CougarCorner
Sign in
Archived Topic

Manu y manu defensa.

by BroncoBot · 3/9/2013

Advertisement
B
BroncoBot
Is that spanish for man to man defense?



It got BYU back in the game. I've wanted to see BYU play more man to man all year. Zone is just too predictable and is not disruptive enough. On the other hand, many here have argued that BYU doesn't have the "quicks" to play sustained periods of man to man defense.



I find this a little confusing. If BYU is playing zone defense, I think it's to keep guys like Cusick, Sharp (where did he go) and Zylstra on the floor. They can knock down shots when they get their feet set and on defense they are able to cover their zone. BYU's zone gets so darn disjointed though that it leaves HUGE lanes open to the basket which turns into wide open 3 point shooting from the wings and corners when help comes. It's embarrassing to watch.



Man to man defense means guys like Winder and Delgado should be on the floor more. They are much quicker, could head off dribble penetration, and are certainly better offensive producers if they ever had enough playing time to get in a rhythm. I hope to see a lot of an improved Delgado next year. If the guard from SLCC is a lock down defender, I want him on the floor disrupting like J. Emery was known for.



I want to beat San Diego by 30+ points every time BYU meets up with them in '13-'14. Where is BYU's pride? Where is the execution? Tonight was some of the sloppiest slop that was ever slopped. When did BYU become a team that does not move on offense? Where is the hustle, intensity and toughness?



Rose, time to do some work. Time to prove you are still a top tier coach without sidekick Rice.
B
Brayden Green
There was night and day difference between us playing man and whatever the hell that zone defense is. That *might* be the worst zone defense played in the entire nation. How is it possible that you have a zone that BOTH gives wide open 3s AND quick buckets in the paint.



We lost the game in the first half, but we continued to lose it with Cusick and Zylstra getting beat repeatedly in the second half.



As far as next year, Winder isn't actually that great defensively in man defense. He lacks a lot of the fundamentals. With good coaching he would be, but I'm not so sure that we have that good coaching at BYU anymore (not talking about Rose here, I don't think his assistants - Nashif and the other dude, are very good).



0 fast break points last night. That is unacceptable for a BYU team, the way that Rose has recruited. But, it is hard to run the break when your PG is the teams leading rebounder at the half, and your 2 and 3 are quite possibly the slowest people on the court (Cusick and Zylstra).



No movement on offense, frantic flailing around in a zone defense. No transition points... I really don't know who BYU has become...
B
BroncoBot
BlueIsBetter wrote:

0 fast break points last night. That is unacceptable for a BYU team, the way that Rose has recruited. But, it is hard to run the break when your PG is the teams leading rebounder at the half, and your 2 and 3 are quite possibly the slowest people on the court (Cusick and Zylstra).

Agree to a large degree with you except for this. If your PG is getting rebounds, it should be a great advantage for fast breaks. If Carlino gets the board, your entire team can sprint and not worry about ball handling. I think the real problem is teams simply know that they have to get back on defense against BYU. They also know that if BYU is in zone that they can crash the boards and get multiple second chances.
B
Brayden Green
BroncoBot wrote:

0 fast break points last night. That is unacceptable for a BYU team, the way that Rose has recruited. But, it is hard to run the break when your PG is the teams leading rebounder at the half, and your 2 and 3 are quite possibly the slowest people on the court (Cusick and Zylstra).

Agree to a large degree with you except for this. If your PG is getting rebounds, it should be a great advantage for fast breaks. If Carlino gets the board, your entire team can sprint and not worry about ball handling. I think the real problem is teams simply know that they have to get back on defense against BYU. They also know that if BYU is in zone that they can crash the boards and get multiple second chances.


Entire team sprinting, like who? Zylstra = not outrunning anyone. Cusick = not outrunning anyone Haws = Not outrunning anyone



The guy that has the best chance of scoring and or dishing on fast break is the guy rebounding under the basket, and by the time he runs all the way up court, the defense is set. Without a rebound and quick outlet pass to a (somewhat already leaking) guard, a fast break is hard to do. That is what BYU used to be boss at with Hartsock.



All of BYU's problems can be solved by playing man defense, eliminating those who cannot play man from the rotation, and telling Davies to box out AND benching him when he doesn't. But Rose never set the precedent early on, and because of that we lose later on in the year.
M
Mars
BlueIsBetter wrote:
There was night and day difference between us playing man and whatever the hell that zone defense is. That *might* be the worst zone defense played in the entire nation.

