This YT video explains and shows why the no zone defense was much easier to play in.

[Hey Yo]

As a superstar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YM_eCnTNt1Q

Shows and explains why today's superstars have it harder with zone compared to last greats.

[Poetry]

"No team played zone on more than 10 percent of defensive possessions last season, per Synergy Sports. Dallas became known as the zone team in 2010-11, but they played a hybrid man zone more than a straight zone, and they did that on a small minority of possessions.

The league overall actually scored more efficiently against zone than man last season, according to Synergy."

Grantland, 2012

[Hey Yo]

"No team played zone on more than 10 percent of defensive possessions last season, per Synergy Sports. Dallas became known as the zone team in 2010-11, but they played a hybrid man zone more than a straight zone, and they did that on a small minority of possessions.

The league overall actually scored more efficiently against zone than man last season, according to Synergy."

Grantland, 2012
Watch the video

[Asukal]

As a superstar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YM_eCnTNt1Q

Shows and explains why today's superstars have it harder with zone compared to last greats.

Yeah let's act like teams today utilize a real zone defensive scheme. :rolleyes:

Go play ball more and stop sitting in front of your computer kid, maybe just maybe you can gain some understanding of the game. :oldlol:

[Dro]

Watch the video
Answer this basic question or your thread is a fail. If zone is so effective, why don't teams play it more than 10% of the time? Simple question...

[Asukal]

That vid is fcking bogus. :facepalm

He goes on to use MJ's 63 point game as an example of isolation play, then shows clips of MJ driving through the lane against MULTIPLE defenders. What a joke... :facepalm

You kids need to grow a brain. Illegal defense does make for more isolation plays but it doesn't mean defenders can't double the offensive player. With smart help defense, the paint could easily get packed before the player could even get there. And again the zone of today's NBA lacks the most important anchor of the defensive scheme, the center packing the paint area. Zones aren't that hard to beat, do you really believe that MJ one of the best mid range shooters of all time couldn't beat a zone? jesus... :whatever:

[Hey Yo]

Answer this basic question or your thread is a fail. If zone is so effective, why don't teams play it more than 10% of the time? Simple question...
If zone isn't effective, then why even have the rule?

Even Jordan and many others said they hated zone. Jordan didn't have to deal with it until he played with the Wizards.

[CavaliersFTW]

Notice the likes/dislikes disabled?

Uploader in the comments:


"Dear Jordanites,

If you want to comment on the video, please stop spamming the page with big blocks of cut and paste from insane Jordan cult member channels and websites. You guys keep cutting and pasting meaningless data dumps of the same deliberately misleading, out-of-context stats and silly arguments verbatim. YouTube automatically(and correctly) marks comments like that as spam and hides them because it detects that the same glut of text has been posted elsewhere over and over. No one, including me, can see your comments when you do that and I'm not going to constantly check and sort through my spam box looking for them just because you insist on trolling every basketball video with the same dumb shit literally word-for-word.

Type a real message like you have some sense so that people will actually get to see it and be able to respond."

The uploader is an NBA conspiracy theorist. He uploads videos with two objectives in mind.

#1, to prove the Michael Jordan is overrated

#2, to prove the NBA is rigged (his YT name is riggedNBA)

His content and conclusions are tin-foil hat status. He has an agenda in mind when he makes his videos. Don't expect him to be some arbiter of truth.

[Asukal]

If zone isn't effective, then why even have the rule?

Even Jordan and many others said they hated zone. Jordan didn't have to deal with it until he played with the Wizards.

They hated it because they don't usually play against it and threw them off guard. If teams utilized it more, these "SUPERSTARS" will get used to it and adapt easily. Go back to the drawing board kid. :hammerhead:

[Hey Yo]

That vid is fcking bogus. :facepalm

He goes on to use MJ's 63 point game as an example of isolation play, then shows clips of MJ driving through the lane against MULTIPLE defenders. What a joke... :facepalm

You kids need to grow a brain. Illegal defense does make for more isolation plays but it doesn't mean defenders can't double the offensive player. With smart help defense, the paint could easily get packed before the player could even get there. And again the zone of today's NBA lacks the most important anchor of the defensive scheme, the center packing the paint area. Zones aren't that hard to beat, do you really believe that MJ one of the best mid range shooters of all time couldn't beat a zone? jesus... :whatever:
Also shows Danny Ainge and Walton guarding him one on one, no help (which is a joke) because of no zone / illegal defense.

MJ able to convert over Danny Ainge one on one with no help D allowed?....."mind blown"

[plowking]

"No team played zone on more than 10 percent of defensive possessions last season, per Synergy Sports. Dallas became known as the zone team in 2010-11, but they played a hybrid man zone more than a straight zone, and they did that on a small minority of possessions.

The league overall actually scored more efficiently against zone than man last season, according to Synergy."

Grantland, 2012

Spurs played zone almost exclusively when Bron was the ball handler in the finals. Both in 2013 and 2014. Only difference was he was shooting the ball well in 2014.

[Hey Yo]

They hated it because they don't usually play against it and threw them off guard. If teams utilized it more, these "SUPERSTARS" will get used to it and adapt easily. Go back to the drawing board kid. :hammerhead:
If teams couldn't use it all (80's 90's) the superstars have nothing to adapt to. They just keep saying they hate zone defense, just like MJ did.

Watch the video.

[Asukal]

Also shows Danny Ainge and Walton guarding him one on one, no help (which is a joke) because of no zone / illegal defense.

