I was reading threads in break room on Middle school ball and I seem to agree that zone defenses are for those coaches who are only out to win, are AAU coaches minded,not defense minded ,do not how to teach proper technique,have a team that are not disciplined in what it takes to defend a man on defense. I am OLD SCHOOL and in my time if you could not play man to man defense you did not play.I know all of you are going to have a different opinion on this but those are the things I see! Tell me the last time you were at a game and heard "boy that team played a great "MAN TO MAN defense". Anyone? In my opinion they should change the rule and middle school should only play man to man. Let's get the game back to the basics and teach yes "Teach" defense ! Ok I am done venting. Let me have it.

I was reading threads in break room on Middle school ball and I seem to agree that zone defenses are for those coaches who are only out to win, are AAU coaches minded,not defense minded ,do not how to teach proper technique,have a team that are not disciplined in what it takes to defend a man on defense. I am OLD SCHOOL and in my time if you could not play man to man defense you did not play.I know all of you are going to have a different opinion on this but those are the things I see! Tell me the last time you were at a game and heard "boy that team played a great "MAN TO MAN defense". Anyone? In my opinion they should change the rule and middle school should only play man to man. Let's get the game back to the basics and teach yes "Teach" defense ! Ok I am done venting. Let me have it.

 

I coach AAU at a competitive level. I teach and almost always play man. We took pride in it. Every once in awhile, we'd go to a zone just to give a different look. But I demanded they play great man to man. We played full court and denied every inbounds pass. We denied, locked down and trapped all over the place. In my experience, the best teams played man defense. There were teams that could stay in the game with zones, but for the most part the better teams played man. We worked on it constantly. My players are all 8th and freshman now and they all contribute and some start on the varsity and JV teams.

Not a fan. Teaching kids to be lazy defensively. Man to man is the only way to go except on out of bounds plays on the baseline.

You can't make the rules man only. No one is going to

go out and guard the person in the corner. It just leads to big arguments when a team doesn't think your guarding close enough. A good zone has man principles and vice versa. Most all high schools play strictly man, but in reality its a 3-2 zone and they switch everything. Im not against zones, but they should be used sparingly in middle school.

Defense is not easy to teach especially when you're talking team D. You need a lot of practice time in order to have time to teach D plus teach your O plus leave days for games and days for being off.

 

I prefer to teach man and use a trapping zone occasionally.

Who says zone isn't a good defense? Boehiem at Syracuse seems to make it work pretty well at a much higher level. I prefer man to man, but I'm not going to say that a zone cannot be a solid strategy.

 

Perhaps the coaches are not comfortable teaching ball denial, when to switch or hedge on screens, etc. If a zone is such a poor defensive strategy good coaches should have no problems exploiting it and forcing the opponent into playing man. JMO.

I was reading threads in break room on Middle school ball and I seem to agree that zone defenses are for those coaches who are only out to win, are AAU coaches minded,not defense minded ,do not how to teach proper technique,have a team that are not disciplined in what it takes to defend a man on defense. I am OLD SCHOOL and in my time if you could not play man to man defense you did not play.I know all of you are going to have a different opinion on this but those are the things I see! Tell me the last time you were at a game and heard "boy that team played a great "MAN TO MAN defense". Anyone? In my opinion they should change the rule and middle school should only play man to man. Let's get the game back to the basics and teach yes "Teach" defense ! Ok I am done venting. Let me have it.

 

 

So you are old school but against coaches who are out to win?

 

 

At what age do you think teams and coaches should be out to win?

Not a fan. Teaching kids to be lazy defensively. Man to man is the only way to go except on out of bounds plays on the baseline.

 

First, it depends on the type of zone you are teaching. If you are using a 2-3 that doesn't attack, then I would agree with you. In order to play any zone correctly and effectively, it is important to have good man to man skills. Just because a team chooses to play a zone doesn't always mean they are teaching them to be lazy. Think of the top player in a 1-3-1 or 1-2-2. In my opinion

I also believe you have to adjust what/how you teach according to your team. Some teams learn man to man better, some zone. Don't get me wrong, I am definitely a supporter of man defense and prefer it myself, but I think you have to teach to your team's strengths at that level. In many cases of school teams, you are lucky if you get 3-5 hours a week to practice, which, in my opinion, is not a lot of time. I think it becomes more difficult to coach up weaknesses due to these time constraints, and coaches may feel like it becomes more important to focus on the strengths and build upon them. Though it is coach's job to teach at that level (and all levels for that matter), it is still competitive basketball, and in many cases they are expected to put their teams in position to win games.

