Sean Miller

[EVCat]

Honest, non-flame question for those who don't like Miller's game strategy, specifically zone offense.

What zone offense would you prefer us run? If you want to emphasize sets or principles instead of just a system name, that's cool. I'm just trying to unpack the general complaint about our zone offense into the specific things people would actually change to do better.

I see a lot of complaints about zone offense. I'm genuinely interested in what actual strategic changes people believe would benefit us.

I thought we ran, in placement, a pretty good zone offense this year. The inability to score from the block when we went high-low, and our lack of a drive-or-dish guard to exploit drives after rubs or skip/swings got the zone out of shape hurt a lot. We had no ability to drive and score, even a high-low post pass died in the post, our 4 did not consistently hit the elbow/circle shot to make the high-low respected, and when they packed zones, our 700 guards couldn't hit a 3.

You shouldn't settle for the 3, but when a team packs a zone like a tourniquet (much like Xavier did in our S16 game), you have to hit WIDE OPEN THREES. It isn't the only way to beat a zone, unless a zone packs inside the frickin' paint like a 4th grade defense. You have to hit a couple of jumpers to bring the zone out to a normal length where there are gaps to exploit.

I thought, in 2018, we ran some good zone stuff, especially with Dusan at the elbow, but it was still in team's perceived best interest to zone us to slow our pace and deal with our size (I think teams with quick backcourts should have been playing man against us from the jump, pressing our guards out, like Buffalo and Wichita St did...lots of groupthink in coaching, and it just became "yes, the zone is what we should do to them").

But a zone simply slowing your pace doesn't mean it is working. If the zone makes us slow down to find the break point, and we are shooting 48% from the field and 41% from 3, the zone is not "causing us problems", even if we are holding the ball for a while to break it. I hear that all the time watching games with casuals..."man...that zone is just choking us. Look at that!" and then I see us score with 15 on the shot clock with a shot from the elbow, or a drive or a wide open 3 and I think "no...as long as we are scoring, it's just fine."

I think our "zone offense" broke down in prior years when our players got impatient after a couple of misses. It wasn't what we were running. When we would get our minds right, we'd see the drives, and the quick swings and the flash to the elbow, etc. But sometimes we would get a quick shot or someone forcing a drive into the heart of the zone, or a missed 3 and think "crap...ZONE!". This last year, I really think we didn't have the skills needed to beat a zone, most notably you have to at least be some threat to hit the open 3 with some consistency. Not shooting blindly, but if the zone packs, you have to make that shot. And even if the zone loosens, you need someone to be able to drive into the zone and distribute, or the high low to have respect for both slots.

It wasn't the offense we were running this year...it was the lack of ability to do the things needed to break a zone.

[AzWdCatFan]

Honest, non-flame question for those who don't like Miller's game strategy, specifically zone offense.

What zone offense would you prefer us run? If you want to emphasize sets or principles instead of just a system name, that's cool. I'm just trying to unpack the general complaint about our zone offense into the specific things people would actually change to do better.

I see a lot of complaints about zone offense. I'm genuinely interested in what actual strategic changes people believe would benefit us.

I thought we ran, in placement, a pretty good zone offense this year. The inability to score from the block when we went high-low, and our lack of a drive-or-dish guard to exploit drives after rubs or skip/swings got the zone out of shape hurt a lot. We had no ability to drive and score, even a high-low post pass died in the post, our 4 did not consistently hit the elbow/circle shot to make the high-low respected, and when they packed zones, our 700 guards couldn't hit a 3.

You shouldn't settle for the 3, but when a team packs a zone like a tourniquet (much like Xavier did in our S16 game), you have to hit WIDE OPEN THREES. It isn't the only way to beat a zone, unless a zone packs inside the frickin' paint like a 4th grade defense. You have to hit a couple of jumpers to bring the zone out to a normal length where there are gaps to exploit.

I thought, in 2018, we ran some good zone stuff, especially with Dusan at the elbow, but it was still in team's perceived best interest to zone us to slow our pace and deal with our size (I think teams with quick backcourts should have been playing man against us from the jump, pressing our guards out, like Buffalo and Wichita St did...lots of groupthink in coaching, and it just became "yes, the zone is what we should do to them").

But a zone simply slowing your pace doesn't mean it is working. If the zone makes us slow down to find the break point, and we are shooting 48% from the field and 41% from 3, the zone is not "causing us problems", even if we are holding the ball for a while to break it. I hear that all the time watching games with casuals..."man...that zone is just choking us. Look at that!" and then I see us score with 15 on the shot clock with a shot from the elbow, or a drive or a wide open 3 and I think "no...as long as we are scoring, it's just fine."

I think our "zone offense" broke down in prior years when our players got impatient after a couple of misses. It wasn't what we were running. When we would get our minds right, we'd see the drives, and the quick swings and the flash to the elbow, etc. But sometimes we would get a quick shot or someone forcing a drive into the heart of the zone, or a missed 3 and think "crap...ZONE!". This last year, I really think we didn't have the skills needed to beat a zone, most notably you have to at least be some threat to hit the open 3 with some consistency. Not shooting blindly, but if the zone packs, you have to make that shot. And even if the zone loosens, you need someone to be able to drive into the zone and distribute, or the high low to have respect for both slots.

It wasn't the offense we were running this year...it was the lack of ability to do the things needed to break a zone.

This! A thousand times this! It drives me crazy when people say we've never been good against a zone defense. We run the proper sets, and flash to the high post, but without that consistent threat to hit the elbow jumper, or a wide open 3 pointer, the zone looks far more effective than it actually is.

When we've had teams with the talent level to make those shots, it has pulled our opponents out of the zone because it isn't effective and they are then getting killed on the boards. It isn't about whether Miller is designing an offense to take advantage of what a zone gives you, it's the execution by the players on the court.

Over the past three seasons we simply haven't had the point guard (yes I know this is Miller's fault), or the shooters to force teams out of the zone. Package that with a shorter than usual team who struggled rebounding at times and there was literally no reason for a coach to run any other type of defense against us this year.

Honestly, the only thing I'd change about our current offensive sets is more off-ball screens, harder rubs and more back door cuts. But again, you need the offensive talent and athleticism to make those work. Thankfully we will have that in spades next year.

