Decent analysis of a tough opponent;
“@CBTonNBC: 2013-2014 Season Preview: No. 20 Wisconsin Badgers http://wp.me/p1aWjM-1Z0Q”
I wouldn't call it so much of an an analysis as a proclamation that Bo Ryan is good so Wisconsin will be too. He doesn't know what will make them good except Ryan and Dekker. All I know is Pointer will be on Dekker a lot, and when not him, it will be Sampson or Sanchez. Get past that and he'll have to shoot over Obekpa. If the rest of the Wisconsin team doesn't step up, it will be tough for them. They do play rock ball though, so I'm sure they are aiming to slow the game down as much as possible.
In any event let's agree this is a tough game. Their mechanical style, solid D & usually proficient three point shooting will present challenges. Our depth, quickness and athleticism should cause problems for them. I certainly like our chances.
Tough without a question. Wisconsin is always tough. I agree with the writer. He just skipped over any real analysis per se. We might have a little bit of a wild card in that we have Whitesell on board and we don't know what twists he will integrate into our half court offense. It's an early season game, so having a new "offensive coordinator" who teams can't really scout could add a wrinkle.
If we run an offense it will brand new to every opponent.
If Wisconsin starts hitting from 3, we'll lose this game.
As I've said before, Syracuse in their 2-3 has never placed a premium on defending the 3-pt shot. Theyve been pretty successful under Boeheim methinks. We need to do a better job getting out on shooters, but it's not that cut and dry. Owning the boards is more important.
Once again, that statement regarding Syracuse and defending three-pointers is completely false. It is a huge part of their defense. I've heard JB himself say that is the biggest misconception about his zone.
Huge part of their defense? They were 289th in 3pt percentage defense. If its a huge part, they aren't particularly effective at that part of it when this was written. Last year they were better, but their opponents still took a ton of shots. Their opponents just didn't hit nearly as much.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/luke_winn/05/14/defending.three/index.html
MCN, you need to read much more closely. It does not say that Syracuse was 289th in 3pt percentage defense. It says, "The Orange ranked 289th in three point attempts allowed." Three point attempts ALLOWED, not % they let their opponents hit. Huge difference. Not only was Syracuse not 289th in three point percentage defense...they were top 50 nationally for the fifth year in a row. They were top ten in 2003 and 2004.
The same article you cited also said "Syracuse plays an extended, trapping 2-3 zone that leads to few post-up possessions and a ton of contested threes." The key word there being contested.
Billy Donovan's on the Syracuse defense: "They don't let you take the three point shot. They did a great job defensively."
JB on his win over Indiana in the tournament: "Our perimeter defense was tremendous."
JB protects the perimeter and traps the corners. If you'd like to borrow my copy of "Jim Boeheims's Complete Guide to the 2-3 Match-up Zone Defense," let me know.