MJ able to convert over Danny Ainge one on one with no help D allowed?....."mind blown"

Dude you are a blind mfcker. All iso starts with one defender, when MJ drives 2-3 help defenders were waiting on the paint. MJ shooting a jumper over ainge demonstrates exactly what beats a zone defense. Your agenda driven thread is hilarious, the GOAT living rent free on your minds. :oldlol:

[Dro]

Also shows Danny Ainge and Walton guarding him one on one, no help (which is a joke) because of no zone / illegal defense.

MJ able to convert over Danny Ainge one on one with no help D allowed?....."mind blown"
Except MJ can score over ANYBODY, 1 vs. 1 or 1 vs. 3. I still don't see the point...He's the GOAT scorer, he's going to score, period. He's smart enough and good enough to figure out what he needs to do to be successful. Yeah he had Phil but at some point, he would have figured it out. Probably have less rings though.

And players don't like playing against zones because yes, it throws you off...thats why its good to go to it in stretches to switch things up. But a team playing zone the entire game and other teams have a chance to gameplan and figure out their strategy before it starts? Oh my...Every team may avg. over 100 ppg and thats not an exaggeration. The only reason they wouldn't is because zone the entire game may slow the pace of the game down which again, is not as entertaining...Thats why many don't like college because a lot of teams play zone all the time.

Again, NBA scouts, gms and coaches get paid to come up with ways to stop the other team and they don't use zone.

Also as a player myself, zones are boring to play against because it removes the mano e mano factor, the 1 vs. 1 factor. You lose the ability to directly school the defender thats guarding you so you wouldn't have as many rivalries...You don't have a Shaq vs. Hakeem in the 95 Finals with a zone defense. These guys are competitive. Nobody wants to play against a zone and win shooting 50 pull mid-range jumpshots, its boring...

[Asukal]

If teams couldn't use it all (80's 90's) the superstars have nothing to adapt to. They just keep saying they hate zone defense, just like MJ did.

Watch the video.

That video reeks of ignorance and bias. I did watch it and I instantly knew the uploader has zero credibility whatsoever. Rent free. :oldlol:

[plowking]

Dude you are a blind mfcker. All iso starts with one defender, when MJ drives 2-3 help defenders were waiting on the paint. MJ shooting a jumper over ainge demonstrates exactly what beats a zone defense. Your agenda driven thread is hilarious, the GOAT living rent free on your minds. :oldlol:

Ball movement and perimeter shooting beats a zone. So getting it out of an individuals hands and actually moving the ball. Hence, a decrease in individual greatness and reliance on one superstar.

[Hey Yo]

That video reeks of ignorance and bias. I did watch it and I instantly knew the uploader has zero credibility whatsoever. Rent free. :oldlol:
Because it shows what you don't want the facts to prove.

[Asukal]

Ball movement and perimeter shooting beats a zone. So getting it out of an individuals hands and actually moving the ball. Hence, a decrease in individual greatness and reliance on one superstar.

What's going to stop a coach from setting up plays for his SUPERSTAR to get open perimeter shots? Specially since zone don't cover like man to man defense. :rolleyes:

[Asukal]

Because it shows what you don't want the facts to prove.

Nah, it shows you and many people are idiots and don't understand how the game is played. Rent free. :oldlol:

[CavaliersFTW]

Because it shows what you don't want the facts to prove.
You mean bodies of evidence - we're forming opinions with bodies of evidence here as the topic in question is an area of gray not black or white/fact or fiction.

Now, in order to form accurate opinions as much data as possible needs to be collected. All sides, people, testimony need to be represented. That isn't being done here though, not ALL players think a zone for example, is more difficult to score on or play against. I've heard Oscar Robertson dismiss zone as an opportunity to get more 3 point shots and layups. Why didn't the uploader include that interview in his video? Because it does not suit his agenda, he has an agenda. Like I said he's not trying to be some arbiter of truth and objectivity, he's trying to show the opinions and plays that suit his agenda. He wouldn't express the same opinion in all his videos (MJ sucks, the NBA is rigged) over and over again if he was objective and truth seeking just trying to help NBA fans understand the game, that isn't his plans at all. He's a tin foil hat fan only crafting and presenting the narrative he's believed all along, whether he could have found examples to support it or not.

[DonDadda59]

Not this again :oldlol:

According to Synergy Sports, 'Zone' is played 2.7% of all defensive possessions league wide and teams actually score better on higher percentages against it than straight man (think someone pointed that out earlier). Scoring, pace, shooting percentages have increased markedly since the introduction of the the 3-second violation and the elimination of hand-checking. And actual zone was common place in the pre-2001 era, ask me for details.

The Cavaliers second option has 2 50 point games this season alone. Let that marinate on your brain for a minute.

[sdot_thadon]

Can't really expect ish to enter this with an open mind, but the video is somewhat legit in the small corner it attempts to paint. The mj iso and going into 3 defenders was a fail though, I'm sure he could have found something better than that. The strategic 3 in the key part was telling. Also he was correct in the shading aspect of the zone being one of the most challenging aspects of it for stars. Just because today's stars adapted to it doesn't mean they wouldn't be better without it.


Not this again :oldlol:

According to Synergy Sports, 'Zone' is played 2.7% of all defensive possessions league wide and teams actually score better on higher percentages against it than straight man (think someone pointed that out earlier). Scoring, pace, shooting percentages have increased markedly since the introduction of the the 3-second violation and the elimination of hand-checking. And actual zone was common place in the pre-2001 era, ask me for details.

The Cavaliers second option has 2 50 point games this season alone. Let that marinate on your brain for a minute.

Is synergy specifying a full zone in those numbers, or hybrid zones? I'm pretty sure the hybrid types are the most utilized, which the shading he illustrated comes from.

