You are the Head Coach! What Defensive set do you run as your Primary and why?
Me being the guy that ALWAYS practices what I preach, which is defense. I am going to run my favorite D which I BELIEVE is the most effect in basketball, which so happens to not get ran at all when I watch collegiate ball.
Point Gaurd up top pressing the ball, 2 and 3 man on the wings playing passing lanes, leaving my Big in the middle to alter every penetration, that wants to come in. I leave my 4 man as the safety valve down low, because he is more versatile then my Big, to shift from baseline to baseline.
What do you think about that! Feel free to BOAST about your D as a Head Coach.
I have been a Head Coach or Assistant Coach for four different teams. Three won championships. Zing.
i would play a 2-3 zone with Pippen and allen iverson at the top and mutumbo in the middle
1 3 1... is a dangerous temporary defense, you can not use it too long.
but it can be very effective with long reactiv players.
junkyarddog... are you doudou?
Kinda missed the point of the thread...I usually just ran a man defense because I had a really good rim protector, but when he was out I tried to press every possession because my team was really fast too. So if I were to coach again, I would stick to playing man and throw in a zone and press every once in awhile to switch it up.
Who am I playing?
Just thought that might be a necessary piece of info...
Depends on the level: NBA, college, JC, high school, middle school...
If I were a college head coach I would run a 3-2matchup zone for my base defense.
I have played on a team for a few years that has used this as a primary defense and when run correctly it is extremely effective. The key is for everyone in the zone to guard with man to man principles, but only guard the guy in their area. While this defense is tricky to learn, with a little practice you will get the hang of the rotations and communications.
I would also mix in a 1-3-1 defense and a 2-2-1 half court trap for certain times of the game.
I would run a 2-3 matchup zone against teams. FSU gave Cincy all kinds of fits last night with it and I've played against them. It's not hard to beat with ball movement, but if not, a team can make life difficult for you with it.
Collegiate is the Level.
Collegiate is the Level.
1-2-1-1 full court press allowing the ball to be inbounded and trapping the first pass on made baskets
and retreating into a 1-3-1 half court trap, extended all the way out to halfcourt on misses
... i'm a big fan of applying a lot of pressure defensively and speeding up the other team
I'm not a big fan of the 1-3-1 because it leaves the baseline corner of the weakside uncovered. And then because you're not defending an actual player, it's harder to get reboundsand know who to block out.
I'm all about a strong man to man defense, that loads up on the strong side from time to time and has excellent second, third and fourth rotations. I'm all about "helping the helper."
I think that's the best defense to play, but a lot depends on who's on your squad.
as a head coach you have to mix up your defenses if you want to be successful, you have to always keep the other head coach on his heals.
I would run mainly a 2-3 matchup zone and through in a man-to-man for about 12 minutes a game.
I'm just not a big fan of zone defenses, unless it's against teams that have ball dominant players that don't move with the ball or shoot well.
IF I was playing against the Heat, I'd zone the hell out of them every possession. I'd get back on D, slow the game down and zone them.
that corner 3 is going to be there all day. If team arent used to seeing the 1-3-1 then its a good look. A back door seal down low leaves it open for a cross court alley oop from the wing also. Whenever I ran a 1-3-1 I used a long armed forward at the top it makes the passes have to be more airbourne across the top the backcourt. You have to make sure that everybody arms are stretched out. It can be your main defense but only if you constantly practice it because teams will figure it out.
man-to-man. anything else isn't basketball
they are effective according to your personell and the team your playing against. The version of the !-3-1 I like the most is when it morphs into a 2-3 when the ball gets at the 2 and 10 oclock positions, being the top of the key is 12 oclock. Alvin Gentry ran some zone at Phoenix in the playoffs a few years ago against the Lakers when Goran Drajic came in for Nash and I liked it a lot. It was a switching 2-3 sorta thing, I cant explain it, but I remember liking it when I saw it.
If I were coaching the Heat against the zone, I would run a 3/2 high low set... I would put Bosh Freethrow line extended and run Lebron on the base line (short corner)... Wade would be the primarily ball handler and Chalmers/Battier/Miller would be the shooters on the wing..
If I had the right players as a college coach, I would run a 3-1-1 press, and a halfcourt trap as well.
Too do this, you need two guys that are very fast, have good hands, are avtive on D, never give up on a play, and have good length as well. A third guy that is really good at closeouts and can read a passer's eyes, and two bigs, at least one of them who is mobile, and another that makes the smart moves and can handle a 2 on 1 fastbreak situation well enough.
If that doesn't work, I run a box and 1, or a standard 2-3 zone.
I feel the box and 1 is really underated, It's the same concept as the 1-3-1, with on guy up top pressuring the ball handler. The only difference is that I have two guys down low, and I have to have one guy to be sure to lock down the middle, and not let anyone get a free pass down the lane, and The one probelm I have witha 1-3-1 is that is vulnerable to the corner three, but it's still very effective as well.
Although the biggest problem with the zone is it's very hard to rebound and box out, and I know that firsthand. Being a big in the middle of a 2-3 for many years, it would frustrate the crap out of me to have a guy go right over the top and get the board, and on the other end playing against zones, I would love running into the middle and jumping up and putting the putback in. Idealy a man-man withe exceptional help is the best.
I'm running man, and a 2-2-1 full court press.
Zone defenses tend to give up offensive rebounds because it's hard to box out when each defender doesn't have a specific individual who they're responsible for boxing out. Zones also give up a lot of open perimeter shots. It's never smart to zone a team that has a lot of good outside shooters. They will shoot you out of the zone.
Also, if you have a team that excels in transition, you're not going to want to play zone because zone defenses slow the tempo of a game. It takes a lot of passing to crack a zone, which makes for long possessions and limited fast-break opportunities for both teams.
Smart offenses know how to overload one side of a zone and play 3-on-2 on one side of the floor. The whole concept of a zone, in my opinion, is generally a way to neutralize a huge gap in talent; teams that aren't as good are forced to play zone against a team that is way better than they are to shorten the game.
Zones are also used to hide lousy defenders. There are a lot of fundamentals of defense that go out the window when playing zone. When I coached, I had to teach kids how to hedge a screen, how to allow room for your teammate to get through when it's your man who's sitting a pick, how to jam flex cuts, how a guard has to cover down when his big man helps him against dribble-penetration, etc.
Zones are usually played by lazy, passive coaches who don't want to teach basic defensive skills. I'm philosophically against them, but I recognize too, that there are times when it's really your only option. Whoever said that you have to mix defenses was right as well; making an offense diagnose a new look every time down the floor is good, it creates confusion and communication problems and will force a lot of turnovers.
I wish I could give more than one thumbs up to a comment. You are exactly right. That is exactly how I feel about the zone. It is good to mix things up, but being overly reliant on a zone really can hold your team back.
Thank you ALL.
Thank you ALL.
I run a man with every team I coach (been doing so for four years now) simply because from a developmental perspective, learning how to defend your man 1v1 is a lot more beneficial than sitting in a zone and forcing the opposition to shoot from outside for the most part.
I don't like to press because I'd rather not give up easy buckets for the chance of getting easy buckets, better to conserve energy and play a disciplined man D, pressure the opposition into mistakes and get out on the break off turnovers.
Zones kill the fun and spectacle of basketball IMO, especially in college where players don't have a defensive 3 second rule. I really hope less NBA teams use zones in the future, Dallas using it effectively in the playoffs is probably going to start a trend, but once the offences figure it out it won't be such a problem.
So yes, to sum, a well executed man to man is the best D in basketball IMO, zones and presses have too many holes.