1-3-1

[Red Don]

I'm surprised more posters aren't here talking about the nice job Miles has done the last two games. The 1-3-1 has worked well. He has used Taylor smartly. Taylor is a liability on O but I have noticed that since Miles inserted him in the lineup Webster and Watson are managing to stay out of foul trouble. Takes the pressure off Taylor on O by having the other 2 out there with him. Takes some of the d pressure off WW. Nice last week for Miles.

Thanks jtf! This might be a good entree to talk a little about the 1-3-1 (that I know nothing about).

From what little I've been able to find, it seems Miles and his staff first started discussing it when Gill went down with his season-ending injury, thinking without Gill they had lost some quickness on defense and what could they do about it (zone). But Miles stated he didn't believe our roster would fit all that well into a 2-3 zone and he and his staff thought the 1-3-1 would be a better fit.

As I understand it, it was Coach Lewis who suggested Miles contact Xavier (in his post-game I think Miles specifically gave credit to Coach Chris Mack at Xavier for his 1-3-1 nuances). I believe the Huskers first practiced the concept Dec 26th, implementing shortly thereafter and used briefly in the Indiana game, (resulting in giving up a bucket).

Here's a screen-shot during the Maryland game. Tai is at the Point and Morrow under the basket.

Many like to trap out of 1-3-1, but it seems like we were trying more to disrupt passes, getting into their passing lanes. Whatever; Maryland was not prepared for it and it seemed to confuse them, making them hesitate, disrupting their timing and offensive flow while helping our rebounding.

For anyone who would like to delve a little deeper, here is a little bit about Xavier's version of the 1-3-1.
http://rushthecourt.net/2016/02/22/the-x-factor-breaking-down-xaviers-1-3-1-zone/

Now that opponents have seen us use it, we probably won't see a lot of it but it may be interesting to have to throw in once in a while.

 

[ColoREDo]

Thanks jtf! This might be a good entree to talk a little about the 1-3-1 (that I know nothing about).

From what little I've been able to find, it seems Miles and his staff first started discussing it when Gill went down with his season-ending injury, thinking without Gill they had lost some quickness on defense and what could they do about it (zone). But Miles stated he didn't believe our roster would fit all that well into a 2-3 zone and he and his staff thought the 1-3-1 would be a better fit.

As I understand it, it was Coach Lewis who suggested Miles contact Xavier (in his post-game I think Miles specifically gave credit to Coach Chris Mack at Xavier for his 1-3-1 nuances). I believe the Huskers first practiced the concept Dec 26th, implementing shortly thereafter and used briefly in the Indiana game, (resulting in giving up a bucket).

Here's a screen-shot during the Maryland game. Tai is at the Point and Morrow under the basket.

Many like to trap out of 1-3-1, but it seems like we were trying more to disrupt passes, getting into their passing lanes. Whatever; Maryland was not prepared for it and it seemed to confuse them, making them hesitate, disrupting their timing and offensive flow while helping our rebounding.

For anyone who would like to delve a little deeper, here is a little bit about Xavier's version of the 1-3-1.
http://rushthecourt.net/2016/02/22/the-x-factor-breaking-down-xaviers-1-3-1-zone/

Now that opponents have seen us use it, we probably won't see a lot of it but it may be interesting to have to throw in once in a while.

According to Maryland fans on reddit, the zone has always been an issue for Mark Turgeon's teams at Maryland.

 

[Red Don]

What Are they going to say? (look how we criticize Miles when he loses!)

 

[LarstheRed]

I absolutely hated playing zone!

First, it takes a great deal of focus and personal accountability when it comes to rebounding. You have to look for and find a man to check out. Too often it allows guys to get offensive boards, and that drove me nuts.

Second, it's really, really hard to play well. The fact is you actually work harder playing zine than man. Probably the best at it the last 5 years or so is Syracuse. They are long, extremely active, and buy into the idea of playing it right. With a guy like Robey and next year Nana, we might be one of those teams that thrives on playing a zone.

