billiCAN Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 I think Richmond ran a pretty effective D against us last night. It was tough to get Conk the ball. I really liked, it in the first half, when they used Cody at the foul line to relay the ball into him. I think this is something Rob should work on over the next couple weeks ( I think he was yanked in the second half after blowing 2 passes to Brian). When we face teams with bigger guards, or guards that are really good at ball pressure, it would be nice to have our bigs comfortable passing it in to Conk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 I think Richmond ran a pretty effective D against us last night. It was tough to get Conk the ball. I really liked, it in the first half, when they used Cody at the foul line to relay the ball into him. I think this is something Rob should work on over the next couple weeks ( I think he was yanked in the second half after blowing 2 passes to Brian). When we face teams with bigger guards, or guards that are really good at ball pressure, it would be nice to have our bigs comfortable passing it in to Conk. RL also had 2 very nice interior passes to Conk in the first half. I think it was an issue of RL forcing the play and not having the discipline to reset the offense if option #1 wasn't available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 He had a lot of success making that pass to Conklin in the Xavier game as well. Yep, Loe just forced a couple of those passes last night. Gotta give Richmond a little credit. They played very intense defense for most of the game. They are no fun to play against. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taj79 Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Watching the game, I thought immediately of Syracuse. The 'Cuse plays a match-up 2-3 zone about 110% of the time. And you know its coming. And despite that knowledge, it still gives just about everyone that sees it fits, even those in the Big East that see it twice a year. I believe the general pundits to a man agree that teams are jsut so unfamiliar against it, that they can't prepare for it even when they kno wits coming. I think we were ready --- Ellis made statements to the mismatched advantages the team knew it owuld have on the interior --- but still we don't see it enough to do things as if in our nature to do it. We shoot a lot form the outside; that took this away and despite plans for a counter, our lack of expertise in executing against it hindered our production. Still we beat them handily. It confused us for sure. Kwamain had two points the whole game until late. Plus I got the feeling neither Jett, nor McCall nor Cassity were fond of th eideaof meeting Garrett at the end of a drive. Even though they delivered well enough in hindsight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Pine Jim Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Richmond's pesky matchup zone seemed to be forcing us to initiate our offense deeper than we usually do, with more ball pressure. No stand at the 3 pt. line and bombs away, even after a series of passes and our normal cuts to the corner or top of the key. So, we had the less common strategy of the high-low lobs to BC,CR and DE, the dribble-drives diagonally thru traffic and the use of Cody as a down low player. Took us awhile but I'm glad we persevered and finally put them away. Was still dicey with 5 min. left. Whew ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 a match up zone played correctly is a b!tch to attack. i have long wondered why more teams do not utilize it. however i have been told that it is hard to implement. there is no doubt it was effective last night vs the billikens. we won last night mainly because we defended the richmond three point shot tremendously and took it away from them. had they hit their threes at the normal level we would have been in trouble in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiCAN Posted February 16, 2012 Author Share Posted February 16, 2012 a match up zone played correctly is a b!tch to attack. i have long wondered why more teams do not utilize it. however i have been told that it is hard to implement. there is no doubt it was effective last night vs the billikens. we won last night mainly because we defended the richmond three point shot tremendously and took it away from them. had they hit their threes at the normal level we would have been in trouble in my opinion.+1 Even if they hit 33% from three we would have a lot more work to do offensively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 +1 Even if they hit 33% from three we would have a lot more work to do offensively. It was really strange the way they chucked up 3's. I think our defense rattled them. They shot some from way out and often times early in the shot. A couple times guys were standing flat footed and then they just threw them up with little chance of going in. They didn't shoot many that seemed to be in the flow of their offense. I like to think it was because our defense was disruptive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 -it was brought up earlier this week (i think) about our offense this year not having the 'shot clock wind down panic shot' as much as in past seasons -give richmond credit as we had a bunch of those last night -i hope we don't fall into that crap again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billikan Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 -it was brought up earlier this week (i think) about our offense this year not having the 'shot clock wind down panic shot' as much as in past seasons -give richmond credit as we had a bunch of those last night -i hope we don't fall into that crap again When faced with several zones and several different man to man schemes, often alternating on various times down the court, it takes additional time for the offense to identify and get everyone in position. I thought the beauty of their defensive scheme was that they often changed from a matchup to man to man to run and jump trap to a one three one zone. That and the sagging denial on Conkin made it tough to get good shots for DE and Conklin. Fortunately, we defended them very well and hit some open shots against the zone late when they were pressing and we were moving the ball to the open man. I give Richmond huge credit for their defensive effort last night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetorch Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 There are consistent ways to attack Richmond's zone. Problem is no one can implement them. It takes too much time to prepare for every instance. We were able to break it a couple times, but it appeared we only had set plays for a couple formations of it. More coaches don't run that defense because A. It takes a lot of intelligence, repetition, & skill to do it and B. You get killed on the boards, even more so than running a straight zone because you are always out of position. Coaches don't like not being able to rebound defensively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillikenFriar Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Syracuse is so effective in large part to their size. They are long from 1 to 5. This year, they are also very deep. I watched them play the Friars twice this year and it is the best team SU has had in recent memory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 syracuse imo has always been the example of a team that wins because they have better players. i have never been impressed with any aspect of their coaching. jim b is a great recruiter, and i assume a great motivator. beyond that i wouldnt have him coach a junior high team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.