Why Don’t Teams Play Zone With Less Than 1 Second Left? | NBA Playbook

Why Don’t Teams Play Zone With Less Than 1 Second Left?

We have seen it plenty of times.  A team losing (or tied) with the ball at half court and under one second left, they clear out the backside with a flash to the basketball and then set a backscreen to the team’s high-flyer for the lob at the rim.  Despite teams knowing that it is coming, the play works a lot more than it should.  The most recent example was Friday night when the Suns tied their game with the Grizzlies after being down two points with 0.4 seconds left on the clock:

The Suns would later go on to win the game in double overtime.  In a preseason game, the Mavericks were able to get a lob against the Rockets in similar fashion:

Remember Rajon Rondo’s play from last year:

Now, aside from the fact that all three teams ran similar plays (clearing out under the basket, then sending a guy for the lob) there is one ore constant in all of these clips.  The opposing team played man to man defense.  That Richardson play got me thinking, why don’t teams play zone in these late game situations?

Now obviously, if there is anywhere between 10 to 1 seconds left, you aren’t going to want to play zone.  But in situations where there has to be a catch and shoot (or a tip in), why not?  Most of the time, the man getting the lob is freed up by a screen and the fact that a team either has their defense fight through it or try and switch it (and fail).  Not to mention that he is cutting to the lane that is cleared out by an offensive player leaving the paint (and his man is forced .  Playing zone eliminates that.  Defensive three seconds doesn’t start until the ball is in play (once it is touched and the clock starts), so that isn’t a problem either.

Simply sit back in a 2-3 zone, pass off any cutting players, and have your big sit in the middle ready to challenge or deflect any lob attempt.  It almost sounds too easy.

So why don’t coaches do it?  I have never seen (though there may be some) a NBA coach go zone in a situation like this, and I think these might be the reasons why:

Challenge The Inbounder

Almost every single coach wants to challenge the inbounds pass.  If you sit in a 2-3 zone, the man inbounding the basketball has the luxury of standing there, surveying the situation, and then making a pass with no pressure in his face.  In situations where the inbounder has time to make the pass, step onto the court, and get the pass back, it makes sense.  In situations with less than one second left, it really doesn’t.  Yet coaches still insist on not only challenging the basketball, but use their centers to do so.

They think the height bothers the man inbounding the basketball (usually a guard or small forward), but they are wrong.  Take a look at  the two plays from this year I mentioned above.  Centers are covering the inbounds man, and they are still able to get the pass off.

Easy Catch And Shot

Another reason why coaches probably don’t go zone is that they don’t want to allow the opposing team’s best shooter to flash to the basketball unchallenged and fire up a catch and shoot opportunity.  However, those are few and far between, and I would rather take my chances with a 20-30 foot uncontested fling at the rim (remember, we are still talking about 1 second left), than give up a lob at the rim.

Coaches Don’t Want To Teach Zone

In terms of the NBA, the zone is still relatively young.  And while most teams do use a zone now, a coach would have to teach a team how to play it (in terms of how to pass of players, zone responsibilities, and positioning) and coaches wouldn’t want to take away from other things they need to go over to practice something that might not even happen once a season.

–

In the end, it is clear that there are reasons why coaches don’t play zone with less than 1 second left in the game, but to me, none of them make a whole lot of sense.  If coaches don’t start playing zone, however, we are going to see more and more lobs like the one Friday night.

09
Nov 2010
POSTED BY Sebastian Pruiti
POSTED IN Coaching Strategy Defense
DISCUSSION 17 Comments
TAGS

  • November

    When you play Phoenix, you have to be concerned about their 3-point shooters as a 3-pointer would have won the game in regulation. I imagine that was the plan but when a Memphis player fell down at the screen, the wide-open lob at the basket was an easy decision. Memphis has enough bigs, they could have put thabeet under the basket to prevent the lob, Gasol on the in-bounds and everyone else on the 3-point line – a different kind of “zone”.

  • http://www.nbaplaybook.com Sebastian Pruiti

    I normally agree with that philosophy late, but with .4 seconds left, I say let them flip the ball at the rim. I would much rather protect the rim and if they hit a crazy three, more power to them.

