Also if the other team knows you never play zone they don't have to spend time practicing against it.
Oregon
- Thread starter DrEss
- Start date
There will never ever be a logical argument for not having it in your bag of tricks to pull out when desperate.
The one logical argument against it stipulates a lack of length and athleticism on the roster.
No, it's not. Like I said, mix it in. Down 20, what do you have to lose?
Dear Oregon,
People forgot to tell you that you won't beat Kansas. Just so you know:
1. It was basically a Kansas home game because they are so close to home.
2. You lost a top player right before the tourney. That should have ended your dream season.
3. The Jayhawks are just too elite.
4. Don't vary your sets and and defenses at all, like play zone. Kansas will torch you and zones of any kind suck
People forgot to tell you that you won't beat Kansas. Just so you know:
1. It was basically a Kansas home game because they are so close to home.
2. You lost a top player right before the tourney. That should have ended your dream season.
3. The Jayhawks are just too elite.
4. Don't vary your sets and and defenses at all, like play zone. Kansas will torch you and zones of any kind suck
I have seen every one of those excuses as to why CMP hasn't made a FF (edit E8) since he's been here.
If Kansas was making threes, which were open looks for the most part, Oregon would not have been in the zone for long.
Oregon's zone was getting more pressure on the shooters than our constantly playing man and doubling the post leaving them wide open.
First off, we doubled the post twice. Two times. You can act like we did it the whole game but we didn't. Your statement is misleading at best.
Oregon did the same thing on a few occasions last night. Appears Altman and Painter saw something in the film. Looked to me like both teams were trying to steal the ball from Lucas or pressure him into a mistake, much like teams do to us.
It has been said Oregon doesn't pressure shooters and I saw nothing to change that belief. We had plenty of pressure on Kansas shooters unless Mason was shooting behind a moving center or they broke down our rotations after penetration. I don't know what to tell you if you think Oregon was pressuring the Kansas shooters. I guess it fits your narrative.
On the other side, Kansas had hands in the face of the Oregon shooters most of the night. Didn't matter, very impressive by Dorsey and company.
Sometimes it's about the Jimmy's and the Joe's, not the X' S and the O's.
A 2-3 zone with PJ, DM, or Cline at the top would get butchered.
Ever hear of a box and one or a 1 3 1 or a 3 2. The excuses are just more BS.
Keep digging.
I think New Pal would say it's not a matter of configuration......... and I would agree with that.
so, who would you put at the top[ of a 1-3-1 ... he better be DAMN QUICK and have a helll of a wingspan. Who is that? As well as who is the baseline guy --- who RUNS from corner to corner constantly????? ... while we're on the subject. who are the back 2 of your 3-2??? you put slower, less wingy guys on the front and every pass gets through to the baseline .. they've got three there to our two ... who are our quick big-wingspan guys that can take their three guys on????
Every coach knows how vulnerable both a 1-3-1 is as well as a 3-2 if you don't have really quick bigs with huge wingspans..... I would LOVE to attack either one
Last edited:
One would think with a name like yours you might actually understand the subject matter.
Me thinks you're a troll.
Exactly. It amazes me how many people each year watch the tourney and act like they have never seen it before.
Seems to me that PU has had problems playing against the zone in the past.
what does that have to do with the players we presently have being able to play a good zone? And when did we have problems ... when we didn't have good outside shooters? That would make sense against a 2-3 .... is that what you mean?
There is a phrase that is beaten to death in the military and other intelligence communities .... it is "SITUATIONAL AWARENESS." .... like, if the other team has great shooters and we have slower players with limited wingspan, then a zone isn't a good fit.
How does that relate? You think that a zone would have worked better? you are right .. I CLEARLY don't understand how any intelligent person would make that ASS-umption
I don't need your compliments. And I do hope you continue to post ... every post adds clarity to who you are.
Poll time:
1. Get butchered with the zone.
2. Get demoralized with m2m .
Either way, 6 months of discussion from us nerds who don't have enough physical coordination to cross half court line without tripping.
You call everyone a troll that doesn't agree with your stances on things. Does that make you any better?
Well BB we'll never know about the zone because we never tried it. However we have a good indication about the m2m. 32 point loss, 5th worst loss in tournament history. And speak for yourself about tripping. Some of us actually played man and zone before instead of just talking about it.
You guys are so full of S@#$. YOU DON'T PLAY IT THE WHOLE GAME. YOU PLAY IT FOR A PART OF THE GAME & YOU HAVE A LINEUP OF DM, CE, BIGGIE, IH & VE. Keeps them out of foul trouble also.
Builder Bob - you are on target with your assessment. At least that is what I saw during the game. Kansas was just "off" with their shooting. If they had shot like they did against us, Kansas would be in the FF. I did not see Oregon do much different than we did. You could argue their execution on defense was better, in that their guards could stay with the Kansas guards better when they drove the paint, but the jump shot defense was little different than ours. The missed shots were on the Kansas team, not the Oregon defense.
Well Oregon did do something different, they played zone. Not saying we would have won if we had. Can't believe anyone would just say "oh well, 32 point loss, nothing to see here, nothing to do different here". Lol
Oregon only beat UM by 1. I don't think they were light years ahead of us. Don't want to make adjustments? Fine, you'll keep coming up with the same results.
Oregon only beat UM by 1. I don't think they were light years ahead of us. Don't want to make adjustments? Fine, you'll keep coming up with the same results.
Zone wouldn't of made a lick of difference. Also saying Painter doesn't make adjustments just tells me you aren't watching the games and just posting this stuff to stir the pot.