Some teams try to mix it in, but if you aren't good at it, it just becomes a way to change a little tempo until a team gets back in the flow of their zone offense.

 

[Thunder's Call'n]

In some ways it may have worked great because Huerter was swacking when we were playing man, and maybe this got him thinking a little bit. He missed some down the stretch.

Morrow is the prototypical baseline guy in the 1-3-1 tho. Athletic guy who can move, shot block, and goes after every rebound

Love the creativity from Miles

 

[LarstheRed]

In some ways it may have worked great because Huerter was swacking when we were playing man, and maybe this got him thinking a little bit. He missed some down the stretch.

Morrow is the prototypical baseline guy in the 1-3-1 tho. Athletic guy who can move, shot block, and goes after every rebound

Love the creativity from Miles

Losing Huerter in man was inexcusable. When you know a guy is a sniper, you hedge on those screens. If he beats you with his passing, so be it, but you make him prove he has that ability. I couldn't believe that kid could catch and shoot with that much space...he had time to spin the ball and get the seams where he liked he had so much space. I thought the zone helped, not because we covered him closer, but we hurt some of their passing angles and ability to kick it out to him.

 

[bilsker]

I absolutely hated playing zone!

First, it takes a great deal of focus and personal accountability when it comes to rebounding. You have to look for and find a man to check out. Too often it allows guys to get offensive boards, and that drove me nuts.

Second, it's really, really hard to play well. The fact is you actually work harder playing zine than man. Probably the best at it the last 5 years or so is Syracuse. They are long, extremely active, and buy into the idea of playing it right. With a guy like Robey and next year Nana, we might be one of those teams that thrives on playing a zone.

Some teams try to mix it in, but if you aren't good at it, it just becomes a way to change a little tempo until a team gets back in the flow of their zone offense.

Evidence that coaches don't like playing zone (for the reasons you mentioned) is that even when playing teams that can't shoot from the outside most coaches still won't switch to zone even if they are getting killed in areas where a zone would really help.

With regard to syracuse...they've been doing it forever....it's kind of Boeheim's calling card.

 

[NUFootballTim]

Evidence that coaches don't like playing zone (for the reasons you mentioned) is that even when playing teams that can't shoot from the outside most coaches still won't switch to zone even if they are getting killed in areas where a zone would really help.

With regard to syracuse...they've been doing it forever....it's kind of Boeheim's calling card.

I've often puzzled why teams would bother playing anything OTHER then zone vs NU. Playing against a zone forces you to adhere to sound bball principles....like.....yes....here it comes.....floor spacing. I've tried not to discuss floor spacing on here lately as it apparently comes across as whining....but neways, back on topic.

I like that NU has mixed in some 1-3-1. Its evidence of a thought process and some strategy, which were sorely needed earlier this year. It won't work well against every one but something to mix things up is often times all it takes.

If I were Miles, I'd add 1 more into the bag of tricks.....full court pressure. just a few minutes here and there, especially when the game starts to drag. Pressure can infuse some energy into your team on offense, and after having watched NU win the last 2 games, my hope is the team feels more comfortable playing with a faster pace on offense. to do that requires energy.

GBR!!!

 

[LarstheRed]

I've often puzzled why teams would bother playing anything OTHER then zone vs NU. Playing against a zone forces you to adhere to sound bball principles....like.....yes....here it comes.....floor spacing. I've tried not to discuss floor spacing on here lately as it apparently comes across as whining....but neways, back on topic.

I like that NU has mixed in some 1-3-1. Its evidence of a thought process and some strategy, which were sorely needed earlier this year. It won't work well against every one but something to mix things up is often times all it takes.

If I were Miles, I'd add 1 more into the bag of tricks.....full court pressure. just a few minutes here and there, especially when the game starts to drag. Pressure can infuse some energy into your team on offense, and after having watched NU win the last 2 games, my hope is the team feels more comfortable playing with a faster pace on offense. to do that requires energy.

GBR!!!

