BleacherCoaches.com

Oh great the accusing game! Don't worry Footballfan I have been called Chris Brown and Caleb Vescovi before. But its just an opinion and doesn't matter. I see nobody called out LHAC207 to be gallaher? He said he was awesome. I agree with him but didn't say it was gallaher or a relative.

So what defense would you suggest if a team is doing the 3 man weave? A 2-3 zone?

Newsflash--if a team is winning and running a 3 man weav, I would hope the opposing team is playing man to man defense. Maybe I misinterpreted the last sentence of your post.

If they are doing a weave then how would a man help if you can't get a steal because they aren't quick enough? Do a 3-2 zone to eliminate them from having Gallagher beat his man over and over again and passing and screening. What was happening was they would get easy shots and layups because the heights were getting screened and lost their man. They should have switched a few times to at least confuse the other team somewhat. Simple basketball. Still think a man is best?

so lay back in a 3-2 and let them eat the clock by passing it back and forth out top. Do you think with the lead they will force something? Gallaher will eat up any defense you throw at him. I have seen him beat double and triple teams.

If you are losing and the other team is doing a weav to eat the clock and get a layup then yes, man to man is the way to go. Not zone! So to answer your question I would say yes to man to man.

Either defense you throw at them, Gallagher will find a way to score. BUT I feel the 3-2 is best to cut down on the chance of him beating his guy and getting an easy layup or passing it off and getting an easy 2. We can argue this till we die but obviously the heights tried the man to man and it didn't work and resulted in easy points. We can't say the 3-2 wouldn't have worked or wouldn't have been best because it was not shown. Man didn't work then so how can you say it was the absolute best idea?

Last year Cambria Heights ran a 1-2-2 or whatever and forest hills held the ball...They were losing and held the ball...If CH would have played 3-2 from the beginning it might have been different, but they have been playing man and that was what sparked their win streak. I think that a 3-2 could have possibly worked, but I'm also saying that FH would have most likely held it and forced CH to go back to man, since they were down the entire game

What we can agree on is that Gallagher won the game for the rangers. He made shots when it really counted. Hes an exciting player to watch.

You want to beat him? Deny him getting the ball. Make the other 4 beat you. If you can.

Shade played a straight up man to man and won. Gimmick defenses will not work. The key is not to allow Gallaher easy looks or passes to team mates. Gallaher got D 1 speed and quickness. Denying him the ball may work from time to time but it is the help side defense on drives that can stop his deep penetration contesting shots and the easy dish.

LOL @ the sentiment that Gallagher has D1 quickness and speed. Have you seen him play against any D1 players?