[Im Still Ballin]

Here goes don again with his bullshit

Define a zone

It's WAY more than just zones

The way in which you can double team now

There is literally no restriction on defenses now

The 05 handcheck rule was necessary because the rules were in favor of defenses from 2001-2004, when record defensive numbers were recorded

[DonDadda59]

Here goes don again with his bullshit

Yup, videos made by random nobodies on youtube = legit evidence. But empirical data from the company the NBA employs to track every single play during the season/postseason = Don's bullshit.

Story checks out.


There is literally no restriction on defenses now

Except defenders not being able to stay in the paint for more than 2.9 seconds or physically impede offensive players. :confusedshrug:


The 05 handcheck rule was necessary because the rules were in favor of defenses from 2001-2004, when record defensive numbers were recorded

But defense is better now because those rules were amended? Makes perfect sense. Take a bow. :applause:

[Im Still Ballin]

And let it be known

All I'm saying is teamwork is required a heck of a lot more nowadays to win compared to previous eras

No one is questioning Jordan's ability to play today

You can't get away with relying on one player these days, and hope for success

This era is not kind to individual production. This is the truth.

[Im Still Ballin]

Yup, videos made by random nobodies on youtube = legit evidence. But empirical data from the company the NBA employs to track every single play during the season/postseason = Don's bullshit.

Story checks out.



Except defenders not being able to stay in the paint for more than 2.9 seconds or physically impede offensive players. :confusedshrug:



But defense is better now because those rules were amended? Makes perfect sense. Take a bow. :applause:
The 3 seconds rule has always been around. It was just listed under the illegal defense rules.

[DonDadda59]

The 3 seconds rule has always been around. It was just listed under the illegal defense rules.

Not in the paint.

But we've been down this road already. You know I've got the goods to make it so you can't show your face in this thread again like before with the same idea threads you started a few days ago. Why are you making me do this to you? :confusedshrug:

[sdot_thadon]

Yup, videos made by random nobodies on youtube = legit evidence. But empirical data from the company the NBA employs to track every single play during the season/postseason = Don's bullshit.

Story checks out.

So no info on whether or not that only tracks full zones or partial ones too? Shades on one player?

[TheMan]

Answer this basic question or your thread is a fail. If zone is so effective, why don't teams play it more than 10% of the time? Simple question...
And it would be great if he could explain this ditty too...


The league overall actually scored more efficiently against zone than man last season, according to Synergy."

[Im Still Ballin]

I'll be on later to destroy you don

[DonDadda59]

So no info on whether or not that only tracks full zones or partial ones too? Shades on one player?

I don't think Synergy keeps a 'shading' stat :oldlol: but you could probably research that on your own, contact them, etc. Here are the facts (and a specific team anecdote) according to their tracking of zone defenses being played in the NBA:


According to Synergy Sports tracking, the Warriors have seen zone a mere 79 possessions this season, 1.5 percent of their total 6,031 possessions. Golden State averages 0.94 points per play overall -- 10th-best in the league -- but that number jumps up a bit to 0.962 points per play against zone, and the Warriors have scorched opponents by shooting 50 percent against it.

...

According to Synergy Sports data, the Celtics rank sixth in the NBA in allowing a mere 0.898 points per play (a number that's dropped steadily since Bradley returned to the lineup). Boston actually owns the fourth-best man-to-man defense, allowing 0.846 points per play in half-court sets. But the Celtics are not afraid to throw the zone changeup and with good reason: Despite the fact that zone has accounted for a mere 145 possessions (2.7 percent of total plays), the Celtics have allowed only 0.786 points per play and opponents have shot 35.6 percent against it.

Teams eventually sniff out the zone and make changes to bust it.

http://espn.go.com/boston/nba/story/_/id/9006908/boston-celtics-clamped-golden-state-warriors-employing-rare-zone-defense


^Only makes sense that a team loaded with shooters would rarely see zone and would scorch it when faced against it. Not like this is middle school :lol

I think the highest recorded % of zone use in the past 6 seasons was Dallas in '11 with 10.5% of their possessions.


I'll be on later to destroy you don

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.mandatory.com/media/2013/02/michael-jordan-laughing.gif#laughing%20my%20ass%20off%20gifs%2032 0x240

Any time you're ready bitch.

[TheMan]

Also shows Danny Ainge and Walton guarding him one on one, no help (which is a joke) because of no zone / illegal defense.

MJ able to convert over Danny Ainge one on one with no help D allowed?....."mind blown"
Dennis Johnson covered him most of the game but then again I'm sure you have no idea who he is.

[sdot_thadon]

I don't think Synergy keeps a 'shading' stat :oldlol: but you could probably research that on your own, contact them, etc. Here are the facts (and a specific team anecdote) according to their tracking of zone defenses being played in the NBA:


According to Synergy Sports tracking, the Warriors have seen zone a mere 79 possessions this season, 1.5 percent of their total 6,031 possessions. Golden State averages 0.94 points per play overall -- 10th-best in the league -- but that number jumps up a bit to 0.962 points per play against zone, and the Warriors have scorched opponents by shooting 50 percent against it.

...

According to Synergy Sports data, the Celtics rank sixth in the NBA in allowing a mere 0.898 points per play (a number that's dropped steadily since Bradley returned to the lineup). Boston actually owns the fourth-best man-to-man defense, allowing 0.846 points per play in half-court sets. But the Celtics are not afraid to throw the zone changeup and with good reason: Despite the fact that zone has accounted for a mere 145 possessions (2.7 percent of total plays), the Celtics have allowed only 0.786 points per play and opponents have shot 35.6 percent against it.

