12/28 @ sdsu

[THEsocalledfan]

I'm a big fan of mixing up defenses. The complaint SDSU fans have about Otzelberger's love of the zone is the same complaint I always had about Saul when he refused to play anything but man-to-man. Zone defenses have their place. They're effective when you're playing a team with a dominant big man or a team that struggles to shoot from the outside but they can be shredded by penetration, good shooting, or good offensive rebounding (unless you're a team like Baylor or Syracuse that has their choice of 8 different 6'7"+ long-armed athletic freaks to throw out there).

I've never understood why coaches aren't more willing to mix up defenses, it's a great way to throw offenses off rhythm.

Yep, I don't get it. I am a believer that in the current game, man to man is the way to go. However, I am the first to say you have to be ready to throw out a zone "just in case" as it happens. It takes a TON of time to perfect your base defense, so I don't have a problem with Otzelberger sticking with his base much of the game. However, it was getting torched. Heck, he would have been better even playing a little more 2-3 zone once NDSU starting hitting the short corner/baseline. Then, at least, they would have only been torched by treys.....

[bisonfan08]

I'm a big fan of mixing up defenses. The complaint SDSU fans have about Otzelberger's love of the zone is the same complaint I always had about Saul when he refused to play anything but man-to-man. Zone defenses have their place. They're effective when you're playing a team with a dominant big man or a team that struggles to shoot from the outside but they can be shredded by penetration, good shooting, or good offensive rebounding (unless you're a team like Baylor or Syracuse that has their choice of 8 different 6'7"+ long-armed athletic freaks to throw out there).

I've never understood why coaches aren't more willing to mix up defenses, it's a great way to throw offenses off rhythm.

This right here, there's nothing wrong with playing exclusively zone if you have the athletes to do it but SDSU obviously does not. The only real benefit it has for them is it keeps Daum a little fresher and limits his likeliness to get a foul versus playing man. They are not long enough or quick enough to defend in a zone and they will absolutely get torched by teams like IPFW and Omaha who shoot the 3 well. All I can say is if they are committed to it all the more power to us. Daum is good enough to carry them to a top 4 finish in league play but unless they improve their defense by March they could get bounced in the first round depending how the matchups work.

[HerdBot]

I'm a big fan of mixing up defenses. The complaint SDSU fans have about Otzelberger's love of the zone is the same complaint I always had about Saul when he refused to play anything but man-to-man. Zone defenses have their place. They're effective when you're playing a team with a dominant big man or a team that struggles to shoot from the outside but they can be shredded by penetration, good shooting, or good offensive rebounding (unless you're a team like Baylor or Syracuse that has their choice of 8 different 6'7"+ long-armed athletic freaks to throw out there).

I've never understood why coaches aren't more willing to mix up defenses, it's a great way to throw offenses off rhythm.

Totally. It keeps offenses from getting comfortable and kind of of sync. For the same reason I like changing up the offense too.

[bisoneer]

Great win, big comeback in Brookings where no visitors typically win! Need to keep bombing 3s, that's what mid majors do. Let's keep picking up the pace and play with more passion at home especially.

[Mr Meaty]

Great win, big comeback in Brookings where no visitors typically win! Need to keep bombing 3s, that's what mid majors do. Let's keep picking up the pace and play with more passion at home especially.

https://media3.giphy.com/media/xT8qA...La8mI/200w.gif