Zone Sets: Transition Zones (and musings on others)
Transition zones are one of those things that coaches love to pull out of their strategic hats*. They can be powerful things when leveraged in the right situations.
What is a transition zone? Simply put, you run a zone set that you don’t intend to run persistently, but rather plan on shifting to a man (or clam, or other zone set, if you’re devious) after some set condition has been met.
What condition? For example:
What sort of condition you use and what sort of zone you throw depends on your goals. I covered some of the goals of a given set when I discussed each (and will cover goals of other sets later), but generally a transition zone’s primary uses are:
A couple important considerations for making the transition:
At a high level, your transition shouldn’t LOOK like a transition. If your transition is on 4 throws, and you have sidelines counting throws (alerting the O line to a potential transition), you don’t necessarily have to sprint over to your woman at the 4th throw. Drift, be prepared to spring into action if they start cutting, but let the O keep wondering as long as possible (keep the sidelines counting throws too).
Other kinds of transitions? As for transitions other than zone-to-man…keep in mind that generally speaking, there are efficiency concerns with practicing a man-to-zone transition or the like a ton if you’re only going to use it a point or two a game. Of course, that point or two could be universe point, but weigh carefully how your team’s resources (time, especially full-team time, and mental/physical effort) are being deployed–get your fundamentals in order first. Now, if I were looking at setting up a man-to-zone transition, the absolute primary consideration would be when to make the transition–I think you want the disc to be moving somewhere that your team would be least exposed in transition–ie, a bad dump (one that doesn’t lead to a swing) or other such motion in the backfield that doesn’t enable a quick strike for yardage (or at least, not deep yardage). Secondly, I think such a transition would mean more or less giving up on the notion of pre-set positions. Even if your deep started last in the stack, who’s to say she’d still be there after 3, 5 throws? Versatility in your players is key, and I think this is probably the number one hindrance to effective implementation–what if your short stubby handler winds up deep? You can shift once the zone is set, but it might be too late by then. Thirdly, it’d probably be easier and make more sense to shirk a “zone set” in favor of something more junk-y. This gives your players more flexibility to work in transition rather than falling prety to defensive tunnel vision, running to play their ‘position’ and missing the actual/imminent threat. Savvy field vets are more or less requisite if you’re thinking of trying it as anything other than a novelty. Generally speaking, a clam/junk D set will be your best bet for these sorts of unorthodox transitions, simply because they have an inherent flexibility to them that other sets don’t. You might also try zone-to-zone transitions, going from a 1-3 to a 3-2 and shifting your defensive priorities by doing so; this happens to some extent with trap looks, so with some clear guidelines it would seem doable. What are your thoughts? *I can say this with somewhat decent authority having looked at the Huddle’s college survey data (I helped trying to identify some topics based on the data for feature authors to write about–won’t say anything else until they publish, though).



Your link to the overview has an extra http in it.
Hey Anon,
Thanks for the heads-up! Fixed the link.
I think the elite teams will start using transitions more, putting junk on when it favours them and man when that favours them.
The 2008 Dingos used a transition to zone when our opponents hucked and the completion was short of the endzone. Stops an easy one-on-one score, makes them pass it around, and defenders early to their position can see the offensive players moving towards them. Other benefits too…
Owen,
Interesting. I’m assuming you do this when your D out-hustles the O deep and the luxury of numbers at first?
I’m always a little hesitant about zones towards the endzone (all it takes is a little of the “easy” dump-swing type motion to work it in, but I’d think they can work if you’ve got the right (smart) personnel, given the tight quarters.
I’ve never seen it done, but I’ve always wondered about the potential of a switch from zone to man triggered by the stall reaching a certain point.
Disc gets caught by a hub in the middle of the field, and she looks downfield for a while, trying to find a hole in the zone–not worried about an easy reset because she’s playing zone O and there’s always a wide-open handler. Then, if the count gets to 6 or abover or something, the cup vanishes and covers those easy dump resets.
Crazy?
Gwen,
Not at all–I’ve seen something akin to that, though more of a spontaneous poaching by the cup rather than a dedicated strategy.
I forgot to mention, too–I’m pretty sure Buzz Bullets ran a man that changed to a zone at a high stall. Or perhaps I’ve got it backwards. Either way, they were obviously very well practiced at it given their success (I think it got some press when they first broke on to the scene a couple years ago).
Sorry to be a jerk, but overview link still doesn’t work.
Not being a jerk at all–this is what I get for not testing the link.
It *definitely* works now.
Gwen, I believe you can watch the 2006 WUCC finals to see Buzz Bullets run the zone-to-man transition on high counts.
Re the transition to junk on hucks, if it is a play your team practises and vocalises, it’s amazing how many more D players you can get down field before the offence. The default habits on many teams are watch, then realise its time to go help because the disc didn’t reach the endzone. Getting a stall count up to just 4 or 5 is also great for making the huck receiver suddenly ignore the endzone and lock onto a dump while the rest of your defence is busy setting up a junk.
Near an endzone, junk can favour the D more: the huck threat is gone, the O will likely pass the disc more (equals more opportunities for D) or else be impatient and force it, and you can bait cross-field hammers/forehands which a fast and clever deep-deep can contest.
Interesting. I definitely agree with getting D players down–it almost always behooves the players on the field to chase hucks, but especially the D–there’s no out-of-position downside on the turn (if an O player is halfway down the field from his defender and the disc turns, he’s halfway down the field from a deep receiver). It’s something we made a habit of emphasizing in practice and at tournaments with good success last year.
Thanks for the heads-up re: diagramming, too. I made an arbitrary choice and guessed wrong. I’ll be sure to get my X’s and O’s right going forward (and will fix the old ones if time/desire permits as well).