In Reply to: More optimism posted by Pyperkub on December 04, 2025 at 12:54:57
I agree with your assessment of the offense. I think we have players who are capable shooters, even if the current numbers don’t fully reflect that. Sky and Tyler performing well was not surprising, and Dent’s improvement also aligned with expectations. The most unexpected offensive outcome, in my view, was how much Eric struggled.
On the defensive end, however, I see the situation differently. I believe the issues extend beyond simply coaching or scheme implementation, and importantly, some of the key challenges are coming from players who have been in the program for at least a year.
Regarding the zone, I don’t see it as a sustainable long-term strategy for a highly competitive team. Zone defenses are inherently vulnerable to strong perimeter shooting and tend to create rebounding difficulties because players are guarding space rather than matching up with a specific body. That makes securing defensive boards less reliable, especially against disciplined opponents. In my view, zone is most effective when used situationally—as a change of pace or to address a particular matchup concern. Historically, most high-level teams are able to exploit a zone over time, with the rare exceptions, such as Syracuse, who recruited specifically for that system.
With that in mind, I think our competitiveness is largely tied to what Jamerson and Booker can provide defensively in the paint. I’m willing to give Booker room to develop, because he’s still early in the program and there’s a realistic chance Cronin can help him make a significant defensive jump. However, I worry that Eric and Tyler are more or less established in their current strengths and limitations, which may mean we see only marginal improvement in certain defensive areas.