Watching last week’s game against San Jose State, it’s apparent that the Huskies are going to see a lot of zone defense this season. I’m a little concerned about how effective the Spartan defense, employed by clearly less talented players, was so effective in keeping the Dawgs’ offense leashed last night.
Zone defenses will neutralize one of the things the Huskies do best: an up-tempo attack with plenty of guard penetration, and it will force them into more outside shooting, still a question mark for the team.
The good news is that this idea of teams trying to beat the Dawgs with a zone has been apparent since training camp, and the Huskies have been preparing for it. Coach Lorenzo Romar mentioned yesterday that Quincy Pondexter quickly becomes scoring option #1 when teams drop out of man-to-man defense. Quincy’s big game last night (including the first 13 Husky points of the second half, all against a zone) was a big part of the reason San Jose State’s upset dreams never came closer to fruition.
While Quincy will continue to find success working out of the high post against the zone, Isaiah may have his difficulties at times, particularly if his jumper isn’t falling.
In my opinion, there is a lineup the Huskies can employ that’ll be set up for dismantling the zone. However, it will at times require Lorenzo Romar to shorten his bench and take a leap of faith with his three best defensive players (Overton, Holiday, and Gant) all on the bench for certain stretches.
The “Zonebuster” squad looks like this: Abdul Gaddy, with his precision passing and more controlled tempo is necessary when the Huskies find themselves playing against a defense that neutralizes their athletic advantage. Isaiah Thomas is too good not to find a way to be successful against the zone, but will need to temper his urge to drive, and look more to dish once the defense has collapsed on him. Elston Turner is the perfect wing to receive these passes. Clearly more comfortable without a defender in his face, Turner could shoot 40%-45% from deep if most of his shots were the open ones often earned against the zone. Quincy Pondexter moving freely between the high post, or making back door cuts along the baseline, gives the Huskies a zonebusting specialist. And, Tyreese Breshers, who can receive the ball and get a shot up even against double coverage, rounds out my Zonebusters lineup. Breshers is enough of a presence not to get swallowed up even when outnumbered in the post.
What do you think? What will the Huskies do to combat the zone this season? Are you concerned? Let me know below, and thanks for coming.
Loading ...Tags: Abdul Gaddy, chalk talk, Elston Turner, Isaiah Thomas, Lorenzo Romar, poll, Quincy Pondexter, Tyreese Breshers, Zone defense
-
I didn’t feel it was the zone that bothered them against SJSU – in fact, Gaddy seemed to thrive against the zone – they were just missing too many easy shots. If they had played a little better defense on Oliver and hit some of those shots they win that game by 20+.
I do have some other concerns regarding this Husky team (their big men, consistent shooting from the perimeter) – but I honestly don’t think they’ll fare any worse against a zone then they will against man-2-man.
-
Color me somewhat concerned.
I do think the Huskies should consider a zone defense of their own. Can’t remember seeing them deploy one this year but could have missed it. Many teams struggle against the zone and I’m sure we’d have a good one.
-
Howitzer,
I agree, having a zone to mix things up is good for certain situations, but this team is quick enough and athletic enough to play man. I’d like to see some more traps and pressure, especially against teams without guards who can handle the rock. But really, defense is way low on any list of possible concerns.
Teams have tried to zone us up and stop us before, and it hasn’t been that successful. Slowed us down maybe, but not changed the outcome of the game. A zone can also backfire if the other team is shooting well and you can have a blowout on your hands (last year @ASU when Dentmon was on fire). It would be nice to see Turner get more plays run for him when he is in the game to take advantage of his shooting. I love Holiday, but when those two are in together, Turner should have the green light, not Holiday. Same goes for Suggs. I don’t think he even attempted a FG against SJSU. If he and Turner get a few plays/looks from 3 point range, it could really open up the opposing defense fro the rest of the game, possibly even get them out of their zone.
-
Grant,
No question we are athletic enough for a man defense but, like you say, the ability to switch to zone or even a match up zone if the opposition has one good 3 point shooter would simply be another arrow in the defensive quiver. Also agree with the pressure defense as we have both quickness and depth.
-
Hey man…congrats on all the new advertising you seemed to have pulled in – I am sure that helps a little bit with the bottom line eh? I love the site and have passed it on to all my friends…
-
Lets not forget, teams thought they could stop us with a zone defense last year as well. Dentmon definitely helped break things up with some big games outside the 3-point line, but I.T. and Turner can do the same thing. Also, its important to remember that a lot of college teams aren’t prepared to play a zone the entire game, so requiring them to focus on learning to play a zone could hurt their team in other areas = helps the Dawgs.
-
one thing that i noticed is that even when we are playing against the zone, someone will step up…of one guy is not hitting his shot, then we have 9 other guys who can score…
-
The Dawgs have struggled against the zone since Romar first took over as coach. It’s not an issue of personnel, so much as it is a game-planning problem. Romar simply cannot game-plan against the zone, for whatever odd reason.
In order to really attack the zone, the best way to do it is through backdoor cuts, lob passes, alleyoops, and stuff like that. Duke does this better than anyone, with a simple back door play that they’ll run all day against the zone.
Search “zone offense” on Google and you can research any one of a thousand plays to combat the 2-3. It’s not like it’s some big secret, but we can’t execute such plays for the life of us.
Your points about the personnel to defeat the zone are dead on. Turner is a must, because he provides the necessary outside shooting, but he shouldn’t be the primary option. The zone forces you to take low-percentage shots from outside, so if Turner is firing away, the defense will have achieved their goal. Plus, Turner has yet to really get hot this season and who knows what his minutes will look like as the season wears on, especially with Suggs in the fold.
Perhaps the biggest area of concern in the Huskies seemingly futile pursuit against the zone is the presence of a high-post passer. They just plain don’t have a guy who fits this role.
Quincy operates well out of the high post, but only when he’s turning and taking the jumper, or ball-faking and driving. He’s not tall enough to see over the defense like your typical high post guy (think a Brad Miller, Spencer Hawes type) and should he be forced to pass, his role as a scorer is neutralized. Breshers wouldn’t fit this role either, and perhaps the only guy who could do it (though he would need extensive coaching to achieve this) would be Matthew Bryan-Amaning (maybe Darnell Gant, but I wouldn’t bank on it).
The good news is we have Enes Kanter coming in next year and he should help fill this role since he can shoot, pass, and work down low from all indications. So maybe things are looking up.
-
I’m sure Kanter has played against a ton of zone defenses over in Europe too.
Reply
Awesome Products and Services
10 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link: http://www.montlakemadness.com/quick-opinion-poll-the-huskies-vs-the-zone/trackback/