[EVCat]

To this point, we keep hearing how bad we are against the zone. Because, fans perceive anything that isn't early offense as being "stopped".

Every frickin' team on our schedule, outside other teams perceived as elite, ran zone against us. We saw it every game, sometimes from teams that barely ran zone all year. But we ALWAYS saw zone.

In 2018, we were KenPom's #15 offense in the adjusted offense category. Out of 351. So top 5% efficiency nationally (95.6%)

In 2017, we were KenPom's #15 offense in the adjusted offense category. Again, out of 351.

In 2016, we were KenPom's #20 offense in the adjusted offense category. Also, out of 351. So still top 5%, round the .6. Or top 6% of you wish.

Pace of play (possessions per game) is sometimes overblown...Duke was 108th last year, Gonzaga 136th, somewhere after NAU. So if the other team is slowing you into making your decisions, but your decisions are still good and you are shooting at a good percentage or getting to the line, the possession number drops for them too, and your defensive effeciency has to be solid enough to keep...wait for it...the other team from scoring fewer points. If you have 200 possessions, you still need to be better on 1 of them. If the game is slowed to 60 possessions, if you are converting on 30, they have to equal you. Pace of play really only is an exposing stat of the top 20 or so and the bottom 40 or so. There are plenty of teams seen as up tempo that fall in the middle. And zone will slow you down. Always...even with a great zone offense.

So, my question is...where did teams zoning us hurt us so much? We would be + offensive rebounds, and our offensive efficiency ratings remained elite (top 5% in the nation is elite) even though every damn team in the world zoned us (except Buffalo and Wichita St., but I already talked about that).

In 2017-18, we shot the ball 50.3%. That was good for #4 in the nation. 98.9th percentile. That is super elite.

In 2016-17, we shot the ball 47.7%, good for 29th in the nation. We shot the ball at a better percentage than 92% of the country.

In 2015-16, we shot the ball 48%, good for 19th in the nation. Again, super elite...we shot the ball better than 95% of the country.

WHEN DID THE ZONE DESTROY US??? Where is the actual statistical evidence that our problem was inability to score vs the zone? We saw the zone in well over half of our games. Probably way more in 2018. We shot the ball at an elite level. Our lowest 3 point rating was in 2018 when we shot the best overall percentage of the lookback, and we were still in the top 23% in 3-point FG%. IN 2017, we were a top 20 3-point shooting team as well. In 2016, we were in the top 10% in the nation in 3 point shooting.

So, our offensive effenciency was elite, our FG% was elite, our 3-pt FG% was elite two years, and top 23% the year we had our best overall FG%.

WHERE DID THE ZONE KILL US, AGAIN?

It wasn't on the boards. In fact, zoning us helped our offensive boards.

Zones don't force more turnovers, but even if you think they did, we never had a bad turnover rating during that run. Not elite, but not even middle of the road.

So...where did the zone kill us? Unable to score quick? Maybe. But you score on breaks and secondary break before the zone. We had to hold the ball a little more to score, but that meant fewer defensive possessions, which is a side of the ball we actually struggled at. Fact is, we were elite in both our efficiency and our shooting ability, and had a higher number of offensive rebounds for putbacks against zones.

So...where did we struggle against the zone? Would we hve just been #1 nationally in offensive efficiency every year against man? Cause the best man defenses killed us.

This year? We weren't good against anything, but yeah...I would zone the crap out of us too.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Honest, non-flame question for those who don't like Miller's game strategy, specifically zone offense.

What zone offense would you prefer us run? If you want to emphasize sets or principles instead of just a system name, that's cool. I'm just trying to unpack the general complaint about our zone offense into the specific things people would actually change to do better.

I see a lot of complaints about zone offense. I'm genuinely interested in what actual strategic changes people believe would benefit us.

I thought we ran, in placement, a pretty good zone offense this year. The inability to score from the block when we went high-low, and our lack of a drive-or-dish guard to exploit drives after rubs or skip/swings got the zone out of shape hurt a lot. We had no ability to drive and score, even a high-low post pass died in the post, our 4 did not consistently hit the elbow/circle shot to make the high-low respected, and when they packed zones, our 700 guards couldn't hit a 3.

You shouldn't settle for the 3, but when a team packs a zone like a tourniquet (much like Xavier did in our S16 game), you have to hit WIDE OPEN THREES. It isn't the only way to beat a zone, unless a zone packs inside the frickin' paint like a 4th grade defense. You have to hit a couple of jumpers to bring the zone out to a normal length where there are gaps to exploit.

I thought, in 2018, we ran some good zone stuff, especially with Dusan at the elbow, but it was still in team's perceived best interest to zone us to slow our pace and deal with our size (I think teams with quick backcourts should have been playing man against us from the jump, pressing our guards out, like Buffalo and Wichita St did...lots of groupthink in coaching, and it just became "yes, the zone is what we should do to them").

But a zone simply slowing your pace doesn't mean it is working. If the zone makes us slow down to find the break point, and we are shooting 48% from the field and 41% from 3, the zone is not "causing us problems", even if we are holding the ball for a while to break it. I hear that all the time watching games with casuals..."man...that zone is just choking us. Look at that!" and then I see us score with 15 on the shot clock with a shot from the elbow, or a drive or a wide open 3 and I think "no...as long as we are scoring, it's just fine."

I think our "zone offense" broke down in prior years when our players got impatient after a couple of misses. It wasn't what we were running. When we would get our minds right, we'd see the drives, and the quick swings and the flash to the elbow, etc. But sometimes we would get a quick shot or someone forcing a drive into the heart of the zone, or a missed 3 and think "crap...ZONE!". This last year, I really think we didn't have the skills needed to beat a zone, most notably you have to at least be some threat to hit the open 3 with some consistency. Not shooting blindly, but if the zone packs, you have to make that shot. And even if the zone loosens, you need someone to be able to drive into the zone and distribute, or the high low to have respect for both slots.

It wasn't the offense we were running this year...it was the lack of ability to do the things needed to break a zone.

Thank you for the in depth, thought out answer.

FWIW, I agree. I tend to think our base strategic concepts are sound, and the issue (when the issue presents itself) revolves more around execution.

