Basketball minds of BA, maybe it's just a coincidence (1 game sample size), I see looking at Central's results that the real clunker of an offensive game they had was vs. Eastern Michigan, who held them in the low 60's. Would a zone be any more effective against the Rayson/Keene combo? Is BG still predominantly playing zone D? They allowed I think 82 to Central in their loss to CMU. Obviously Keene and Rayson both struggled against Eastern, compared to their season averages. Maybe it was just a bad night for them, but would a zone be any more effective than man?
Not really. A zone is specifically designed to keep teams out of the middle of the floor and paint and force them to whip the ball on the perimeter to shoot outside. Designing plays to bust the zone are not that easy, because you're telling your guys to find areas of open space and when you want to set a screen a man may not be there.
But some teams like EMU and Syracuse have it down to a science where they take away both shooters and the middle of the floor. When it's all you play, you get pretty good at extending it because your players develop a better 360 range around them.
It also really depends on what kind of zone you play. A 2-3 maybe be more susceptible against wing and a little below foul line extended shots, and skip passes to the opposite side. A 1-3-1 zone (my favorite) allows your best athlete to roam out front and try to get steals and gives great opportunities for trapping, but it leaves you vulnerable in the deep corners for the guy who has to run back and forth on the baselines.
Last Edited: 2/10/2017 12:33:06 PM by GoCats105