Teams eventually sniff out the zone and make changes to bust it.

http://espn.go.com/boston/nba/story/_/id/9006908/boston-celtics-clamped-golden-state-warriors-employing-rare-zone-defense


^Only makes sense that a team loaded with shooters would rarely see zone and would scorch it when faced against it. Not like this is middle school :lol

I think the highest recorded % of zone use in the past 6 seasons was Dallas in '11 with 10.5% of their possessions.



http://www.blogcdn.com/www.mandatory.com/media/2013/02/michael-jordan-laughing.gif#laughing%20my%20ass%20off%20gifs%2032 0x240

Any time you're ready bitch.
So basically what you're saying is it only accounts for full zone. Almost makes it pointless to post. The other elements are more common.

[DonDadda59]

So basically what you're saying is it only accounts for full zone. Almost makes it pointless to post. The other elements are more common.

No, what I'm saying is they don't keep a 'shading' stat. :oldlol:

I'll tell you what. Show me an example of 'shading' either in video or gif form from a game from the post 'zone' era and we'll move on from there. Deal with any misconception you or the other misguided pups may have. :cheers:

[iamgine]

Wow defense really are tougher back then.

Tougher for the defender.

[sdot_thadon]

No, what I'm saying is they don't keep a 'shading' stat. :oldlol:

I'll tell you what. Show me an example of 'shading' either in video or gif form from a game from the post 'zone' era and we'll move on from there. Deal with any misconception you or the other misguided pups may have. :cheers:
There were plenty of examples in the video bro of a defender playing centerfield behind another man defender. :no: don't come at me like that, I asked a civil question. Put ur big boy pants on we're adults here.

[DonDadda59]

There were plenty of examples in the video bro of a defender playing centerfield behind another man defender. :no: don't come at me like that, I asked a civil question. Put ur big boy pants on we're adults here.

I'm wearing sweatpants right now nigguh, shit is serious.

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/4-01-2015/IsE872.gif

Knicks throwing shade at the GOAT here? :confusedshrug:

[CavaliersFTW]

That YouTuber is not unlike that guy who used to make the "Kobe vs zone defenses" guy who was making up phrases like Zone Sandwich and what not and cherry picked a bunch o 1 on 3 and 1 on 5 sequences of Kobe and tried to assert that that was basically what Kobe faces/faced his entire career and that Jordan only played 1 on 1.

The tin foil hat basketball stans are easy to spot. The video in the OP is created by a tin foil hat fan who despises MJ.

[DonDadda59]

That YouTuber is not unlike that guy who used to make the "Kobe vs zone defenses" guy who was making up phrases like Zone Sandwich and what not and cherry picked a bunch o 1 on 3 and 1 on 5 sequences of Kobe and tried to assert that that was basically what Kobe faces/faced his entire career and that Jordan only played 1 on 1.

This. Although I haven't had a good zone sandwich in a while. Sprinkle in a little shading and you've got yourself a helluva lunch.


The tin foil hat basketball stans are easy to spot. The video in the OP is created by a tin foil hat fan who despises MJ.

Dudes don't know the basics of basketball, it's really amusing to watch. If you want to see what actual zones look like, you watch the NCAA not the NBA :lol

[Cali Syndicate]

The 05 handcheck rule was necessary because the rules were in favor of defenses from 2001-2004, when record defensive numbers were recorded

MJ played in that period and when he was healthy was putting up 20+ppg with a tad below 45%clip. And this was mJ out of shape, worn down knees and a busted j (which was basically his only offensive move in his arsenal). And even still put up some amazing performances throughout those two seasons, check the record books. But a prime mj, a great off the ball and mid range shooter, wouldn't adapt to today's defenses....Mj wouldn't even miss a beat

[Jud]

"No team played zone on more than 10 percent of defensive possessions last season, per Synergy Sports. Dallas became known as the zone team in 2010-11, but they played a hybrid man zone more than a straight zone, and they did that on a small minority of possessions.

The league overall actually scored more efficiently against zone than man last season, according to Synergy."

Grantland, 2012
Hi 3ball

[sdot_thadon]

I'm wearing sweatpants right now nigguh, shit is serious.

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/4-01-2015/IsE872.gif

Knicks throwing shade at the GOAT here? :confusedshrug:
I don't understand your point. That's not what I asked. And I'm not comparing, you threw info out there so I figured you knew more about it. This gif thing kinda prone to cherry picking. It's not like the moment from the gif is representative of that eras defense as a whole. My question is focused on the current era.

[DonDadda59]

I don't understand your point. That's not what I asked. And I'm not comparing, you threw info out there so I figured you knew more about it. This gif thing kinda prone to cherry picking. It's not like the moment from the gif is representative of that eras defense as a whole.

And you base this assertion on what exactly?


My question is focused on the current era.

Your question was about synergy sports keeping track of 'shading' data.

I don't think they keep track of that. But you can email/call them for specifics.

http://corp.synergysportstech.com/

If whoever answers your inquiry doesn't laugh in your face, be sure to come back here and tell us what they say. :cheers:

[3ball]

.
MJ's Mid-Range Shooting (Ron Artest said MJ was like Reggie Miller (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5dXZxj6Zbc&t=0m57s) from the mid-range)


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/e376b067b766d37a2b60958ae7df4dc9.gif


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/Jordan_Fadeaway_Hangtime_VS_En_f2e6935bf43334e8c5c 30c1b2b6489d8.gif


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/No_hangtime_like_Jordans_0dd6db619b8c6a7c785b93425 f5b59da.gif


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/Jordan_Hangtime_Jumper_on_offb_12e8ad28b619d87d7ad fef991e4158c1.gif


http://www.gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/b6b18ec51d8ae4c3dd98e52b5d970736.gif

[sdot_thadon]

And you base this assertion on what exactly?



