Dome). It is also a good offense if you don't have a real solid point guard, because it spreads the ball handling out. One thing that Princeton usually has the we haven't the past few years is good outside shooters, and that is key in the Princeton offense; if teams don't have to respect your outside shooting, they pack their defense in and the back door cuts aren't there. Which often times last year left Miami last year passing around the perimeter and forcing up a shot late in the clock.
These same weaknesses -- not much inside presence, poor shooting, no true point guard -- caused teams to play a lot of zone against Miami last year as well. Both were effective.
I have seen some very positive changes in Miami this year. First, personnel wise, Hatcher and Troyer are pretty much handling the PG duties. Chet, Peavy and Hausfeld are playing wings (Chet and Haus are not PG's). Danny and Monte and Nate VS are playing post. The roles are much more defined.
Offense wise, Miami has made some changes in their man offense. instead of relying soley on back door cuts, Miami is screening away from the ball and sending the cutters through the lane. Miami is posting up Danny and Monte and even Nate VS at times. If you taped the Xavier game, Miami ran a beautiful down screen to set up Danny for a three late in the first half. Danny was on the weakside low post and Haus was at the point withthe ball. He passed to the wing and went down the lane, setting a screen for Danny just below the foul line. Danny popped up to the top of the key off the screen and hit a wire open three. Perfectly executed, and not a staple of the Princeton offense.
Against zone, at least against Xavier, we executed much better than last year, forcing them back into a man. Two of Haus' treys came from great ball reversal to the weak side wing. It's not just that Miami MADE a couple shots, but they used good ball movement to GET better shots. Once again, much better than what I saw last year.
Miami's weaknesses last year? No true PG, an inability to get the ball inside and poor outside shooting. And poor shooting gets worse when the opponent doesn'r respect you inside game.
Improvements this year. A better point guard and a better job of getting the ball inside -- against either man or zone -- has led to better shooting.
OK, I have said more than enough. Fire away if you wish, although the more I read back, the more I think we agree.
=>I pretty much agree with you on everything you have wrote above other than 1) I think Miami has been pretty successful the few times teams have tried man and 2) Miami's O vs. the zone has not been as bad as some think (Miami milks clock on offense which tends to keep the score low).
IN order to keep this quote chain going, I submit the following to Debate Club: Miami's improved shooting in 3 of the 4 games is a direct result of the changes the basketball teams have made in the way they are now tying their shoes. In the past, Miami laced the shoes from the outside in. Now, laces come from the inside out. Coupled with triple knots over the previous double knots These changes have created more balance as the players push off the court on the jump shot.
I couldn't disagree more. It has nothing to do with the shoelaces and everthing to do with Monte's Elvis sideburns. Not really sure why.
=>A: No it isn't.
No what isn't?
=>The longest quote train in history. |
What is the longest in history?
would Ken Jennings get this question correct? |
I had to do this. Sorry. |
I didn't know you could Quote yourself?
Someone needs to keep this going. We have to outdo the BobHuskers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