The actual sets Miller uses are fairly common, regarded as solid and work. In terms of execution, part of a coach's job is execution. That's also part of a player's job. That's an area where I honestly don't know enough to opine on how it could be more effective.

A common failing against zone is it's exponentially easier to get an open 23 footer than a look at the rim. When a team fires up the first open look they have, that leads to a lot of 3's, because that is usually the first open look against zone. When those 3's miss, the offense looks ugly.

[Chicat]

RiseAndFail is currently hoping all this intelligent, nuanced strategy talk dies down so he can post, “Sean Miller is a big dumb doo-doo head who never tells his team to run faster!”

[Spaceman Spiff]

To this point, we keep hearing how bad we are against the zone. Because, fans perceive anything that isn't early offense as being "stopped".

Every frickin' team on our schedule, outside other teams perceived as elite, ran zone against us. We saw it every game, sometimes from teams that barely ran zone all year. But we ALWAYS saw zone.

In 2018, we were KenPom's #15 offense in the adjusted offense category. Out of 351. So top 5% efficiency nationally (95.6%)

In 2017, we were KenPom's #15 offense in the adjusted offense category. Again, out of 351.

In 2016, we were KenPom's #20 offense in the adjusted offense category. Also, out of 351. So still top 5%, round the .6. Or top 6% of you wish.

Pace of play (possessions per game) is sometimes overblown...Duke was 108th last year, Gonzaga 136th, somewhere after NAU. So if the other team is slowing you into making your decisions, but your decisions are still good and you are shooting at a good percentage or getting to the line, the possession number drops for them too, and your defensive effeciency has to be solid enough to keep...wait for it...the other team from scoring fewer points. If you have 200 possessions, you still need to be better on 1 of them. If the game is slowed to 60 possessions, if you are converting on 30, they have to equal you. Pace of play really only is an exposing stat of the top 20 or so and the bottom 40 or so. There are plenty of teams seen as up tempo that fall in the middle. And zone will slow you down. Always...even with a great zone offense.

So, my question is...where did teams zoning us hurt us so much? We would be + offensive rebounds, and our offensive efficiency ratings remained elite (top 5% in the nation is elite) even though every damn team in the world zoned us (except Buffalo and Wichita St., but I already talked about that).

In 2017-18, we shot the ball 50.3%. That was good for #4 in the nation. 98.9th percentile. That is super elite.

In 2016-17, we shot the ball 47.7%, good for 29th in the nation. We shot the ball at a better percentage than 92% of the country.

In 2015-16, we shot the ball 48%, good for 19th in the nation. Again, super elite...we shot the ball better than 95% of the country.

WHEN DID THE ZONE DESTROY US??? Where is the actual statistical evidence that our problem was inability to score vs the zone? We saw the zone in well over half of our games. Probably way more in 2018. We shot the ball at an elite level. Our lowest 3 point rating was in 2018 when we shot the best overall percentage of the lookback, and we were still in the top 23% in 3-point FG%. IN 2017, we were a top 20 3-point shooting team as well. In 2016, we were in the top 10% in the nation in 3 point shooting.

So, our offensive effenciency was elite, our FG% was elite, our 3-pt FG% was elite two years, and top 23% the year we had our best overall FG%.

WHERE DID THE ZONE KILL US, AGAIN?

It wasn't on the boards. In fact, zoning us helped our offensive boards.

Zones don't force more turnovers, but even if you think they did, we never had a bad turnover rating during that run. Not elite, but not even middle of the road.

So...where did the zone kill us? Unable to score quick? Maybe. But you score on breaks and secondary break before the zone. We had to hold the ball a little more to score, but that meant fewer defensive possessions, which is a side of the ball we actually struggled at. Fact is, we were elite in both our efficiency and our shooting ability, and had a higher number of offensive rebounds for putbacks against zones.

So...where did we struggle against the zone? Would we hve just been #1 nationally in offensive efficiency every year against man? Cause the best man defenses killed us.

This year? We weren't good against anything, but yeah...I would zone the crap out of us too.

Another good post.

I also agree that zone, almost by definition, makes a game uglier. It slows the pace and makes a team do things by passing and moving instead of the fun to watch things like drives and dunks.

I also agree slamming the offensive glass is an underrated strategic tool vs the zone. It is ugly to watch, but zone makes hitting the offensive glass easier, and kicking ass there is a valid thing.

Overall, I do think there's a significant element that people overlook in terms of how zone creates a slow, ugly game. It's one reason I don't understand posters who simultaneously want Miller to play more zone and play a faster pace.

[EVCat]

RiseAndFail is currently hoping all this intelligent, nuanced strategy talk dies down so he can post, “Sean Miller is a big dumb doo-doo head who never tells his team to run faster!”

I honestly believe a casual fan just sees that it takes a couple more seconds to break the zone, or 3 or 4 consecutive possessions where the players break into one on one and don't run the zone principles they are taught on offense, and just make the wild "WE SUCK AGAINST THE ZONE!!!" proclamation.

The numbers don't bear that out. In any way. But so many favor anecdotal evidence over factual evidence.

And, yeah...teams zoned us knowing those numbers. Because they were overwhelmed with our size last year, and knew we'd have stretches where we shot ourselves out of games. And lesser teams do want to reduce fouls and possessions. So we did what we had to do...slow down, probe the defense, and beat it.

And, based on just pure elite offensive numbers, we did. Did it help the other team? Maybe...in giving them a better chance of beating us with fewer possessions and a hot shooting night.

But the two times we got run in the 1st round, it was a team (WSU, Buffalo) that used heavy man pressure to completely destroy our point. I wish Buffalo had run zone against us last year.

[Beachcat97]

With all due respect to Buffalo, I still can't believe a team with Ayton, Trier and Alkins lost to them.

[EVCat]

With all due respect to Buffalo, I still can't believe a team with Ayton, Trier and Alkins lost to them.

I could say that about every major upset in the tournament.

With all due respect, I still cannot believe a team with Pete Eisenrich and a freshman Steve Nash, who was off in the game, could beat a team with Chris Mills, Damon Stoudamire, Khalid Reeves and company.