"Zones" get a bad rap. First and foremost if you are a quality coach you are teaching man to man. Then when you go to zone you a applying all the man principles to the zone. I watch 3/4 graders play zone and it can make you sick to your stomach watching them let players beat them off the dribble and not deny passing lanes at the elbows. BUT this is because they are playing for some dad who knows nothing about man principles and what a zone truely is. I love hearing parents yell "get your hands up" but rarely do you hear "move your feet."

 

It is comical to watch my kids team because we have one player who was obviously taught man principles by someone as he is 8 and he guards and defends and the rest of the team plays the keep your hands up zone. So......my point is man principles can be taught then incorporated into a zone. But I feel your pain if you have coaches like our team that does not teach it correctly and just goes out and puts kids in spots.

I coached at this level.

1. are we pressing? Kind of hard to go man out of a zone press.

2. are we winning by a large margin. How many times do we have to hear team staying in M-M with a huge margin is "running up the score."

3. are we trying to get kids ready for the next level? knowing zone principles especially weak side responsibilty is a fundamental of the game.

4. are a fully manned team? i've gone into a game with 6 healthy kids.

5. when do we stress that winning is important? wait to freshman year? hope not...

Ahhhh...a question right up my alley since I coach a 5/6 grade team and 7/8 grade team. In general, I first teach all my kids man to man defense and principles. They have to know what a good defensive stance/position is, defensive slide and recover, ball denial, on ball d, off ball d, help and recover...etc. There are also different "styles" of man d that can be taught or used. I like teaching ball line or ball u man defense in the begining where wings are denying that entry pass really hard and overplaying the passing lanes while trying to get them "up the line" so they can help as well. That type of hard man d takes quickness, talent and disipline. And you know what...sometimes you have a group of kids or individuals that just don't have everything they need to play good man d.

 

For instance, I have a lineup with my 5/6 graders than can play pretty good man d...we also press a lot. My 7/8 graders are the exact opposite, for the most part we are much too slow and unathletic, especially on the perimeter, to play solid man to man d, so we play a lot of zone simply because we need to in order to be competitive. And if you have a team that CAN be competitive, then don't you want them to be? Would I like to play more man d with them? I would simply becasue when playing man d I believe you have the ability to force your will and dictate the game more so than you can in a zone, at least most of the time, but not always.

 

With all that said, zone defenses have their place and SHOULD also be taught within an overall defensive package. Believe me, Iv'e been a stuborn coach before and kept my kids in man-to-man d after continously getting beat time and time again in a game by superior teams and talent. I will still do it today from time to time just to teach the kids a lesson and try to have them learn in game situations. But, after a while, what good does that do the kids or the team? It's easy to say play man to man all the time, especially when you have the kids that can do it and do it well, but not all kids have the same abilities and talents, but yet still may be able to conturbite and be successful doing something other than man to man all the time.

 

Man to man defense good? Yes. Do zones have their place? Absolutely. When should kids start being competitive? Right out of the womb.

My coach always said a good man defense looks like a zone defense and a good zone defense looks like a man defense, so this thread puzzles me.:ohbrother:

My coach always said a good man defense looks like a zone defense and a good zone defense looks like a man defense, so this thread puzzles me.:ohbrother:

 

Yes but you also have youth coaches that are clueless and teach zone as a keep your hands up and stay in thsi spot type of defense............................

My coach always said a good man defense looks like a zone defense and a good zone defense looks like a man defense, so this thread puzzles me.:ohbrother:

 

Hum...never heard that, and personally I dont know that I agree with it completely. Maybe initially, when D first sets up on a trip back down the floor they could be in one and looks like the other and there are ways to try and disguise it, but after a couple of passes, sending a cutter through the lane and/or sending a baseline runner down the base line you should see pretty quickly what the d is running. Now there are man to man principles in every zone of course, and a matchup Syracuse 2-3 style zone has a lot of man play in it, but a zone is not man and vise versa and they are played differently.