To break the direction of negative thought, it might be interesting to hear some opinion on the question of utilizing a zone defense, especially when the second unit subs in. With neither Trey or Dusty possessing great foot speed and changing things up a bit, would the different look have any merit? I know we are more a man type team, but Mike has played some zone and it didn’t appear to be a disadvantage. I would think having some different looks could have some advantages.
Even when we play zone, we still end up playing screens poorly. It seems like most every time that the other team sets a high screen, we usually try to double team the ball handler, which leads to an open shot somewhere else. If we could learn how to play those high picks where the off ball defender cheats high and then lets his own player thru, then the zone would be WAY more effective, as would our man-to-man defense. Which begs the question… If we could learn how to play those high picks, would we really have to go to more zone?
We have to stop doing 2 things: double teaming the ball handler, and getting caught in a switch with a PF/C on their PG.
If we get into a half court defense the book on us seems to be defined at this point as I see so many teams do it. High pick and roll, if we switch, spread the floor and take advantage of our PG on their big man inside or our big man on their PG outside. If we don’t switch, try again. It is very frustrating to watch time and time again. The scramble to help our PG down low results in an open 3 a high % of the time.
We can play good defense without trapping/double teaming. Trapping is killing our defense against good teams. The trapping of good guards with passing skills has our defense in constant reaction mode with a wide open man.