With all due respect, I still cannot believe a team with Greg Dennis, Rodney English, and Calvin Talford could beat a team with Sean Rooks, Chris Mills, Wayne Womack, and Damon Stoudamire

With all due respect, I still cannot believe a team with Devin Davis, Landon Hackim, and Jamie Mahaffey could beat a team with Damon Stoudamire, Joseph Blair, Michael Dickerson, Miles Simon, and Ben Davis,

With all due respect, I still cannot believe a team with Eduardo Najara and Eric Martin could beat a team with national POY Jason Terry, Richard Jefferson, Michael Wright and AJ Bramlett.

That's just the 90's. And that is just us. The One and Done of the NCAA's makes for some weird results.

[RiseAndFire]

To this point, we keep hearing how bad we are against the zone. Because, fans perceive anything that isn't early offense as being "stopped".
Every frickin' team on our schedule, outside other teams perceived as elite, ran zone against us. We saw it every game, sometimes from teams that barely ran zone all year. But we ALWAYS saw zone.
In 2018, we were KenPom's #15 offense in the adjusted offense category. Out of 351. So top 5% efficiency nationally (95.6%)
In 2017, we were KenPom's #15 offense in the adjusted offense category. Again, out of 351.
In 2016, we were KenPom's #20 offense in the adjusted offense category. Also, out of 351. So still top 5%, round the .6. Or top 6% of you wish.
Pace of play (possessions per game) is sometimes overblown...Duke was 108th last year, Gonzaga 136th, somewhere after NAU. So if the other team is slowing you into making your decisions, but your decisions are still good and you are shooting at a good percentage or getting to the line, the possession number drops for them too, and your defensive effeciency has to be solid enough to keep...wait for it...the other team from scoring fewer points. If you have 200 possessions, you still need to be better on 1 of them. If the game is slowed to 60 possessions, if you are converting on 30, they have to equal you. Pace of play really only is an exposing stat of the top 20 or so and the bottom 40 or so. There are plenty of teams seen as up tempo that fall in the middle. And zone will slow you down. Always...even with a great zone offense.
So, my question is...where did teams zoning us hurt us so much? We would be + offensive rebounds, and our offensive efficiency ratings remained elite (top 5% in the nation is elite) even though every damn team in the world zoned us (except Buffalo and Wichita St., but I already talked about that).
In 2017-18, we shot the ball 50.3%. That was good for #4 in the nation. 98.9th percentile. That is super elite.
In 2016-17, we shot the ball 47.7%, good for 29th in the nation. We shot the ball at a better percentage than 92% of the country.
In 2015-16, we shot the ball 48%, good for 19th in the nation. Again, super elite...we shot the ball better than 95% of the country.

WHEN DID THE ZONE DESTROY US??? Where is the actual statistical evidence that our problem was inability to score vs the zone? We saw the zone in well over half of our games. Probably way more in 2018. We shot the ball at an elite level. Our lowest 3 point rating was in 2018 when we shot the best overall percentage of the lookback, and we were still in the top 23% in 3-point FG%. IN 2017, we were a top 20 3-point shooting team as well. In 2016, we were in the top 10% in the nation in 3 point shooting.
So, our offensive effenciency was elite, our FG% was elite, our 3-pt FG% was elite two years, and top 23% the year we had our best overall FG%.
WHERE DID THE ZONE KILL US, AGAIN?
It wasn't on the boards. In fact, zoning us helped our offensive boards.
Zones don't force more turnovers, but even if you think they did, we never had a bad turnover rating during that run. Not elite, but not even middle of the road.
So...where did the zone kill us? Unable to score quick? Maybe. But you score on breaks and secondary break before the zone. We had to hold the ball a little more to score, but that meant fewer defensive possessions, which is a side of the ball we actually struggled at. Fact is, we were elite in both our efficiency and our shooting ability, and had a higher number of offensive rebounds for putbacks against zones.
So...where did we struggle against the zone? Would we hve just been #1 nationally in offensive efficiency every year against man? Cause the best man defenses killed us.
This year? We weren't good against anything, but yeah...I would zone the crap out of us too.

No, fans percieve a bad offense when you have regular stretches of 3 or 4 minutes without a basket, resort to jacking up bad threes, and fail in the biggest games time after time!

What does it say about Miller when he has 7 straight years of top 5 recruiting classes (so top 2% of 351), and his highest rated offense is #15 (top 4.2% of 351)? Wouldn't you think one of those years you'd mess up and actually overachieve and have a top 5 offense? You would, if you had a decent coach whose offensive philosophy didn't originate before the fast break was invented.

Im not going to subject myself to rewatching Millers awful offenses to keep by-defense-faced stats. But I can search the game threads for "zone" and the in-game commentary sure points to lots of trouble with zone!:
http://www.beardownwildcats.com/search. ... 1&start=12" target="_blank
18-19: against Oregon, USC and UCLA this year when they whooped us by 20+ and pretty much every team in the PAC except CAL and Stanford
17-18: with Ayton: against Colorado Stanford Cal Oregon State
16-17: with Lauri and Trier: against 11 seed Xavier, at home vs UCLA and USC and of course scoring 58 against Oregon's zone in that ass whooping, vs UW and WSU, vs Butler, Santa Clara
15-16: Even Chico State!
14-15: The entire NCAA tournament except of course Bo Ryan's equally boring (but better than Miller somehow) Bennett Ball

The truth is that Aytons, Triers, Lauri's, Kobi's Gordons and Stanleys out-talenting a bunch of pathetic non-cons and P12 teams on the way to a high statistical rating does not indicate that we run good offense. If Miller doesnt' have elite talent or shooting (3pt) to make his 1930's offense work then you get 9th place in the P12 and no postseason.

Im going to miss these heated debates when Miller gets canned in a few weeks as he steps into federal court to see the wiretaps go public.

[zonagrad]

With all due respect to Buffalo, I still can't believe a team with Ayton, Trier and Alkins lost to them.

I could say that about every major upset in the tournament.

With all due respect, I still cannot believe a team with Pete Eisenrich and a freshman Steve Nash, who was off in the game, could beat a team with Chris Mills, Damon Stoudamire, Khalid Reeves and company.