Your question was about synergy sports keeping track of 'shading' data.

I don't think they keep track of that. But you can email/call them for specifics.

http://corp.synergysportstech.com/

If whoever answers your inquiry doesn't laugh in your face, be sure to come back here and tell us what they say. :cheers:
:coleman: for one I watched that era, 2nd if you don't feel that distinction matters you never really wanted to have an honest debate about it. If that's the case carry on.

[3ball]

not representative of that eras defense as a whole.


you know what's representative of that era as a whole?

no spacing.. hand-checking.. physicality..

and according to the NBA, more difficult penetration (http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/04/09/stujackson/index.html).

you know what else?... legal paint-camping.. from the Illegal Defense Guidelines:

2b. "When a defensive player is guarding an offensive player who is adjacent (posted-up) to the 3-second lane, the defensive player may be within the "inside lane" area with no time limitations. An offensive player shall be ruled as "postedup" when he is within 3' of the free throw lane line. A hash mark on the baseline denotes the 3' area."

[sdot_thadon]

you know what's representative of that era as a whole?

no spacing.. hand-checking.. physicality..

and according to the NBA, more difficult penetration (http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/04/09/stujackson/index.html).

you know what else?... legal paint-camping.. from the Illegal Defense Guidelines:

2b. "When a defensive player is guarding an offensive player who is adjacent (posted-up) to the 3-second lane, the defensive player may be within the "inside lane" area with no time limitations. An offensive player shall be ruled as "postedup" when he is within 3' of the free throw lane line. A hash mark on the baseline denotes the 3' area."
Yeah I agree that much is true, but that only means this era is different for certain.....

[3ball]

.
...............THINGS THAT MAKE DEFENSES STRONGER:


........................ Previous Eras... Today's Era

No Spacing.................[x]................[ ]

Hand-Checking............[x]................[ ]

Paint-Camping.............[x]................[ ]

Physicality..................[x]................[ ]



I couldn't include zones on the list above, because today's NBA bans zone inside the paint, so today's zones aren't really zones at all - and i couldn't include "partial zones" on the list, because those make defenses WEAKER, not stronger.

[3ball]

as opposed to playing against a defense that's always hovering in your vicinity but never fully committing to a hard trap so that they can cut off both the driving lane and passing lane - (flooding and shading)


http://s29.postimg.org/y32v1xeqv/overload.jpg


Flooding Deandre to the strongside (seen above) leaves the weakside a man down and vulnerable - the ways to exploit this were standardized years ago and are routinely used by all teams.

Whereas letting Deandre paint-camp under the rim doesn't leave the weakside vulnerable - Griffin gets to stay on Love in the near-corner, while Dandre's presence under the rim provides the best opportunity to defend against penetrators from the strongside... He's closer to Mosgov this way too.

It's been long proven that a big man's presence under the rim is the best possible position for him defensively - the only reason the strong-side flood exists is BECAUSE defenders can no longer paint-camp.





This simple isolation play would be frontside flooded with help across the lane low today.


http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2015/0107/Klay-New-03.gif


Today's defensive 3 seconds and spacing forces bigs to defend in a flood and shading-type fashion on the perimeter, instead of protecting the rim in the paint.. To execute floods and shading, bigs must come AWAY from the hoop and defend a guard off-the-dribble, as Pau is seen trying to do above.

This is a major disadvantage for the big man - essentially, today's game forces bigs to trade in their advantage of taking on smaller defenders AT the rim (previous eras paint-camping), for a disadvantage of contesting quicker players on the perimeter (today's floods and shading).

And clearly, the stats prove that today's floods and shading haven't made scoring or penetration more difficult - teams score more today than in the mid-90's and the NBA's own stats (http://stats.nba.com/tracking/#!/team/drives/?sort=DTP&dir=1) show teams score via dribble-penetration more than any other scoring method..

[3ball]

partial zones


Partial zones make defenses weaker, not stronger.

Today's spacing and defensive 3 seconds forces would-be rim protectors to flood and shade OUTSIDE the paint on the perimeter (see previous post) - so once the ballhandler beats whoever is flooding/shading, there is no one protecting the rim because the shaders and flooders got beat on the perimeter.

otoh, previous era defenders just waited inside the paint..

The very reason shading and flooding was invented is specifically BECAUSE the NBA banned paint-camping.

[DonDadda59]

:coleman: for one I watched that era

So you know all about the Jordan Rules and teams skirting the illegal defense rules to play actual zone then. Good for you. :applause:


2nd if you don't feel that distinction matters you never really wanted to have an honest debate about it. If that's the case carry on.

Yeah... I showed you empirical data from the company employed by the NBA that documented the limited use of 'zone' defense in the league today. You wanted to know if they kept data on 'shading'. I told you they most likely didn't but gave you the contact number for the company so you can ask them personally. I also showed you an example of a team 'shading' Jordan back in '92... but obviously that was 'cherrypicked' and didn't count.

I'm all for a good debate. Take this thread wherever you want it to go, I'll follow. The world is yours son. :cheers:

[sdot_thadon]

.
...............THINGS THAT MAKE DEFENSES STRONGER:


........................ Previous Eras... Today's Era

No Spacing.................[x]................[ ]

Hand-Checking............[x]................[ ]

Paint-Camping.............[x]................[ ]

Physicality..................[x]................[ ]



I couldn't include zones on the list above, because today's NBA bans zone inside the paint, so today's zones aren't really zones at all - and i couldn't include "partial zones" on the list, because those make defenses WEAKER, not stronger.
Rerun....yawn
This desperate obsession to prove era superiority really causes major logic fails for you bro, need to try something different every now and then.

