Why are so many elite teams playing zone defense? I've watched a lot of the EYBL games and over half the teams I'm watching are playing a 2-3 zone or another zone of some sort. Don't you want to show that your kids can defend full court and half court playing man to man? I feel like zone is hiding a lot of deficiencies on defense.
ZONE??
- Thread starter alwayslearning
- Start date
so many reasons.. which have been discussed here many times.. but in short..
- not a ton of time/ practice in aau to get everyone on the same page with man principles and techniques compared to a hs season
- hiding deficiencies isnt necessarily a bad thing in regards to recruiting.. you want to highlight the players upsides not downsides
- not enough coaches actually know how to teach proper man to man systems (not limited to aau ball)
- so many kids at high levels are so athletic and quick off the bounce that a zone may actually be required (at times)
if you watch enough, you will see many teams play good man defense, but usually those are teams that have been together for multiple years and/or teams that have a lot of kids from the same hs.. the highest levels make it harder since most likely there is a new roster every year
- not a ton of time/ practice in aau to get everyone on the same page with man principles and techniques compared to a hs season
- hiding deficiencies isnt necessarily a bad thing in regards to recruiting.. you want to highlight the players upsides not downsides
- not enough coaches actually know how to teach proper man to man systems (not limited to aau ball)
- so many kids at high levels are so athletic and quick off the bounce that a zone may actually be required (at times)
if you watch enough, you will see many teams play good man defense, but usually those are teams that have been together for multiple years and/or teams that have a lot of kids from the same hs.. the highest levels make it harder since most likely there is a new roster every year
Kudos to those programs and coaches that are teaching and playing man to man. Teach good man and it will translate to a good pressure zone defense.
Nothing wrong with a good zone defense. You are right, a lot don't know how to teach good man to man defense. I know there are plenty of college coaches that would love to get a kid who already knows how to play great man to man defense. But I guess it boils down to competing and winning and less about teaching in AAU.
Nothing wrong with a good zone defense. You are right, a lot don't know how to teach good man to man defense. I know there are plenty of college coaches that would love to get a kid who already knows how to play great man to man defense. But I guess it boils down to competing and winning and less about teaching in AAU.
and yet unfortunately there are still too many high level hs coaches that dont teach proper man... why is that??
oh wait you answered that already.. insert "in high school" at the end and it is still a true statement..
One big reason: Elite athletes tend not to shoot well, because the Win By Friday syndrome that parents buy into rewards getting to the rack over and over again so meaningless tournaments can be won as opposed to skill development -- which would mean learning to shoot by missing shots and losing the occasional game.
If players can't shoot threes, why play man? And again, parents will put their kids on teams that win. They do not tolerate losing even if it adds skill.
If players can't shoot threes, why play man? And again, parents will put their kids on teams that win. They do not tolerate losing even if it adds skill.
It's unfortunate that there's no system that will educate parents of young athletes about the process ahead of them. They come in with a child with talent, and by the time the child has finished high school, they have a somewhat better understanding, but they are really left on their own to navigate a complicated system.
Of course, that's just how the colleges want it ... uninformed parents mean that the NCAA and the colleges run the show just how they want to, and exclusively for their own benefit.
Of course, that's just how the colleges want it ... uninformed parents mean that the NCAA and the colleges run the show just how they want to, and exclusively for their own benefit.
It would not matter if there was a system to educate parents. The ones who want to understand learn quickly. Others just don't want to know. They want the game to be fast with a lot of shooting and no defense. They want their kid to play more minutes and score more points than everyone else. And they want to win. And they want all that RIGHT NOW!! The only way to understand youth sports is to recognize that a huge number of parents are looking for their own immediate gratification and entertainment, with the development and enjoyment of the player purely secondary.
Sad but true ... too much ego invested in the child's performance, and winning trumps all.
Agree with personalogic
The parents that get it are few and far between and it isn't always the parents you think should or will get it.
I would like to see the NCAA change contact rules to force more college coaches back in the high school gyms, open gyms and local summer leagues.
$$$ will never allow that though.
Over 500 teams in Chicago? Many of those west coast teams went back to back Oregon and Chicago.
Curious any parents out there. How much was that for just those 2 tournaments? Flight ($800), hotel ($1000), transportation($300), food ($300)?
A small investment if your kid is one of the top 30 kids in Norcal and will hopefully stay healthy and be one of the fortunate ones to get a D1 scholarship.
On the other hand if your kid is one of the many who will NOT play in college because they get burned out or just maybe get books paid for at a D2 or go to a $65k a year high academic D3 to play.
Very easy to get caught up in it all no doubt.