With all due respect, I still cannot believe a team with Greg Dennis, Rodney English, and Calvin Talford could beat a team with Sean Rooks, Chris Mills, Wayne Womack, and Damon Stoudamire

With all due respect, I still cannot believe a team with Devin Davis, Landon Hackim, and Jamie Mahaffey could beat a team with Damon Stoudamire, Joseph Blair, Michael Dickerson, Miles Simon, and Ben Davis,

With all due respect, I still cannot believe a team with Eduardo Najara and Eric Martin could beat a team with national POY Jason Terry, Richard Jefferson, Michael Wright and AJ Bramlett.

That's just the 90's. And that is just us. The One and Done of the NCAA's makes for some weird results.

Ben Davis didn't play. He was serving a stupid 2-game suspension from the NCAA for something that happened in his days prior to playing at Arizona. Stoudamire had just returned from a 1-game suspension after his father, without telling Damon, accepted a plane ticket from an agent. And Joseph Blair was injured and basically playing on one leg with a badly sprained ankle.

But point taken, upsets happen in a one game scenario. I still find it baffling that Arizona had to travel to Dayton, OH to play a team from Miami of Ohio. Basically a road game for Arizona despite being a 5-seed.

[zonagrad]

With all due respect to Buffalo, I still can't believe a team with Ayton, Trier and Alkins lost to them.

Hard to win in the NCAA tournament with a point guard like PJC. We were playing 4 on 5 vs. Buffalo.

[zonagrad]

Honest, non-flame question for those who don't like Miller's game strategy, specifically zone offense.

What zone offense would you prefer us run? If you want to emphasize sets or principles instead of just a system name, that's cool. I'm just trying to unpack the general complaint about our zone offense into the specific things people would actually change to do better.

I see a lot of complaints about zone offense. I'm genuinely interested in what actual strategic changes people believe would benefit us.

The best zone offense involves a versatile guard or forward who can attack the middle or soft underbelly of a zone. I think if you're playing zone you're basically conceding that you have guys who can't guard. If I was playing against Arizona the last few years, I'd probably zone too because I try to make the weakest link on the floor (PJC) beat me. I'd know PJC couldn't drive and finish and wasn't capable of getting to the middle of the zone and consistently knocking down a midrange shot. Miller schemed well against the zone even with PJC on the floor, making sure it was anyone but PJC probing the zone near the elbow.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Rise and Fire.

You responded to another poster. Would you mind answering my question about what strategic changes in zone offense you want? Feel free to include sets and principles as well.

For the other people who've answered, thanks. As I posted, I'm being genuine about my interest in other perspectives.

Zonagrad, I'd go further regarding your last post and say personnel almost always trumps system. I loved crediting the triangle offense with the Jackson Bulls. Phil could have run the parallelogram and he'd have been ok with Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen doing most of the ballhandling and decisionmaking.

[Chicat]

Wait....

Did RiseAndFail really crowdsource his response thus PROVING that knee jerk takes on in game situations are unreliable at best when it comes to strategy?

Super sweet self own bro.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Wait....

Did RiseAndFail really crowdsource his response thus PROVING that knee jerk takes on in game situations are unreliable at best when it comes to strategy?

Super sweet self own bro.

If we have to seriously perform on statements made during games, there are some uncomfortably sexual promises I've made to a few players that I'm not looking forward to having to follow through on.

[Chicat]

Wait....

Did RiseAndFail really crowdsource his response thus PROVING that knee jerk takes on in game situations are unreliable at best when it comes to strategy?

Super sweet self own bro.

If we have to seriously perform on statements made during games, there are some uncomfortably sexual promises I've made to a few players that I'm not looking forward to having to follow through on.

Heeke is definitely going to fire Miller when he reads the 2nd ASSU game thread.

[EVCat]

With all due respect to Buffalo, I still can't believe a team with Ayton, Trier and Alkins lost to them.

Hard to win in the NCAA tournament with a point guard like PJC. We were playing 4 on 5 vs. Buffalo.

and they exploited us with heavy man pressure. We withstood for a half.

I wish they had played a zone. PJC was sometimes effective, based on his shot that day, against a zone. He was allowed to walk the ball into the offense. PJC's main deficiencies for us came on his inability to pin the wing/close the shooter in the pack line. On offense, he was not as much of a detriment as some remember him to be. But against heavy pressure from athletic guards, he was in trouble.

So was Justin Coleman. They had very similar games...decent to good handle, streaky shooting, absolutely unable to finish at the rim on the break, not enough vision to find a passing lane on the drive. Coleman was better off the bounce/beating his man, but PJC made less unforced errors.

[CalStateTempe]

It will be telling if Miller drives next years ferrari like it’s a dodge caravan.

[EVCat]

With all due respect to Buffalo, I still can't believe a team with Ayton, Trier and Alkins lost to them.

I could say that about every major upset in the tournament.

With all due respect, I still cannot believe a team with Pete Eisenrich and a freshman Steve Nash, who was off in the game, could beat a team with Chris Mills, Damon Stoudamire, Khalid Reeves and company.

With all due respect, I still cannot believe a team with Greg Dennis, Rodney English, and Calvin Talford could beat a team with Sean Rooks, Chris Mills, Wayne Womack, and Damon Stoudamire

With all due respect, I still cannot believe a team with Devin Davis, Landon Hackim, and Jamie Mahaffey could beat a team with Damon Stoudamire, Joseph Blair, Michael Dickerson, Miles Simon, and Ben Davis,

With all due respect, I still cannot believe a team with Eduardo Najara and Eric Martin could beat a team with national POY Jason Terry, Richard Jefferson, Michael Wright and AJ Bramlett.

That's just the 90's. And that is just us. The One and Done of the NCAA's makes for some weird results.

Ben Davis didn't play. He was serving a stupid 2-game suspension from the NCAA for something that happened in his days prior to playing at Arizona. Stoudamire had just returned from a 1-game suspension after his father, without telling Damon, accepted a plane ticket from an agent. And Joseph Blair was injured and basically playing on one leg with a badly sprained ankle.

But point taken, upsets happen in a one game scenario. I still find it baffling that Arizona had to travel to Dayton, OH to play a team from Miami of Ohio. Basically a road game for Arizona despite being a 5-seed.

Bad miss for me. Yes. Ben was out, as was Joseph. Damon caem back the day before. Ray Owes should go on that list in place of Ben Davis, remove Blair. Still...should have won.

But, yeah...those were just ours. Grab some of those 2/15 losses and 3/14 losses by Duke and Iowa State and Syracuse and the same game can be played.