If you watched the video op posted the main thing that jumped out in debate is how when guys iso back then they had a shot at only having to beat a single defender to reach the paint. In this era they have one guy zoning behind the man defender meaning to get to the bucket against that particular setup, you have to beat 2 guys just to reach the paint sometimes. Big difference. Again not representative of a whole era but it works for you since you're into that sort of thing. Look at those clips in the video and tell me how many of those plays become dunks or layups after you remove the zone man. All this proves is the eras are different and each has their own specific challenges rule wise.

[iamgine]

Is it true though that in the past....lets say player X is on the left 3pt line, the opponent don't wanna double team. His teammates all run to the right 3pt line. Their defenders then must follow to the right 3pt line or it will be illegal defense?

[sdot_thadon]

Is it true though that in the past....lets say player X is on the left 3pt line, the opponent don't wanna double team. His teammates all run to the right 3pt line. Their defenders then must follow to the right 3pt line or it will be illegal defense?
Yeah when the refs call it. They missed calls back then though just like any era. The idea was you had to appear to be guarding someone.

[iamgine]

Yeah when the refs call it. They missed calls back then though just like any era. The idea was you had to appear to be guarding someone.
Do the ref called it often though? Or is it like carrying where they very seldom calls it.

[DonDadda59]

Is it true though that in the past....lets say player X is on the left 3pt line, the opponent don't wanna double team. His teammates all run to the right 3pt line. Their defenders then must follow to the right 3pt line or it will be illegal defense?

If the opponent didn't want to double a guy, I assume everyone would just play their man, no? :confusedshrug:

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/4-01-2015/P6YzYB.gif

^Jordan catches the ball on the left 3 point line, all the defenders run away from him to avoid the illegal D call.


Yeah when the refs call it. They missed calls back then though just like any era. The idea was you had to appear to be guarding someone.

Got to the point that teams were using outright zones with little or no real repercussions and the NBA tried repeatedly curtailing it with no luck. They finally gave up and abolished the rule (while adding other caveats along the way- 3 sec in the paint, no handchecking, etc).

Zone, actual zone, was played openly in the NBA long before 2001.


Do the ref called it often though? Or is it like carrying where they very seldom calls it.

That.

[iamgine]

If the opponent didn't want to double a guy, I assume everyone would just play their man, no? :confusedshrug:

Yeah but if a defense center's man goes to the perimeter clearly it would be great if that center could stay near the strong side paint and not have to follow his man.

[DonDadda59]

Yeah but if a defense center's man goes to the perimeter clearly it would be great if that center could stay near the strong side paint and not have to follow his man.

I'm having a hard time following your broken english, but I assume you're if a center's man goes to the perimeter, he'd be forced to follow? That gif I posted above showed 3 different Knicks (including PF Oakley) not guarding any man but Jordan, throwing multiple traps at him on the strong side... before Jordan ran into the 7 fter camping in the paint... but here's more (all from Game 1 of the Bulls-Knicks 1992 Playoff series):

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/4-01-2015/k1Rp5_.gif

^Pay close attention to Ewing. During the whole play he's never within 10 ft of his man until the very last second of the play clock. The Knicks played a hybrid 3-2 zone on that play. They tripled Jordan when he got the ball at the top of the key

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/4-01-2015/WJfp23.gif

^Again watch as Ewing is nowhere near his man, but just camps out in the paint and 'shades' Jordan on the post (While Gerald Wilkins flashes a double). No illegal D was called.

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/4-01-2015/kGPQAj.gif

^Ewing 'shades' Pippen, disregarding his man (Mark Jackson also zoning at the top of the key).

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/4-01-2015/KdJEpr.gif

^Another 'hybrid' 3-2 zone, 3 guys at the top of the key guarding an area, not a man. Jordan's man chases him down once he gets the pass on the baseline.

Etc, and so on... that's just a few random plays from the first half of game 1.

[iamgine]

So from what I gather...the rule that you have to follow your man/guard someone was indeed an official rule in the past.

How much teams was actually affected by it and how much it was enforced was the debate. There are evidence for and against it.

[3ball]

some misinformation itt..

[3ball]

they had a shot at only having to beat a single defender to reach the paint.

you have to beat 2 guys just to reach the paint sometimes.


You've identified the difference in today's era and previous eras - in today's game, ballhandlers face more defense outside the paint ("to reach the paint" as you said), and consequently, they face less defense inside the paint.

Last I checked, a ballhandler's strength is beating defenders on the perimeter and all ballhandlers love doing it - with today's defenders on the perimeter away from the paint, the ballhandler has a shot at finishing in the paint against ZERO rim protection.. Whereas previous era ballhandlers faced paint-camping... Paint-camping > floods by a mile.

[andgar923]

As a superstar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YM_eCnTNt1Q

Shows and explains why today's superstars have it harder with zone compared to last greats.

are you serious? I hope you didn't make the vid yourself because even in the clips that are used to prove how weak the past eras were, they mentioned "double" teams coming to help. :facepalm

FACT is, MJ faced EVERY defense known past, present and more than likely future.

Isolation is still very much a part of the game. Because some players today can't take advantage it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. They simply aren't smart enough, skilled enough, or athletic enough to beat it.

But is has a been shown repeatedly:

A. The zone is rarely played with any sort of consistency
B. The 'zone' isn't really a true 'zone' because it is restricted by rule changes which decrease its effectiveness
C. The zone hasn't stopped players from penetrating. Unlike popular and misleading myths, the zone doesn't stop penetrating wing players from getting to the rim. This has been backed up by a shitload of stats aka FACTS

One important thing to consider as well.

The NBA wasn't as strict at calling it by the book like they are today. The NBA officials let the defense get away with much much more than today, it's night and day at the amount of shit they didn't call.