  • Anders

    How about manning up on the four guys running around inside the lines, then leave a big athletic fellow infront of the rim? (and thus nobody on the passer)

  • November

    When you play Phoenix, you have to be concerned about their 3-point shooters as a 3-pointer would have won the game in regulation. I imagine that was the plan but when a Memphis player fell down at the screen, the wide-open lob at the basket was an easy decision. Memphis has enough bigs, they could have put thabeet under the basket to prevent the lob, Gasol on the in-bounds and everyone else on the 3-point line – a different kind of “zone”.

  • http://www.thetwomangame.com/2010/11/heard-it-through-the-grapevine-150/ Heard It Through the Grapevine | The Two Man Game

    [...] thought that teams should play more zone on endgame out-of-bounds plays, in part because of one particularly successful Mavericks [...]

  • http://www.nbaplaybook.com Sebastian Pruiti

    I normally agree with that philosophy late, but with .4 seconds left, I say let them flip the ball at the rim. I would much rather protect the rim and if they hit a crazy three, more power to them.

  • Anders

    How about manning up on the four guys running around inside the lines, then leave a big athletic fellow infront of the rim? (and thus nobody on the passer)

  • bzoooty

    I like this and Anders' thoughts.

    What about running a 2-2 zone plus a man (not the center) on the passer? That way you put some minimal pressure on the inbounds pass, don't clutter the lanes for screens, and you still have enough bodies to handle the zone.

  • bzoooty

    I like this and Anders’ thoughts.

    What about running a 2-2 zone plus a man (not the center) on the passer? That way you put some minimal pressure on the inbounds pass, don’t clutter the lanes for screens, and you still have enough bodies to handle the zone.

  • http://nbaplaybook.com/2010/11/10/how-to-protect-the-rim-with-under-1-second-left/ NBA Playbook – A Look At The Playcalling In The NBA Through Videos, Pictures, & Words » How To Protect The Rim With Under 1 Second Left

    [...] funny, after doing yesterday’s post about lob plays with 1 second or less on the clock, I thought we would have to wait a few weeks to see a situation like that again.  We [...]

  • Praefect

    “They think the height bothers the man inbounding the basketball (usually a guard or small forward), but they are wrong.”

    Well, that's probably an overstatement. This is a bit of a quibble, but… I totally agree that you shouldn't give up all your rim protection just to bother the inbounder, but on the Jazz's successful defense against the Heat, they had Elson there. If there were no defender on the in-bounds pass, I think they would have thrown the lob anyway. Who's going to win a hops contest, Paul Millsap or LeBron James? If you can pick your spot perfectly, Millsap very possibly ends up fouling (like the Pacers-Cavs game from a year or so ago where both teams ran consecutive lobs, with Granger and LeBron, and they called the foul in both cases). I think that's key: if you just park your big man there, and someone like LeBron catches the ball in the air and attempts a tip shot while coming into contact with a big man, the probability of a foul is not negligible.

    Also, the tall, active defender on the inbounder has been successful in late-game pressure situations: Lamar Odom made it possible for Ariza to get those key steals against the Nuggets in the playoffs two years ago. Seems like you should do both: pressure the inbounder, but prioritize rim protection. Both of those strategies make the lob more difficult – notice that in the two examples you're talking about, the defender on the lob is not anywhere near contesting it, so it doesn't matter that Kidd had to send the lob sky-high to get it over Yao. If they had simply switched the screen at the top of the key, Battier would have had plenty of time and opportunity to beat Marion to the spot and maybe get a hand on the ball. If you apply your pressure in those two points, then all you're giving up is a catch-and-shoot from outside, from only a couple possible angles, with less than a second to go.

  • Praefect

    “They think the height bothers the man inbounding the basketball (usually a guard or small forward), but they are wrong.”

    Well, that’s probably an overstatement. This is a bit of a quibble, but… I totally agree that you shouldn’t give up all your rim protection just to bother the inbounder, but on the Jazz’s successful defense against the Heat, they had Elson there. If there were no defender on the in-bounds pass, I think they would have thrown the lob anyway. Who’s going to win a hops contest, Paul Millsap or LeBron James? If you can pick your spot perfectly, Millsap very possibly ends up fouling (like the Pacers-Cavs game from a year or so ago where both teams ran consecutive lobs, with Granger and LeBron, and they called the foul in both cases). I think that’s key: if you just park your big man there, and someone like LeBron catches the ball in the air and attempts a tip shot while coming into contact with a big man, the probability of a foul is not negligible.

