Coaching Philosophy / System

After watching us let Seton Hall shoot 63% from beyond the arc, while we struggled to make a shot, it made me think... before Steve Lavin came on board, and before any of us got to know Mike Dunlap;  if someone had started a thread asking what kind of recruiting philosophy or defensive system we wanted the next head coach to install, would this have been your answer?  Or, in a perfect world do you prefer a half court, man to man, style, or something else?

When Lavin came on board he had a blank slate to mold the program however he wanted.   I'm not asking if anything should change, for better or worse this is our identity now.  Plus the players are learning the zone, it's Dunlap's forte, and we need it to protect the 6 players we have from foul trouble etc. 

But,  if we had to do it all over again, would you go with this philosophy of athletic recruits (mostly wings) and a match-up zone?

I think it's an interesting question, because how often does a coach get to completely rebuild a roster and install a system to match?   Not often.   

We're St.John's. We play man to man. This isn't Division 2. All of these "experts" keep saying you can't play man to man with 6 guys.

Forgive me for being so blunt, but after seeing us lose by 30 to an overrated Seton Hall team, I don't see how anyone can argue in favor of this match up zone garbage.

We're St.John's. We play man to man. This isn't Division 2. All of these "experts" keep saying you can't play man to man with 6 guys.

Forgive me for being so blunt, but after seeing us lose by 30 to an overrated Seton Hall team, I don't see how anyone can argue in favor of this match up zone garbage.

Man to man worked great when Norm was here.

Guys, anyone who questions dunlaps pverall strategy really doesn't understand the game and how you adjust your style to the players you have.

Dunlap's "Match up" zone was a must last year because our team was horrible one on one defenders. They bought into what Dunlap was teaching defensively and the results spoke for themselves.

This year, who knows what the game plan may have been in September but we have no choice but to play as much zone as we can. We have better athletes on the roster but because we are so thin we have to play zone to avoid foul trouble and massive height mis-matches.

6 guys

Quote from: Poison on February 15, 2012, 12:18:10 PM

We're St.John's. We play man to man. This isn't Division 2. All of these "experts" keep saying you can't play man to man with 6 guys.

Forgive me for being so blunt, but after seeing us lose by 30 to an overrated Seton Hall team, I don't see how anyone can argue in favor of this match up zone garbage.

Man to man worked great when Norm was here.

We are so far removed from Norm Roberts right now. Right? Except that we have 10 wins and 16 losses. These are BE players. They can make a wide open 3 pointer.

Guys, anyone who questions dunlaps pverall strategy really doesn't understand the game and how you adjust your style to the players you have.

Dunlap's "Match up" zone was a must last year because our team was horrible one on one defenders. They bought into what Dunlap was teaching defensively and the results spoke for themselves.

This year, who knows what the game plan may have been in September but we have no choice but to play as much zone as we can. We have better athletes on the roster but because we are so thin we have to play zone to avoid foul trouble and massive height mis-matches.

It sure is a good thing that the match up zone is able to prevent massive height mismatches. If not for the zone, Gift would be getting dunked on with regularity.

6 guys

So play more of them. They're on the bench. If Dunlap won a D2 title, he should be used to getting more out of less. Play a couple of walk ons, and find a way for them to help out.

Quote from: Dave on February 15, 2012, 01:42:46 PM

6 guys

So play more of them. They're on the bench. If Dunlap won a D2 title, he should be used to getting more out of less. Play a couple of walk ons, and find a way for them to help out.

You forgot that in DII they don't have to play Big East teams every night.

6 guys

Dave,  I agree it makes a ton of sense for us now based on who we have.  (and the lack of depth)

But, starting from scratch like Lavin and Dunlap were in April 2010, would this have been your system if they gave you the keys to the program?
And, related to that, on the recruiting trail would you have put the emphasis on athletes? 

Quote from: Poison on February 15, 2012, 02:10:55 PM

Quote from: Dave on February 15, 2012, 01:42:46 PM

6 guys

So play more of them. They're on the bench. If Dunlap won a D2 title, he should be used to getting more out of less. Play a couple of walk ons, and find a way for them to help out.

You forgot that in DII they don't have to play Big East teams every night.

We saw against Texas Pan Am just how good of an idea the match up zone was. Other than moral victories, this season, as a strategy, it's produced 10 wins. Very few of those wins are worth anything to anyone. Everyone keeps blaming the loss of recruits on Lavin's health, or the player's grades, but maybe these recruits just don't like what they see?

 Scroll down a bit. Talks about St. John's and their struggles.


 https://twitter.com/#!/nateblueis4real

We haven't seen the system take fold yet.  We have a team built to run, but no depth to let them do just that.  Like I said earlier in the season, Dunlap has a NYC apartment full of greyhounds.  A few more big bodies will allow these kids to defend 94 feet of the floor, run, and not stop running. 

Lavin and Dunlap want to wear down teams with depth, athleticism, length, and versatility.  You dont win games by just running once in a while, you break the opposing team's will.  It's like pounding the ball in football...it might not pay off in the first half, but by the fourth quarter good running teams are reaping the benefits.

Zone doesn't work?  Syracuse plays one and the Hall had all of 15 points in the fisrt half en route to a 26 point loss.

to say it does not work is not quite accurate.  You need the combination of the right players and the experience.

Zone doesn't work?  Syracuse plays one and the Hall had all of 15 points in the fisrt half en route to a 26 point loss.

to say it does not work is not quite accurate.  You need the combination of the right players and the experience.

SU's zone works when they have length.

After watching us let Seton Hall shoot 63% from beyond the arc, while we struggled to make a shot, it made me think... before Steve Lavin came on board, and before any of us got to know Mike Dunlap;  if someone had started a thread asking what kind of recruiting philosophy or defensive system we wanted the next head coach to install, would this have been your answer?  Or, in a perfect world do you prefer a half court, man to man, style, or something else?

When Lavin came on board he had a blank slate to mold the program however he wanted.   I'm not asking if anything should change, for better or worse this is our identity now.  Plus the players are learning the zone, it's Dunlap's forte, and we need it to protect the 6 players we have from foul trouble etc. 

But,  if we had to do it all over again, would you go with this philosophy of athletic recruits (mostly wings) and a match-up zone?

I think it's an interesting question, because how often does a coach get to completely rebuild a roster and install a system to match?   Not often.

a good coach adjusts philosophy/system to fit his players unique talents (which was norms biggest failure at Stj). Lavins master plan was obviously hampered when some of his players didnt qualify and didnt end up on the team. maybe the system would be somewhat different if all his players had arrived. who knows?

in terms of recruiting, i think lav recruits the right type of players for the BE. obviously the more athletic the better, and wing players are the most versatile players. obviously we need guard play and big men, and im confident lav can recruit good PGs SGs. finding a big man is harder, there simply arent enough big men for every team that wants one. finding a good skilled big man is mostly a matter of good recruiting mixed with luck.

No one seemed to have a problem with the zone last year when we were ranked and in the tourney 

No one seemed to have a problem with the zone last year when we were ranked and in the tourney

And if you remember correctly it took a while for them to get used to it. It's even harder with 5 freshman and no bench.

This team has lateral quickness. Last years team didn't. Dunlap should have sucked it up, and given a couple of the walk ons a chance to contribute. The starters deserve a rest.

6 guys

Thought it was 5 Guys (burger joint).