This entire vid and argument is weak sauce that has been exposed eons ago.

[andgar923]

I quickly clicked on 2 of Bron's greatest games. And I noticed TONS of isolations, EASY paths to the basket with uncontested layups and dunks, weak help from the defense, his inability to make smart decisions and expose the defense which led to him getting trapped, lack of explosiveness and elusiveness on his behalf and much more.

All while facing no defensive physical restrictions the entire time, which basically lets him waltz his way to any position on the floor at will.

I will make a vid dissecting every single one of these easy scoring opportunities ushered in by today's rules, purposely changed to make it easier on perimeter scorers as per NBA officials in due time.

He is an awkward awkward player with bad balance, and not as strong at finishing as one might think. Actually kinda weak finisher at times.

[sekachu]

As a superstar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YM_eCnTNt1Q

Shows and explains why today's superstars have it harder with zone compared to last greats.




MJ virtually faced a lot of this situation like the video showed but he still couldn't be stopped.

[sekachu]

If zone isn't effective, then why even have the rule?

Even Jordan and many others said they hated zone. Jordan didn't have to deal with it until he played with the Wizards.




He hates zone doesn't mean he can't play well against zone.

With MJ's excellent off ball movement, post up which today's perimeter players are lack of, he can easily decode the zone. Not to mention his outstanding quick first step.

[sdot_thadon]

So from what I gather...the rule that you have to follow your man/guard someone was indeed an official rule in the past.

How much teams was actually affected by it and how much it was enforced was the debate. There are evidence for and against it.
Pretty much this. Notice how most of the gifs are of the Knicks who openly pushed the limits of the rules. Notice the current era gifs are of various teams.....


You've identified the difference in today's era and previous eras - in today's game, ballhandlers face more defense outside the paint ("to reach the paint" as you said), and consequently, they face less defense inside the paint.

Last I checked, a ballhandler's strength is beating defenders on the perimeter and all ballhandlers love doing it - with today's defenders on the perimeter away from the paint, the ballhandler has a shot at finishing in the paint against ZERO rim protection.. Whereas previous era ballhandlers faced paint-camping... Paint-camping > floods by a mile.
Everyone knows the eras are different 3ball, only some insecure knob jobs around here really wish to prove one is better than the other. Just as you can find gifs of open paint here, you can find ones with the paint clogged if you chose. But why would you do that? You also can find countless clips of Mj dunking with no resistance underneath the rim as well likewise, but since it doesn't fit your agenda you wont. Your info would hold much more weight if you acknowledge the other side of things and maybe even highlighted weak point from both eras and not just one.

What you've been doing here is basically post highlight clips from your favorite player over and over again.....

[DonDadda59]

Pretty much this. Notice how most of the gifs are of the Knicks who openly pushed the limits of the rules. Notice the current era gifs are of various teams.....


:rolleyes:

So now the Knicks were the only team that played like that? Everyone else played that isolation defense with absolutely no help... is that your new 'debate' line? OK, let's go back 5 seasons, 1987 with the Indiana Pacers:

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/3-27-2015/zXwjmS.gif

^3-2 isolation zone leads to triple team of Jordan at the top of the key and he runs into man waiting in the paint.

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/3-27-2015/CSrHmf.gif

^Strong side flood isolation zone, 3 bodies on MJ, forced to pass out.

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/3-27-2015/iQ7vsd.gif

^1-2-2 (Box and 1) isolation zone. 4 bodies waiting in the paint.

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/3-27-2015/KGA1dP.gif

^2-3 hybrid isolation zone leads to triple team.

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/3-27-2015/v-n-Ui.gif

^4 bodies clog the paint, stopping the drive, no foul. No dice.


I wonder who was keeping the shading stats back then :roll:

[sdot_thadon]

:rolleyes:

So now the Knicks were the only team that played like that? Everyone else played that isolation defense with absolutely no help... is that your new 'debate' line? OK, let's go back 5 seasons, 1987 with the Indiana Pacers:

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/3-27-2015/zXwjmS.gif

^3-2 isolation zone leads to triple team of Jordan at the top of the key and he runs into man waiting in the paint.

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/3-27-2015/CSrHmf.gif

^Strong side flood isolation zone, 3 bodies on MJ, forced to pass out.

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/3-27-2015/iQ7vsd.gif

^1-2-2 (Box and 1) isolation zone. 4 bodies waiting in the paint.

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/3-27-2015/KGA1dP.gif

^2-3 hybrid isolation zone leads to triple team.

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/3-27-2015/v-n-Ui.gif

^4 bodies clog the paint, stopping the drive, no foul. No dice.


I wonder who was keeping the shading stats back then :roll:

Well really only one of those gifs you provided really fit what I'm addressing. The rest were double and triple teams, which is what the rules of the era dictate. You had to double or guard your man. Maybe a second could be considered that as well but it's really borderline.

It's pretty dim for a guy your age to run this whole 3ball shtick. If anything the older guys should be able to make the best comparisons of the eras but this place is what it is. Just posting gifs doesn't make your assertions true cuz. You responded by posting gifs of a different team doing different things.....

Just to be clear I'm not a fan of either agenda, but I'd like to see a real conversation instead of this shit.

[DonDadda59]

Well really only one of those gifs you provided really fit what I'm addressing. The rest were double and triple teams, which is what the rules of the era dictate. You had to double or guard your man. Maybe a second could be considered that as well but it's really borderline.

It's pretty dim for a guy your age to run this whole 3ball shtick. If anything the older guys should be able to make the best comparisons of the eras but this place is what it is. Just posting gifs doesn't make your assertions true cuz. You responded by posting gifs of a different team doing different things.....