[azgreg]

It looks like Miller is still our coach. Hmmm.........

[EVCat]

It looks like Miller is still our coach. Hmmm.........

But we have to fire him now if we are going to beat out UNLV for David Grace.

He has Arizona ties, you know! High school, but still...

And he hates Alford too!

[Spaceman Spiff]

With all due respect to Buffalo, I still can't believe a team with Ayton, Trier and Alkins lost to them.

Hard to win in the NCAA tournament with a point guard like PJC. We were playing 4 on 5 vs. Buffalo.

and they exploited us with heavy man pressure. We withstood for a half.

I wish they had played a zone. PJC was sometimes effective, based on his shot that day, against a zone. He was allowed to walk the ball into the offense. PJC's main deficiencies for us came on his inability to pin the wing/close the shooter in the pack line. On offense, he was not as much of a detriment as some remember him to be. But against heavy pressure from athletic guards, he was in trouble.

So was Justin Coleman. They had very similar games...decent to good handle, streaky shooting, absolutely unable to finish at the rim on the break, not enough vision to find a passing lane on the drive. Coleman was better off the bounce/beating his man, but PJC made less unforced errors.

This is all really true. PJC was at his most effective when the opposition didn't attack him. Bigger, quicker, stronger players who went aggressively at him and forced him to handle the ball under pressure were always the major issue he had.

When he could play calmly and shoot and distribute unmolested, he was at his best.

[Longhorned]

Coleman was better off the bounce/beating his man, but PJC made less unforced errors.

Fewer unforced errors.

Talking about unforced errors.

[ByJoveByJingle]

But can you actually dangle in shorts like that? Less space, fewer inches.

[Newportcat]

It will be telling if Miller drives next years ferrari like it’s a dodge caravan.

[Spaceman Spiff]

It will be telling if Miller drives next years ferrari like it’s a dodge caravan.

I owned a Dodge Caravan and you can drive it over 100 MPH, no problems.

[Chicat]

It will be telling if Miller drives next years ferrari like it’s a dodge caravan.

I owned a Dodge Caravan and you can drive it over 100 MPH, no problems.

But can you do it just by coaching it to go faster?

[azgreg]

[FreeSpiritCat]

Who would want that vehicle. It is so low to the ground that it looks dangerous. I'd be afraid of running over something in the road, like a blown tire. What if the struts start to go out? Hit a speed bump too hard?

[azcat49]

Strap a hellcat engine (also known as a Nico) in that Caravan and you will be just fine!

[Chicat]

When your mom’s new boyfriend Rick rolls up in that bad boy, you know shit’s about to go down....

[RiseAndFire]

Rise and Fire.

You responded to another poster. Would you mind answering my question about what strategic changes in zone offense you want? Feel free to include sets and principles as well.

For the other people who've answered, thanks. As I posted, I'm being genuine about my interest in other perspectives.

Zonagrad, I'd go further regarding your last post and say personnel almost always trumps system. I loved crediting the triangle offense with the Jackson Bulls. Phil could have run the parallelogram and he'd have been ok with Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen doing most of the ballhandling and decisionmaking.

Feel free to venmo me a consulting fee if you want a novel about sets and principles. Until then

Offensive Adjustment #1: You can beat the zone defense in transition if you have an up-tempo team that can push the ball up the floor without giving the defense enough time to get set. Miller teams average 6 fast break points per game and our tempo rating is #264 and this was a "quick" Miller team! How do we become an up-tempo team? This is going to blow Chicat's walnut but you literally tell the PG to push the ball up the court as fast as possible. I know, its a wild concept.

Offensive Adjustment #2: Put players on the floor who can score. Personnel and substitutions should not be dictated by defense alone. Doing so is a recipe for a shit offense that never finds a rhythm. For example, a player starts heating up and actually scoring some points he blows a defensive assignment - UH OH! Do you immediately bench him for Dylan Smith? No! Consider the offensive flow, who's hot, who's not shooting well, instead of focusing only on defensive or rebounding mistakes. Leave him in, instead of confusing him with a quick benching. Not only will his confidence grow but he'll be less likely to bolt to the NBA prematurely or abruptly transfer out of the program in the middle of the season like Akot

Offensive Adjustment #3: Passing. Passing must be quick and crisp. Do not fucking dribble the ball around for a while and allow the defense to adjust. Make them late on their rotations. There is nothing quick or crisp about Miller offense. More of a lazy and predictable weave-and-heave a 3pt shot.

Did you know that the fast break was invented in 1922 by Frank Kearney when the ball was taken out at the end line instead of by a center jump after each basket? So yes, an offense from 1922 is more modern that Miller's system

[azgreg]

Who would want that vehicle. It is so low to the ground that it looks dangerous. I'd be afraid of running over something in the road, like a blown tire. What if the struts start to go out? Hit a speed bump too hard?

It's on air bags.

[dovecanyoncat]

....is going to blow Chicat's walnut...

Everybody, we were explicitly asked to keep his wife out of it.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Rise and Fire.

You responded to another poster. Would you mind answering my question about what strategic changes in zone offense you want? Feel free to include sets and principles as well.

For the other people who've answered, thanks. As I posted, I'm being genuine about my interest in other perspectives.

Zonagrad, I'd go further regarding your last post and say personnel almost always trumps system. I loved crediting the triangle offense with the Jackson Bulls. Phil could have run the parallelogram and he'd have been ok with Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen doing most of the ballhandling and decisionmaking.

Feel free to venmo me a consulting fee if you want a novel about sets and principles. Until then

Offensive Adjustment #1: You can beat the zone defense in transition if you have an up-tempo team that can push the ball up the floor without giving the defense enough time to get set. Miller teams average 6 fast break points per game and our tempo rating is #264 and this was a "quick" Miller team! How do we become an up-tempo team? This is going to blow Chicat's walnut but you literally tell the PG to push the ball up the court as fast as possible. I know, its a wild concept.

