SameOldNudityDrew wrote:Zone D is legal in the NBA right? Could a team conceivably design a zone defense that targeted those areas? It would be tough because the 3 point line covers so much space. But I'm curious what that might look like and if it could be effective?
Drew, a matchup zone would have the best chance of succeeding against this. You need constant pressure on the ball.
I'll just throw out there that Flip was one of the few NBA coaches around that would run a lot of legal zone defenses.
Another issue you have to resolve with teams that do this type of thing is you can't let them get offensive rebounds. I'd be curious to see how many of Houston's 3's were made off their 12 offensive rebounds. It's tough because the Rockets always have one big out there that's an offensive rebounding player whether is Nene, Capella or Harrell. With them taking all those 3's everyone has to rebound. You have to be disciplined and box everyone out because with those long shots there will be long rebounds. That's hard to do when you are trying to run guys off the line and close out and then you can be out of position if they miss and then you probably give up an easy 3 point look. The Rockets won the rebounding battle against NO and...I just looked now who led them in rebounds? Beverly.
SameOldNudityDrew wrote:Zone D is legal in the NBA right? Could a team conceivably design a zone defense that targeted those areas? It would be tough because the 3 point line covers so much space. But I'm curious what that might look like and if it could be effective?
Drew, a matchup zone would have the best chance of succeeding against this. You need constant pressure on the ball.
But isn't that similar to just switching everything on the perimeter? You are just handing off guys from one person to the next as screens come.
What about a 1-3-1 with the weak side wing dropping down to the paint when necessary?
LOL, I have to believe NBA coaches have thought this through....khans is probably right.
The thing is it can take a long time to change conventional thinking. It took 30+ years for the NBA to truly grasp the basic math of 3 points being 50% greater than 2 points, thus an open 3 is almost always the better shot. Are there dogmas on defense that need to be broken in order to catch up with the new realities?
Q, the problem with the 1-3-1 is it would leave you susceptible to the corner 3. NBA players are too good at skip passes. You would almost have to defend the ball 94 feet and you would end up wearing out your defense.
SameOldNudityDrew wrote:Zone D is legal in the NBA right? Could a team conceivably design a zone defense that targeted those areas? It would be tough because the 3 point line covers so much space. But I'm curious what that might look like and if it could be effective?
Drew, a matchup zone would have the best chance of succeeding against this. You need constant pressure on the ball.
But isn't that similar to just switching everything on the perimeter? You are just handing off guys from one person to the next as screens come.
What about a 1-3-1 with the weak side wing dropping down to the paint when necessary?
LOL, I have to believe NBA coaches have thought this through....khans is probably right.
The thing is it can take a long time to change conventional thinking. It took 30+ years for the NBA to truly grasp the basic math of 3 points being 50% greater than 2 points, thus an open 3 is almost always the better shot. Are there dogmas on defense that need to be broken in order to catch up with the new realities?
Q, the problem with the 1-3-1 is it would leave you susceptible to the corner 3. NBA players are too good at skip passes. You would almost have to defend the ball 94 feet and you would end up wearing out your defense.
I think they may ultimately take away the corner 3 and make the line go out to the sideline.
I should say too I hope they do. Cutting passing shooting in all parts of the court is what basketball is about too me. I find this to be similar to what hockey experienced with the neutral zone trap where teams are finding a gimmick within the rules that is going against what I think is the spirit of the sport.
SameOldNudityDrew wrote:Zone D is legal in the NBA right? Could a team conceivably design a zone defense that targeted those areas? It would be tough because the 3 point line covers so much space. But I'm curious what that might look like and if it could be effective?
Drew, a matchup zone would have the best chance of succeeding against this. You need constant pressure on the ball.
But isn't that similar to just switching everything on the perimeter? You are just handing off guys from one person to the next as screens come.
What about a 1-3-1 with the weak side wing dropping down to the paint when necessary?
LOL, I have to believe NBA coaches have thought this through....khans is probably right.
The thing is it can take a long time to change conventional thinking. It took 30+ years for the NBA to truly grasp the basic math of 3 points being 50% greater than 2 points, thus an open 3 is almost always the better shot. Are there dogmas on defense that need to be broken in order to catch up with the new realities?
Q, the problem with the 1-3-1 is it would leave you susceptible to the corner 3. NBA players are too good at skip passes. You would almost have to defend the ball 94 feet and you would end up wearing out your defense.
Makes sense. Just spit ballin'.
It would also leave you open to getting beat at the rim with simple cuts or guys sitting in the dunkers spot and waiting for a pass.
It's certainly going to be interesting to see how the game is changing and how defense will change. I think the league has figured out the math AND the level of talent shooting the ball from 3 across various types of players. Curry is the greatest shooter of all time and he plays right now...with another one of the best players ever. Guys like Porzingis and Towns basically came into the league as legit 3 point shooters. This 3 point shooting thing is still relatively new leaguewide and some teams still haven't embraced it because at the very least their rosters can't comply. It may take a couple years to adjust defensively including making roster decisions based on that.
Thibs had a whole week to think about the opening post-all start break schedule, including tonight's game against Houston. We have beaten these guys before, so it's not like it can't be done. But it's pretty unlikely....
Moral victory goal of the night: Hold Houston below their season average for 3-point attempts. That's all I'm asking. Make them take 2's. If they go in, they go in.