I just wish and hope college coaches aren't looking down on those kids who are actually in the gym working on their game while all these other kids are traveling across the country playing 1 maybe 2 meaningless games a day.
It's BIG BUSINESS
The parents that get it are few and far between and it isn't always the parents you think should or will get it.
I would like to see the NCAA change contact rules to force more college coaches back in the high school gyms, open gyms and local summer leagues.
$$$ will never allow that though.
Over 500 teams in Chicago? Many of those west coast teams went back to back Oregon and Chicago.
Curious any parents out there. How much was that for just those 2 tournaments? Flight ($800), hotel ($1000), transportation($300), food ($300)?
A small investment if your kid is one of the top 30 kids in Norcal and will hopefully stay healthy and be one of the fortunate ones to get a D1 scholarship.
On the other hand if your kid is one of the many who will NOT play in college because they get burned out or just maybe get books paid for at a D2 or go to a $65k a year high academic D3 to play.
Very easy to get caught up in it all no doubt.
I just wish and hope college coaches aren't looking down on those kids who are actually in the gym working on their game while all these other kids are traveling across the country playing 1 maybe 2 meaningless games a day.
It's BIG BUSINESS
The system works for the colleges, and since the athletes -- the ones who draw the fans in person and on TV -- have zero input, it's not going to change.
A concerted effort by USA Basketball, say, that required parents to take courses before their middle schoolers started playing in tournaments, courses that explained the relative importance of getting trophies in seventh grade as opposed to developing skills, could make a difference. (And of course explaining the financial realities as well ...)
In addition, it would be great if USA Basketball could offer a scouting service to families that would estimate a girl's chances of getting a Division I scholarship. As long as this was completely independent of the NCAA, it would help in decision-making.
But absent any kind of information flow from sources with no bias (high school and club coaches do have biases), parents will continue to blunder about in the dark forest of the NCAA landscape, with the only guidance coming from those who want to take advantage of their child's talents with as little risk or investment as possible.
A concerted effort by USA Basketball, say, that required parents to take courses before their middle schoolers started playing in tournaments, courses that explained the relative importance of getting trophies in seventh grade as opposed to developing skills, could make a difference. (And of course explaining the financial realities as well ...)
In addition, it would be great if USA Basketball could offer a scouting service to families that would estimate a girl's chances of getting a Division I scholarship. As long as this was completely independent of the NCAA, it would help in decision-making.
But absent any kind of information flow from sources with no bias (high school and club coaches do have biases), parents will continue to blunder about in the dark forest of the NCAA landscape, with the only guidance coming from those who want to take advantage of their child's talents with as little risk or investment as possible.
Winning=great programs, right? I've said this time and time again. IF you have the athletic horses that can play, play man to man. I agree that many coaches at the HS and AAU circuit have no clue how to teach man to man because it really takes a lot of time and knowledge how to teach ball defense, help (one pass away), help (two passes away), help (three or more passes away), and throw in how to rotate? That takes up a lot of time and coaches don't want spend precious time doing that. just play a 2-3 or 1-2-2...what coaches don't understand that it's easier to run zone/matchup defenses when kids know solid man to man principles.
You look at SMS, Miramonte, Salesian and they play mostly some sort of a zone defense. Does that mean they're bad coaches? Nope. Just means they have the athletes to be successful in things other than a man to man. But when they have to play man to man it looks suspect cause they don't teach it on a daily basis. They're all great programs that win, but do a disservice by not playing man to man in my opinion. But what do I know...they're winning state championships!
Team A can go undefeated in EYBL playing zone but can college coaches really get a good sense of how a player plays defense when they sit back in a zone and defend? I'm sure they do and can. It's a personal preference, zone vs. man and I've always admired Mitty and Cagers because they play the right way. No way they're on the level some of the other AAU programs are, but they're solid and fundamental and it shows at the high school level.
You look at SMS, Miramonte, Salesian and they play mostly some sort of a zone defense. Does that mean they're bad coaches? Nope. Just means they have the athletes to be successful in things other than a man to man. But when they have to play man to man it looks suspect cause they don't teach it on a daily basis. They're all great programs that win, but do a disservice by not playing man to man in my opinion. But what do I know...they're winning state championships!
Team A can go undefeated in EYBL playing zone but can college coaches really get a good sense of how a player plays defense when they sit back in a zone and defend? I'm sure they do and can. It's a personal preference, zone vs. man and I've always admired Mitty and Cagers because they play the right way. No way they're on the level some of the other AAU programs are, but they're solid and fundamental and it shows at the high school level.
Similar threads
