Again Guys SJU's Zone Offence isn't good!

Some people bashed me about a week ago about my post regarding the zone offence.
Open your eyes people we STINK against a good zone!!!

This is 3 games in a row now........

Man I hope I'm wrong but why anyone would ever play man to man against us is beyond me!!

Some people bashed me about a week ago about my post regarding the zone offence.
Open your eyes people we STINK against a good zone!!!

This is 3 games in a row now........

Man I hope I'm wrong but why anyone would ever play man to man against us is beyond me!!

First of all, it's "offense."  Not to mention, why make another thread rehashing the same thing? 

Sorry Sir for the mis-spelling.......Because you guys made it seem like I had no clue what the hell I was talking about.
I was write so It's fine......Just wish you guys would open your eyes and watch the game.....And come back with facts why the zone O is good.

Sorry Sir for the mis-spelling.......Because you guys made it seem like I had no clue what the hell I was talking about.
I was write so It's fine......Just wish you guys would open your eyes and watch the game.....And come back with facts why the zone O is good.

"You guys?"  What "guys" are you referring to?  I never responded to your initial thread.  You act like you've just invented sliced bread with that particular post.  You loved it so much that you had to post it twice.

You were "write," alright.  LOL   Again....  Who are "you guys?"  You root for the same team, right?

You have no clue. They finished 5th in the Big East, 21 wins, ranked 18th in the country including some amazing beat downs and now the offenSE stinks? We arguably have the Big East player of the year and the coach of the year, yet the offenSE stinks? Something must be going right if they are doing this well.

We had trouble against Mike Rice today. He did a great a job mixing man to man to zone.
Tomorrow, we won't see that mix. It's only zone against those hicks.
We need to be ready, and we need to hit them hard, and put them on the line.

Listen - phins seems like realfan jr, but he has a good point.

Our offense is very stagnant against a zone.  Think about the zones we have faced - rutgers, usf, syracuse, some ucla off the top of my head. Not great games for us

Its just a fact of our team.  Another fact is we hvae a great coaching staff, and I have to believe we will do something different against cuse.

phins, this is a college basketball message board. Accountability is more common here than any other I've seen, but don't expect people to remember a post you made last week, let alone this morning. The traffic is too high right now. And that's fine. We all now we play better against man. We don't start a point guard at the point. Still, Lavin has turned lemons into lemonade.

This a perfectly fine thread and valid point of discussion. I would agree the offense flails when facing a compact 2/3 zone. St. John's needs to run some high low out of that.

This a perfectly fine thread and valid point of discussion. I would agree the offense flails when facing a compact 2/3 zone. St. John's needs to run some high low out of that.

The complaint is about posting the same thread he posted last week.  Why not just "bump" the thread instead of starting a new one?  Not to mention, the thread was made in an attempt to show up the ones who argued with him or her last week (when many of us knew there were some defeciencies with this team from the get-go).   

It comes off, as a "look-at-what-I-know" thread.  Chest bumping, per se'.

Hey Phins what did you think of that zone offense...

Hey Phins what did you think of that zone offense...

Dude is practially a troll, kjd.

If Hardy isnt hitting the jumpshot, any zone will be effective against us

We had a scheme to attack he zone and it worked a few times.  The problem is that Syracuse has some much length and athleticism that it often disrupted what we tried to do in the half court.  Also, many reach ins were not called and they resulted in turnovers.  Most of our scoring seemed to come off fast breaks. 

Cuse fans were uncomfortable until the very end.  We will get them next year.

Quote from: Dave on March 10, 2011, 02:47:58 AM

This a perfectly fine thread and valid point of discussion. I would agree the offense flails when facing a compact 2/3 zone. St. John's needs to run some high low out of that.

The complaint is about posting the same thread he posted last week.  Why not just "bump" the thread instead of starting a new one?  Not to mention, the thread was made in an attempt to show up the ones who argued with him or her last week (when many of us knew there were some defeciencies with this team from the get-go).   

It comes off, as a "look-at-what-I-know" thread.  Chest bumping, per se'.

We have some great moderators in place to worry about that kind of stuff. Don't burden yourself.

As for the thread, I don't see an issue with it. The bigger issue is St. John's zone offense....it is a problem.

We have some great moderators in place to worry about that kind of stuff. Don't burden yourself.

As for the thread, I don't see an issue with it. The bigger issue is St. John's zone offense....it is a problem.

I'm not burdening myself with it.  I'm just calling it how I see it....  An unnecessary post that was posted last week.  For what reason?  To show up the folk who argued with he or she last week and pat self on the back.  Not to mention, he's a borderline troll.

By the way, I thought St. John's did a fairly decent job versus the zone on yesterday.  Considering, we don't have any shooters that was a commendable effort versus a lengthy zone.  The game wasn't lost on not being able to figure out the zone.  IMO, it was lost on key offensive rebounds by the 'Cuse, which were converted into points.

Yeah, I don't know what game y'all were watching, but I was really impressed and heartened by St. John's offense. team scored 53% against a zone filled with big forwards/ bigger defenders. The movement and passing along the baseline was pretty good. Burrell and Evans needed to hit more of their free throws, Brownlee needs to really think before shooting the trey, and the team needed a little more Hardy magic...

And far better ballhandling. The turnovers did the team in, in my opinion. And the offensive rebounding.

Yeah, I don't know what game y'all were watching, but I was really impressed and heartened by St. John's offense. team scored 53% against a zone filled with big forwards/ bigger defenders. The movement and passing along the baseline was pretty good. Burrell and Evans needed to hit more of their free throws, Brownlee needs to really think before shooting the trey, and the team needed a little more Hardy magic...

And far better ballhandling. The turnovers did the team in, in my opinion. And the offensive rebounding.

  Yup.  Agree with everything. They looked good against the zone.  At times, it seemed we tried to force some extra passes, especially Brownlee.  I think this team goes to the sweet 16.