This must be why national basketball pundits are continually commenting on the high level of Zone D that Coach Rose runs in Provo. In other words, the loss does hurt, but don't troll. I think that you have enough valid points to make that you are better than hyperbole. And enough weaknesses were apparent, unfortunately, that you can discuss them without the need of over-selling any.
Advertisement
B
Brayden Green
Mars wrote:
There was night and day difference between us playing man and whatever the hell that zone defense is. That *might* be the worst zone defense played in the entire nation.

This must be why national basketball pundits are continually commenting on the high level of Zone D that Coach Rose runs in Provo. In other words, the loss does hurt, but don't troll. I think that you have enough valid points to make that you are better than hyperbole. And enough weaknesses were apparent, unfortunately, that you can discuss them without the need of over-selling any.


This was the worst comment ever! (Sorry, my hyperbole machine is out of control.)



In all seriousness, point taken and thanks. The Zone D is pretty bad, and was exploited heavily in our last 10 games. It must have been like a mass email to all the AD's in the WCC or something, because out of nowhere we went from having a serviceable defense to a defense that (as Bart Scott would say) can't stop a nosebleed. CAN'T WAIT!!!
Q
Qman
The Zone D was good earlier in the year but the teams inconference got to see it enough to figure it out.
S
SpiffCoug
One thing, IMO, that hurts our man defense, is we don't have a shot blocker. Last year Hartsock, while not great, could/would at least challenge shots in the paint. This year our bigs (Davies, Austin, Sharp) were more interested in trying to draw a charge than challenge the shot. Taking a charge is a win for the opponent, because you are getting the chance to get an and-1 and a foul on a key BYU player (Davies). You know there will be contact so a call is going to be made.
B
Brayden Green
SpiffCoug wrote:
One thing, IMO, that hurts our man defense, is we don't have a shot blocker. Last year Hartsock, while not great, could/would at least challenge shots in the paint. This year our bigs (Davies, Austin, Sharp) were more interested in trying to draw a charge than challenge the shot. Taking a charge is a win for the opponent, because you are getting the chance to get an and-1 and a foul on a key BYU player (Davies). You know there will be contact so a call is going to be made.


Correction. Only Austin was more concerned about taking charges to try and block. Davies was more concerned with following shooting guards around on the 3 point line to be even in remotely good position to block and/or rebound.
S
SpiffCoug
BlueIsBetter wrote:
One thing, IMO, that hurts our man defense, is we don't have a shot blocker. Last year Hartsock, while not great, could/would at least challenge shots in the paint. This year our bigs (Davies, Austin, Sharp) were more interested in trying to draw a charge than challenge the shot. Taking a charge is a win for the opponent, because you are getting the chance to get an and-1 and a foul on a key BYU player (Davies). You know there will be contact so a call is going to be made.


Correction. Only Austin was more concerned about taking charges to try and block. Davies was more concerned with following shooting guards around on the 3 point line to be even in remotely good position to block and/or rebound.

And yet strangely, he was in a position to grab more than thre emore rebounds a game than any other BYU player. You don't need to overstate Davies penchant to come to the perimeter.



His 7.8 rpg were the highest for BYU player since at least 05-06.
Advertisement
B
Brayden Green
SpiffCoug wrote:
SpiffCoug wrote:
One thing, IMO, that hurts our man defense, is we don't have a shot blocker. Last year Hartsock, while not great, could/would at least challenge shots in the paint. This year our bigs (Davies, Austin, Sharp) were more interested in trying to draw a charge than challenge the shot. Taking a charge is a win for the opponent, because you are getting the chance to get an and-1 and a foul on a key BYU player (Davies). You know there will be contact so a call is going to be made.


Correction. Only Austin was more concerned about taking charges to try and block. Davies was more concerned with following shooting guards around on the 3 point line to be even in remotely good position to block and/or rebound.

And yet strangely, he was in a position to grab more than thre emore rebounds a game than any other BYU player. You don't need to overstate Davies penchant to come to the perimeter.



His 7.8 rpg were the highest for BYU player since at least 05-06.


Yeah, he has a lot of stiff competition there :roll:



Still, point taken. Too bad he never learned to box out. He would have had even better numbers.
This is an archived topic from the original CougarCorner forum. New replies are not accepted.