    Also, the tall, active defender on the inbounder has been successful in late-game pressure situations: Lamar Odom made it possible for Ariza to get those key steals against the Nuggets in the playoffs two years ago. Seems like you should do both: pressure the inbounder, but prioritize rim protection. Both of those strategies make the lob more difficult – notice that in the two examples you’re talking about, the defender on the lob is not anywhere near contesting it, so it doesn’t matter that Kidd had to send the lob sky-high to get it over Yao. If they had simply switched the screen at the top of the key, Battier would have had plenty of time and opportunity to beat Marion to the spot and maybe get a hand on the ball. If you apply your pressure in those two points, then all you’re giving up is a catch-and-shoot from outside, from only a couple possible angles, with less than a second to go.

  • Jazzaloha

    My sense is that most college teams don't play zone with one second left either.

    But what I'm really wondering is why teams don't play zone more often. This would be especially true if 1.) the team doesn't have a great center/shot blocker(s); 2.) the opponents have great one-on-one players that can't be stopped; 3.) the team doesn't really move the ball well in the half-court; 4.) the opponent relies heavily on an untempo game.

    A good zone is ideal if all or most of the conditions are met above, imo. The bad things about zones are that a good offense can get really good shots off of them. However, it takes time and good execution. If an opponent lacks patience and doesn't know how to move the ball against the zone, their offense can be severely diminished. Add the relatively short shot clock time and I think that makes for a good match-up. (Plus, the zone could be even more effective if you add a full-court pressing defense.)

    Most teams don't have a Dwight Howard; and most teams can't come close to slowing down Kobe or D-Wade. Why souldn't those teams go to a zone?

  • Jazzaloha

    My sense is that most college teams don’t play zone with one second left either.

    But what I’m really wondering is why teams don’t play zone more often. This would be especially true if 1.) the team doesn’t have a great center/shot blocker(s); 2.) the opponents have great one-on-one players that can’t be stopped; 3.) the team doesn’t really move the ball well in the half-court; 4.) the opponent relies heavily on an untempo game.

    A good zone is ideal if all or most of the conditions are met above, imo. The bad things about zones are that a good offense can get really good shots off of them. However, it takes time and good execution. If an opponent lacks patience and doesn’t know how to move the ball against the zone, their offense can be severely diminished. Add the relatively short shot clock time and I think that makes for a good match-up. (Plus, the zone could be even more effective if you add a full-court pressing defense.)

    Most teams don’t have a Dwight Howard; and most teams can’t come close to slowing down Kobe or D-Wade. Why souldn’t those teams go to a zone?

  • Jazzaloha

    My sense is that most college teams don't play zone with one second left either.

    But what I'm really wondering is why teams don't play zone more often. This would be especially true if 1.) the team doesn't have a great center/shot blocker(s); 2.) the opponents have great one-on-one players that can't be stopped; 3.) the team doesn't really move the ball well in the half-court; 4.) the opponent relies heavily on an untempo game.

    A good zone is ideal if all or most of the conditions are met above, imo. The bad things about zones are that a good offense can get really good shots off of them. However, it takes time and good execution. If an opponent lacks patience and doesn't know how to move the ball against the zone, their offense can be severely diminished. Add the relatively short shot clock time and I think that makes for a good match-up. (Plus, the zone could be even more effective if you add a full-court pressing defense.)

    Most teams don't have a Dwight Howard; and most teams can't come close to slowing down Kobe or D-Wade. Why souldn't those teams go to a zone?

  • http://nbaplaybook.com/2010/12/09/indiana-doesnt-protect-the-rim-gives-up-the-game-winner-with-0-5-left/ NBA Playbook – A Look At The Playcalling In The NBA Through Videos, Pictures, & Words » Indiana Doesn’t Protect The Rim, Gives Up The Game Winner With 0.5 Left

    [...] month we saw a few different tip plays that lead many people (including myself) to say “why don’t teams just zone that final possession?  Then Jerry Sloan did do that and the issue kind of went away, because let’s face it, how [...]

  • http://nbaplaybook.com/2011/01/29/the-defensive-mistake-that-almost-cost-miami-the-game-against-detroit/ NBA Playbook – A Look At The Playcalling In The NBA Through Videos, Pictures, & Words » The Defensive Mistake That Almost Cost Miami The Game Against Detroit

    [...] with this site, you are probably guessing that the mistake is Miami playing man to man here instead of zone, but I actually agree with going man in this [...]