Offensive Adjustment #2: Put players on the floor who can score. Personnel and substitutions should not be dictated by defense alone. Doing so is a recipe for a shit offense that never finds a rhythm. For example, a player starts heating up and actually scoring some points he blows a defensive assignment - UH OH! Do you immediately bench him for Dylan Smith? No! Consider the offensive flow, who's hot, who's not shooting well, instead of focusing only on defensive or rebounding mistakes. Leave him in, instead of confusing him with a quick benching. Not only will his confidence grow but he'll be less likely to bolt to the NBA prematurely or abruptly transfer out of the program in the middle of the season like Akot

Offensive Adjustment #3: Passing. Passing must be quick and crisp. Do not fucking dribble the ball around for a while and allow the defense to adjust. Make them late on their rotations. There is nothing quick or crisp about Miller offense. More of a lazy and predictable weave-and-heave a 3pt shot.

Did you know that the fast break was invented in 1922 by Frank Kearney when the ball was taken out at the end line instead of by a center jump after each basket? So yes, an offense from 1922 is more modern that Miller's system

So, try to get fast break layups and dunks, play people who are better scorers and pass the ball better?

4. Score more points than the opponent. This is frequently overlooked, but scoring more points than the opponent has a high correlation to victory. If players are confused, tell them more points, not fewer points. >, not <, if they are more graphically inclined.

5. Make shots. It becomes easier to score more if you make shots. If you see a player thinking he should toss the ball at the side of the backboard, tell him NO. The ball goes through the center of the rim!

6. Show up to the correct gym. If you go to the YMCA and the refs are at McKale Center, they might think you're forfeiting. It is the Pac12, so the refs will probably call a few ticky tack handchecks before they declare a forfeit, but if you stay at the YMCA, eventually they'll get sick of calling touch fouls on nonexistent people and call the game.

7. Wear adult diapers if you have uncontrollable diarrhea. This one's more of a life strategy, but can also help on the court. You can't run fast if you're slipping on your own foul feces.

[Chicat]

RiseAndFail is that special kind of masochist that would rather lose 92-87 than win 65-58.

[TheGreatCatsby]

Avery Johnson buyout, maybe Bryne wants Miller lol

[Azgirl]

Believe me Bryne wants Miller, whether the timing is right or not we will see.

[ChooChooCat]

Believe me Bryne wants Miller, whether the timing is right or not we will see.

He's hiring Steve Prohm, who is a Bama alum.

[Chicat]

Believe me Bryne wants Miller, whether the timing is right or not we will see.

Would seem to be a somewhat odd hire. Not sure how many ADs would hire a guy their predecessor at their old job originally brought on and one who is under so much scrutiny.

For Miller, Bama would be a step down in prestige (but granted, a step up in conference) in an area of the country he’s never recruited, at a place without a pedigree that would aid in recruiting.

[Merkin]

RiseAndFail is that special kind of masochist that would rather lose 92-87 than win 65-58.

[midnightx]

Believe me Bryne wants Miller, whether the timing is right or not we will see.

Would seem to be a somewhat odd hire. Not sure how many ADs would hire a guy their predecessor at their old job originally brought on and one who is under so much scrutiny.

For Miller, Bama would be a step down in prestige (but granted, a step up in conference) in an area of the country he’s never recruited, at a place without a pedigree that would aid in recruiting.

It doesn’t matter who the AD is. Arizona is a premier college basketball job, Alabama not so much. If Miller is fired for cause from Arizona at some point, then a step-down like an Alabama makes more sense, but Miller isn’t leaving AZ for Bama.

[azgreg]

Sean miller still our coach this morning?

[midnightx]

Sean miller still our coach this morning?

That's the rumor.

[RiseAndFire]

Rise and Fire.

You responded to another poster. Would you mind answering my question about what strategic changes in zone offense you want? Feel free to include sets and principles as well.

For the other people who've answered, thanks. As I posted, I'm being genuine about my interest in other perspectives.

Zonagrad, I'd go further regarding your last post and say personnel almost always trumps system. I loved crediting the triangle offense with the Jackson Bulls. Phil could have run the parallelogram and he'd have been ok with Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen doing most of the ballhandling and decisionmaking.

Feel free to venmo me a consulting fee if you want a novel about sets and principles. Until then

Offensive Adjustment #1: You can beat the zone defense in transition if you have an up-tempo team that can push the ball up the floor without giving the defense enough time to get set. Miller teams average 6 fast break points per game and our tempo rating is #264 and this was a "quick" Miller team! How do we become an up-tempo team? This is going to blow Chicat's walnut but you literally tell the PG to push the ball up the court as fast as possible. I know, its a wild concept.

Offensive Adjustment #2: Put players on the floor who can score. Personnel and substitutions should not be dictated by defense alone. Doing so is a recipe for a shit offense that never finds a rhythm. For example, a player starts heating up and actually scoring some points he blows a defensive assignment - UH OH! Do you immediately bench him for Dylan Smith? No! Consider the offensive flow, who's hot, who's not shooting well, instead of focusing only on defensive or rebounding mistakes. Leave him in, instead of confusing him with a quick benching. Not only will his confidence grow but he'll be less likely to bolt to the NBA prematurely or abruptly transfer out of the program in the middle of the season like Akot

Offensive Adjustment #3: Passing. Passing must be quick and crisp. Do not fucking dribble the ball around for a while and allow the defense to adjust. Make them late on their rotations. There is nothing quick or crisp about Miller offense. More of a lazy and predictable weave-and-heave a 3pt shot.

Did you know that the fast break was invented in 1922 by Frank Kearney when the ball was taken out at the end line instead of by a center jump after each basket? So yes, an offense from 1922 is more modern that Miller's system

So, try to get fast break layups and dunks, play people who are better scorers and pass the ball better?

Lol are you actually going with "Miller doesn't emphasize defense over offense" in just about every lineup and substitution decision? Thats a good one!

This is why you can't have an honest discussion with a Miller fangirl. Thats ok, its all over in a few weeks - then the adults can look for a coach that can actually teach offense and more than one defense and Miller fangirls can follow CSM to Siberia U for his next coaching stop.

The Wofford coach looks good to me!

[MC1983]

Rise and Fire.

You responded to another poster. Would you mind answering my question about what strategic changes in zone offense you want? Feel free to include sets and principles as well.

For the other people who've answered, thanks. As I posted, I'm being genuine about my interest in other perspectives.

Zonagrad, I'd go further regarding your last post and say personnel almost always trumps system. I loved crediting the triangle offense with the Jackson Bulls. Phil could have run the parallelogram and he'd have been ok with Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen doing most of the ballhandling and decisionmaking.

