the flex offense

#26
#26
omghulkhands said:
It is not like the flex offense is bad against the zone, it just requires you have a pair of very good perimeter shooters, something we lack.
Click to expand...

Tennessee has never run the flex against a zone. Instead, we employ a stagnant, no movement offense that results in rushed threes as the shot clock winds down.
 
#27
#27
Zeppelin18241 said:
I haven't been on volnation recently due to finals; however, I have had a chance to catch the basketball games.

The flex isn't a problem. Every college basketball team runs some version of it. The purpose of the flex is ball movement and screens to get open looks. We've been getting open looks, we just haven't been hitting open shots. THIS is the reason we have lost the past two games. Even Hopson said this the other day. When we hit the shots, we can beat anyone, when we don't we can lose to anyone.
Click to expand...

Tennessee's problem isn't their man to man offense. It is their zone offense. They don't run the flex against the zone. After that pathetic performance at Charlotte, I can't imagine this team not seeing heavy doses of zone the rest of the year.
 
#28
#28
Last year's zone offense with Maze at the point, Chism at the high post, Prince on one wing and Hopson/Tatum on the other and Williams working the weakside baseline was very effective.

Prince had the ability to feed the post, penetrate and make skip passes and Chism was a very good decision maker at the high post position. Prince also had the ability to play the high post position.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#29
#29
Zeppelin18241 said:
I haven't been on volnation recently due to finals; however, I have had a chance to catch the basketball games.

The flex isn't a problem. Every college basketball team runs some version of it. The purpose of the flex is ball movement and screens to get open looks. We've been getting open looks, we just haven't been hitting open shots. THIS is the reason we have lost the past two games. Even Hopson said this the other day. When we hit the shots, we can beat anyone, when we don't we can lose to anyone.

The thing I'd like to see are halftime adjustments. If we're not hitting jumpers, take more high percentage shots and rack up some points in the paint. The last two losses are inexcusable and we won't get better until we adjust to adversity. In not one of our wins have we had to make a halftime adjustment. We just seem not to be as resilient as Pearl's past teams.
Click to expand...

Bob Knight will tell you that he'd prefer to win with scheme and execution than shooting. All teams win when shooting well. Well coached teams do everything else well every night and can win when shooting poorly.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#30
#30
LawVol13 said:
Tennessee's problem isn't their man to man offense. It is their zone offense. They don't run the flex against the zone. After that pathetic performance at Charlotte, I can't imagine this team not seeing heavy doses of zone the rest of the year.
Click to expand...

you can bank on it
 
#31
#31
yoyoyoyo said:
The problem with Pearl's zone offense is that lacks a high post at the foul line area. A high post goes against the principals of the flex offense so that is why Pearl will not do it. In the flex the cutters go all the way through instead of having a player play the high post area. Instead of having a different zone offense Pearl thinks his man offense will work vs zone and it does not.

90-95% of the time there is never anyone at the high post in Pearl's zone offense and that is why it fails from the start. That is the weakness of the 2-3 zone. Watch USC next game when they play us 2-3 (I am sure they will) and the middle of the zone is wide open. Without a high post you just put your offensive players were there defensive players are and play right in to their hands.

If we would put Harris at the high post and it would vastly improve our zone offense. The reason Harris would be perfect for that spot is he can square to basket and could shoot, pass or has the ability to take it the hole off the dribble if they rotate late. Also the high post pulls the back side defender into the middle when the defense rotates and this would give us more open 3's back side instead of trying to skip pass the ball all the way across the court.
Click to expand...

I agree completely. Every zone has weak points if they are attacked appropriately. Most all coaches will put a player in the high post area of the zone, Pearl refuses to do so. That's why our offense consists of passing the ball around the zone for 30 seconds of the shot clock and then shooting a 3. When you shoot 2-27 from the 3, you have little to no chance to win any game with this zone offense approach.
 
#33
#33
BasketvolsFan said:
I agree completely. Every zone has weak points if they are attacked appropriately. Most all coaches will put a player in the high post area of the zone, Pearl refuses to do so. That's why our offense consists of passing the ball around the zone for 30 seconds of the shot clock and then shooting a 3. When you shoot 2-27 from the 3, you have little to no chance to win any game with this zone offense approach.
Click to expand...

Good post.

Tonight we you will see more of us passing the ball back and forth out front because USC will play their sagging man to man and invite us to do it. The high post will not be open tonight but they will give us the 3 ball all night and pack it in.
 
Last edited:
#34
#34
yoyoyoyo said:
How long did you play ball or coach and at what level? Your statement is incorrect. All base offenses can be adapted to work against a man or zone.
Click to expand...

You're right that the flex is occasionally used against zones. However, Tennessee does not and never has used it against a zone.
 
#35
#35
yoyoyoyo said:
How long did you play ball or coach and at what level? Your statement is incorrect. All base offenses can be adapted to work against a man or zone.
Click to expand...
Adaptation means not the same. The flex is garbage against the zone because the flex cut is rendered useless.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#36
#36
BigPapaVol said:
Adaptation means not the same. The flex is garbage against the zone because the flex cut is rendered useless.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I've seen it used occasionally against a 2-3 where the screen is set on the middle man and the flex cut is sometimes open. However, I fully agree that it's not an effective zone offense.
 
#37
#37
LawVol13 said:
I've seen it used occasionally against a 2-3 where the screen is set on the middle man and the flex cut is sometimes open. However, I fully agree that it's not an effective zone offense.
Click to expand...

The baseline is open because the high post forces the center to make a decision. High low is a zone offense.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#38
#38
yoyoyoyo said:
How long did you play ball or coach and at what level? Your statement is incorrect. All base offenses can be adapted to work against a man or zone.
Click to expand...

I knew the flex was a man offense around 5th grade. The flex was created as a man offense. Some coaches have used some of the same principals such as the baseline cutter and other things that are similar to the flex but it is not the flex.

I really don't want to get into a big debate with you because you obviously think you know something that you don't. Speaking specifically to our flex with 2 men high 3 low to start the offense the ball is passed up top and the flex cut is made on the baseline off the screener on the block then a back screen is set for the top guy and the screener then pops and replaces. Could you please explain to me "oh knowledgable one" how this could be affective against a zone and when we have ran it against a zone? Before you try the answer is no.
 
Last edited:
#39
#39
yoyoyoyo said:
How long did you play ball or coach and at what level? Your statement is incorrect. All base offenses can be adapted to work against a man or zone.
Click to expand...
:crazy:

Tell me that you don't honestly believe that. Attacking and executing against man and zones are a totally different thing.
 
#40
#40
I whole heartedly agree. Attacking the man and zone are 2 totally different things. That's why coaches will switch from a man to zone so you have to change what you are doing. And is it just me but is Maymon and Harris the only 2 players we got that know how to attack a zone defense?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top