One reason you don't go zone is you feel you have enough physical advantage playing man that you can dominate certain players to the point you can remove them from the game entirely. It also lets you cheat when you realize the guy you are covering is a nonfactor on offense. Zone really is taxing on players if you play it properly.

 

[NUFootballTim]

One reason you don't go zone is you feel you have enough physical advantage playing man that you can dominate certain players to the point you can remove them from the game entirely. It also lets you cheat when you realize the guy you are covering is a nonfactor on offense. Zone really is taxing on players if you play it properly.

i agree. but given the serious scoring droughts that NU has put up consistently when having to face a zone defense, I'm just suprised more teams don't play zone against them. I'm glad they don't, and I bet that Tim Miles is too. NU's offense vs zone d has looked borderline clueless the past few years. It was much better vs IU as they started feeding Roby in the high post. Hopefully they'll stick with that should the need arise again.

 

[ColoREDo]

i agree. but given the serious scoring droughts that NU has put up consistently when having to face a zone defense, I'm just suprised more teams don't play zone against them. I'm glad they don't, and I bet that Tim Miles is too. NU's offense vs zone d has looked borderline clueless the past few years. It was much better vs IU as they started feeding Roby in the high post. Hopefully they'll stick with that should the need arise again.

Until Indiana, I felt exactly how you did. Why wouldn't a team play the 2-3 the whole game against Nebraska?

 

[LarstheRed]

i agree. but given the serious scoring droughts that NU has put up consistently when having to face a zone defense, I'm just suprised more teams don't play zone against them. I'm glad they don't, and I bet that Tim Miles is too. NU's offense vs zone d has looked borderline clueless the past few years. It was much better vs IU as they started feeding Roby in the high post. Hopefully they'll stick with that should the need arise again.

If we use Roby and Jacobson in the high post, and Horne keeps shooting well, it's not going to be the same team we were in the first part of the season against a zone.

 

[Rainbow Dash]

The best defense to run for any team or program is man-to-man in my opinion. However, I will say, if you have the athletes, the depth, the commitment, and total effort from the players, an aggressive 1-3-1 is probably the most dominating defense when properly mastered. Running it here or there is fine, but outside of that, I think it's all or nothing. If you have the players and commitment, make it your primary defense and not a defense your run 25% of the time. Hope that makes sense.

I love zone defense, but I hate when youth coaches run it. Quite frankly, I'm not even wild about high school programs running it. I've coached youth teams in the past and have had dads get upset with me because 'the other team beat us using a zone, why don't you try it'. Yeah, I could have packed the team into zone, made the other team shoot shots that 12-14 year old kids struggle with, and we probably would have won. Winning a youth game means nothing, developing skills is paramount.

 

[All 'N' 011808]

Yeah, I could have packed the team into zone, made the other team shoot shots that 12-14 year old kids struggle with, and we probably would have won. Winning a youth game means nothing, developing skills is paramount.

I hear that.

My son is almost 9. When we go shoot baskets, he can only shoot from inside the bottom of the key, so he can develop his shot without picking up nasty habits because he isn't strong enough to get the ball to the rim. As he gets older, I'll move him out.

 

[BasilLongfellow]

The best defense to run for any team or program is man-to-man in my opinion. However, I will say, if you have the athletes, the depth, the commitment, and total effort from the players, an aggressive 1-3-1 is probably the most dominating defense when properly mastered. Running it here or there is fine, but outside of that, I think it's all or nothing. If you have the players and commitment, make it your primary defense and not a defense your run 25% of the time. Hope that makes sense.

I love zone defense, but I hate when youth coaches run it. Quite frankly, I'm not even wild about high school programs running it. I've coached youth teams in the past and have had dads get upset with me because 'the other team beat us using a zone, why don't you try it'. Yeah, I could have packed the team into zone, made the other team shoot shots that 12-14 year old kids struggle with, and we probably would have won. Winning a youth game means nothing, developing skills is paramount.

Sounds to me like you're just not committed to the zone.