Feel free to venmo me a consulting fee if you want a novel about sets and principles. Until then

Offensive Adjustment #1: You can beat the zone defense in transition if you have an up-tempo team that can push the ball up the floor without giving the defense enough time to get set. Miller teams average 6 fast break points per game and our tempo rating is #264 and this was a "quick" Miller team! How do we become an up-tempo team? This is going to blow Chicat's walnut but you literally tell the PG to push the ball up the court as fast as possible. I know, its a wild concept.

Offensive Adjustment #2: Put players on the floor who can score. Personnel and substitutions should not be dictated by defense alone. Doing so is a recipe for a shit offense that never finds a rhythm. For example, a player starts heating up and actually scoring some points he blows a defensive assignment - UH OH! Do you immediately bench him for Dylan Smith? No! Consider the offensive flow, who's hot, who's not shooting well, instead of focusing only on defensive or rebounding mistakes. Leave him in, instead of confusing him with a quick benching. Not only will his confidence grow but he'll be less likely to bolt to the NBA prematurely or abruptly transfer out of the program in the middle of the season like Akot

Offensive Adjustment #3: Passing. Passing must be quick and crisp. Do not fucking dribble the ball around for a while and allow the defense to adjust. Make them late on their rotations. There is nothing quick or crisp about Miller offense. More of a lazy and predictable weave-and-heave a 3pt shot.

Did you know that the fast break was invented in 1922 by Frank Kearney when the ball was taken out at the end line instead of by a center jump after each basket? So yes, an offense from 1922 is more modern that Miller's system

So, try to get fast break layups and dunks, play people who are better scorers and pass the ball better?

Lol are you actually going with "Miller doesn't emphasize defense over offense" in just about every lineup and substitution decision? Thats a good one!

This is why you can't have an honest discussion with a Miller fangirl. Thats ok, its all over in a few weeks - then the adults can look for a coach that can actually teach offense and more than one defense and Miller fangirls can follow CSM to Siberia U for his next coaching stop.

The Wofford coach looks good to me!

Mike Young looks good to you? Do you realize he has coached Wofford for 17 years and made the tournament 4 times going no farther than second round. Yeah that sounds great...

[ChooChooCat]

It will be telling if Miller drives next years ferrari like it’s a dodge caravan.

LMAO, I just saw this post, my dad drove a Stratus. This is my new favorite thing on the web now, thx NPC.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Rise and Fire.

You responded to another poster. Would you mind answering my question about what strategic changes in zone offense you want? Feel free to include sets and principles as well.

For the other people who've answered, thanks. As I posted, I'm being genuine about my interest in other perspectives.

Zonagrad, I'd go further regarding your last post and say personnel almost always trumps system. I loved crediting the triangle offense with the Jackson Bulls. Phil could have run the parallelogram and he'd have been ok with Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen doing most of the ballhandling and decisionmaking.

Feel free to venmo me a consulting fee if you want a novel about sets and principles. Until then

Offensive Adjustment #1: You can beat the zone defense in transition if you have an up-tempo team that can push the ball up the floor without giving the defense enough time to get set. Miller teams average 6 fast break points per game and our tempo rating is #264 and this was a "quick" Miller team! How do we become an up-tempo team? This is going to blow Chicat's walnut but you literally tell the PG to push the ball up the court as fast as possible. I know, its a wild concept.

Offensive Adjustment #2: Put players on the floor who can score. Personnel and substitutions should not be dictated by defense alone. Doing so is a recipe for a shit offense that never finds a rhythm. For example, a player starts heating up and actually scoring some points he blows a defensive assignment - UH OH! Do you immediately bench him for Dylan Smith? No! Consider the offensive flow, who's hot, who's not shooting well, instead of focusing only on defensive or rebounding mistakes. Leave him in, instead of confusing him with a quick benching. Not only will his confidence grow but he'll be less likely to bolt to the NBA prematurely or abruptly transfer out of the program in the middle of the season like Akot

Offensive Adjustment #3: Passing. Passing must be quick and crisp. Do not fucking dribble the ball around for a while and allow the defense to adjust. Make them late on their rotations. There is nothing quick or crisp about Miller offense. More of a lazy and predictable weave-and-heave a 3pt shot.

Did you know that the fast break was invented in 1922 by Frank Kearney when the ball was taken out at the end line instead of by a center jump after each basket? So yes, an offense from 1922 is more modern that Miller's system

So, try to get fast break layups and dunks, play people who are better scorers and pass the ball better?

Lol are you actually going with "Miller doesn't emphasize defense over offense" in just about every lineup and substitution decision? Thats a good one!

This is why you can't have an honest discussion with a Miller fangirl. Thats ok, its all over in a few weeks - then the adults can look for a coach that can actually teach offense and more than one defense and Miller fangirls can follow CSM to Siberia U for his next coaching stop.

The Wofford coach looks good to me!

No, I'm going with you've contributed nothing of substance. You post as if all that's required is to tell players to go faster, make shots and pass better.

I was making fun of you with the remainder of my post because of that. Every coach wants his players to get fast break dunks, make more shots and pass the ball better. Creating an effective strategy for achieving that is a different thing.

I'll tip my actual feelings. A lot of the people who criticize Miller do so with no clue about what a better (or even different) strategy would be. They just want more made shots, more fast breaks, etc, but have no idea how to make it happen.

Miller is educated in basketball. The posters can't match that, so they just pretend like whatever team (Wofford, in your case) won last night has a coach with the answers. Last night was literally Wofford's first NCAA tournament win in school history. But yeah, that guy has the answers.

[azcat49]

I am a Miller fan and want him here for years but if I could make changes I would want the following:

A coach that forces the issue on offense. An offense that focuses on getting shot attempts up more often than their opponents so we are a good offensive rebounding team and we take care of the Ball. This offense would a lot like what Roy runs st North Carolina and what he ran at Kansas. Always putting pressure on the other team to with offense. Lute I think was similar

On defense I want a team in the passing lanes. I want our defense to provide several easy lay ups a game. I want to trust our big guys low and not have a foot to the paint. I want a team of bigs that “head hunt” in the lane and “chips” any cutters going through their territory. Nastiness is required.