AdaSooner
Admin Emeritus
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2008
- Messages
- 16,086
- Reaction score
- 49
I think most of you will agree that this team is better (I use that word loosely) in a match up zone than any other defensive set we've played since the season started. Even our half-court zone traps are fairly effective, when used sparingly as a means to get our opponents out of their rhythm.
If you'll think back to every game we've played where we closed the gap after our opponents got big leads or took control of a game against a weaker team, we were in a match up zone (usually a 1-3-1 with Cam at the top) in almost every case. Yesterday's game against ATM was no exception. Billy Tubbs, who tries not to be too critical of what OU is doing offensively or defensively, continues to point to the match up zone as our best defense. It's obvious he also knows that we're not very good (understatement) in a man to man defense. Billy is not the only television commentator this year to notice that our defense is better when we're in a zone.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, a man to man is only as good as your weakest link. If we only had one or two and we played good help-side defense, that might be okay. The problem is, we have too many weak links, and our help defense is poor, which usually results in giving up easy drives to the basket and wide open shots that lead to double-digit deficits before we have a chance to get un-tracked. Sound familiar?
My question is, if the television commentators and fans like me know that, why do our coaches stubbornly cling to the idea that this team can guard anyone in a man to man? I know why coaches prefer a man defense, so please don't give me the usual blocking out on the boards and keeping the other team's shooters from getting good looks. We don't block out when we're in a man, so what difference does it make? I would rather give up an occasional wide open three, than watch our opponents drive for uncontested layups, dunks and finger rolls.
I want to make it clear that I'm not opposed to switching to a man to man from time to time to change up our defense. But IMHO, this team should be in a zone at least 80% of the game, if not more. Why wait until our opponent gets a big lead before we go to a match up zone? Am I missing something here?
If you'll think back to every game we've played where we closed the gap after our opponents got big leads or took control of a game against a weaker team, we were in a match up zone (usually a 1-3-1 with Cam at the top) in almost every case. Yesterday's game against ATM was no exception. Billy Tubbs, who tries not to be too critical of what OU is doing offensively or defensively, continues to point to the match up zone as our best defense. It's obvious he also knows that we're not very good (understatement) in a man to man defense. Billy is not the only television commentator this year to notice that our defense is better when we're in a zone.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, a man to man is only as good as your weakest link. If we only had one or two and we played good help-side defense, that might be okay. The problem is, we have too many weak links, and our help defense is poor, which usually results in giving up easy drives to the basket and wide open shots that lead to double-digit deficits before we have a chance to get un-tracked. Sound familiar?
My question is, if the television commentators and fans like me know that, why do our coaches stubbornly cling to the idea that this team can guard anyone in a man to man? I know why coaches prefer a man defense, so please don't give me the usual blocking out on the boards and keeping the other team's shooters from getting good looks. We don't block out when we're in a man, so what difference does it make? I would rather give up an occasional wide open three, than watch our opponents drive for uncontested layups, dunks and finger rolls.
I want to make it clear that I'm not opposed to switching to a man to man from time to time to change up our defense. But IMHO, this team should be in a zone at least 80% of the game, if not more. Why wait until our opponent gets a big lead before we go to a match up zone? Am I missing something here?
