What does a gimmick defense look like? At what point does a defense become a gimmick D?

What does a gimmick defense look like? At what point does a defense become a gimmick D?

 

This question nagged me for years so I asked a local college coach. He claims that virtually any defense designed to disguise or compensate for the (defending) team's obvious weakness can be called a "gimmick" or "junk" defense.

What does a gimmick defense look like? At what point does a defense become a gimmick D?

 

When it takes a player out of his game and said team gets shut down. Triangle and 2, Box and chaser. I love the gimmicks.

You coach gimmicks for one of 3 reasons -

 

1 - your kids cannot play man/a traditional zone

 

2 - you do not know how to teach m2m correctly and completely

 

3 - change of pace/more to scout

 

 

More coaches fall into 1 and mostly 2, than 3 from my experience.

 

I know one that his base D is a triangle and 2, but you know what else his teams can do, get up in your hind end and play man if he chooses.

Good coaches know how to make a team quit the gimmick defense (using the defense as picks to free a guy). Part of a coaches job is to disrupt the other teams offense.

Don't like running a gimmick d, and don't mind facing them. Gimmick d's usually leave huge openings somewhere.

 

With that, I will say I have gotten away a little bit from man to man defense, used to run it almost exclusively, even when it hurt to do it. We have gone more to a 1-3-1 and run it kind of like a hybrid zone-man. It covers up for some of our lack of quickness and speed on my middle school group, while still incorporating a lot of man principles. I don't see a lot of 1-3-1 with the teams we play, so some might call it a "junk" d. I don't see it that way though.

You coach gimmicks for one of 3 reasons -

 

1 - your kids cannot play man/a traditional zone

 

2 - you do not know how to teach m2m correctly and completely

 

3 - change of pace/more to scout

 

 

More coaches fall into 1 and mostly 2, than 3 from my experience.

 

I know one that his base D is a triangle and 2, but you know what else his teams can do, get up in your hind end and play man if he chooses.

 

Or the other team has a stud player but nothing else.

How about total denial defense against one player and having that specific defender not provide any defensive help to anyone at anytime? Is that a gimmick?

It's just the worst when it works on your team every... single... game.

 

See: University of Dayton, 2008.

 

Easily the most depressing season of UD basketball... and that's really saying something.

What does a gimmick defense look like? At what point does a defense become a gimmick D?

 

I think that it is any defense that your team uses that is completely unsustainable and is either to bridge a gap or to admit that your team has no hope stopping a certain player one-on-one. If you wouldn't do it against 90% of your schedule, it is a gimmick.

I think so many defenses have become more broadly used that I would scarcely call a defense a gimmick.

Man, 2-3, 3-2, 1-3-1, Box and 1, Triangle a 2 are all pretty common defenses in my mind.

 

To me a gimmick defense would be more where you're trying to disguise what you're doing.

Or the other team has a stud player but nothing else.

 

Rarely should that happen. I use them, I've used everything you can think of.

I know of people who think anything outside of man to man is a gimmick. If you can't "man-up", then you're weak to have to rely on any type of zone.

 

To me, if you know you can't compete man to man, then you're not truly coaching if you don't at least attempt something else.

You coach gimmicks for one of 3 reasons - 1 - your kids cannot play man/a traditional zone 2 - you do not know how to teach m2m correctly and completely 3 - change of pace/more to scout More coaches fall into 1 and mostly 2' date=' than 3 from my experience. I know one that his base D is a triangle and 2, but you know what else his teams can do, get up in your hind end and play man if he chooses.[/quote']

 

 

COMPLETELY disagree. Driving. Will respond later.

How about total denial defense against one player and having that specific defender not provide any defensive help to anyone at anytime? Is that a gimmick?

 

That is the impetus for this thread.