Just to be clear I'm not a fan of either agenda, but I'd like to see a real conversation instead of this shit.

You are absolutely full of shit my dude. I still don't even know what you're trying to 'debate' exactly.

I gave you factual, empirical data about the use of zone by the data company employed by the NBA itself... nope not good enough, they don't have 'shading' data and 'shading' is some new never before seen phenomena.

I show you specific examples from a playoff game in '92 where the defense played zone and exhibited 'shading'... nope not good enough, I was cherry-picking and the Knicks were the only team that played like that back then.

So I go back to the 80s, show you examples of the same from the Pacers... but of course you have a problem with that too.

So cards on the table time- what exactly are you trying to debate/have a conversation about?

[sdot_thadon]

You are absolutely full of shit my dude. I still don't even know what you're trying to 'debate' exactly.

I gave you factual, empirical data about the use of zone by the data company employed by the NBA itself... nope not good enough, they don't have 'shading' data and 'shading' is some new never before seen phenomena.

I show you specific examples from a playoff game in '92 where the defense played zone and exhibited 'shading'... nope not good enough, I was cherry-picking and the Knicks were the only team that played like that back then.

So I go back to the 80s, show you examples of the same from the Pacers... but of course you have a problem with that too.

So cards on the table time- what exactly are you trying to debate/have a conversation about?
There's no debate "i'm" trying to have you came in to criticize the video posted, so apparently you have the issue. I asked a question because you're being disingenuous. Playing stupid about exactly what I'm getting at screams you want no part of it. Although your lame ass know exactly what I'm getting at, I'll break it down one more time for you in slow person style so you can relate.

You posted a statistic about how often zone is used in the modern league.

I asked if it was full on zones or partial elements as well. (Shading a ball handler or half zones)

You're doing this cute little kid dance around the reason for the question.

I'm not part of whatever vendettas you got going on here bro. You know damn well that a team doesn't have to play full on zone in order to utilize advantages from the rule changes. You know exactly what significance the question has as well. You're a bulls fan correct? If so you know better bro.

[DonDadda59]

There's no debate "i'm" trying to have you came in to criticize the video posted, so apparently you have the issue. I asked a question because you're being disingenuous. Playing stupid about exactly what I'm getting at screams you want no part of it. Although your lame ass know exactly what I'm getting at, I'll break it down one more time for you in slow person style so you can relate.

You posted a statistic about how often zone is used in the modern league.

I asked if it was full on zones or partial elements as well. (Shading a ball handler or half zones)

You're doing this cute little kid dance around the reason for the question.

I'm not part of whatever vendettas you got going on here bro. You know damn well that a team doesn't have to play full on zone in order to utilize advantages from the rule changes. You know exactly what significance the question has as well. You're a bulls fan correct? If so you know better bro.

So in other words you keep typing paragraphs to say absolutely nothing. 'Partial Zones', 'Shading', etc whatever you want to call it (times were it was known as 'help defense' :oldlol: ), that has existed for many decades. It's not some new never before seen defense that was invented by Tom Thibodeau in 2010. I showed you specific examples of that, you cried cherry pick and complained that the Knicks were the one time-travelling team from the future who went back in time to play that way. :oldlol:

Fact is- there isn't a single defensive scheme or tactic around now that wasn't used in the past. Call it whatever you want, nitpick as much as your heart desires. But the flip side is true- there are plenty of schemes (particularly full court pressure/zones) and tactics (hand checking/camping in the paint) that players now never see. The NBA explicitly changed the rules to make it easier for perimeter players to score. They weren't trying to hide their intentions. And it worked out exactly the way they planned.

[Hey Yo]

"But there was one that might be bothersome, the zone defense. It was the topic du jour at last month's All-Star Game, and Jordan was making an impassioned plea before the competition committee that had gathered to consider rules changes to enliven the NBA game. Jordan spoke passionately. If teams were able to play zone defenses, he said, he never would have had the career he did.

And that was Jordan's argument: He believed that allowing any defense, or a zone, enables teams to gang up on the star. Gone will be the highlight-show moves and plays, the ESPN-ization of the game that others contend has been detrimental to sound play.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2001-04-01/sports/0104010375_1_defense-recommendations-nba

[DonDadda59]

"But there was one that might be bothersome, the zone defense. It was the topic du jour at last month's All-Star Game, and Jordan was making an impassioned plea before the competition committee that had gathered to consider rules changes to enliven the NBA game. Jordan spoke passionately. If teams were able to play zone defenses, he said, he never would have had the career he did.

And that was Jordan's argument: He believed that allowing any defense, or a zone, enables teams to gang up on the star. Gone will be the highlight-show moves and plays, the ESPN-ization of the game that others contend has been detrimental to sound play.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2001-04-01/sports/0104010375_1_defense-recommendations-nba

The f*ck?

Why was Jordan complaining about rule changes when he was retired (article says early 2001, right?)? Any other articles about that or any real actual direct quotes?

[Hey Yo]

The f*ck?

Why was Jordan complaining about rule changes when he was retired (article says early 2001, right?)? Any other articles about that or any real actual direct quotes?
At that time, he already had part ownership with the Wizards and came back to play in the following season (2001-02). So maybe he didn't want the zone because he already knew he was going to play for the Wiz before he announced it? Thought it would hinder what he had left in the tank?

[DonDadda59]

At that time, he already had part ownership with the Wizards and came back to play in the following season (2001-02). So maybe he didn't want the zone because he already knew he was going to play for the Wiz before he announced it? Thought it would hinder what he had left in the tank?

That doesn't make even a little bit of sense. Do they even let owners/current players make pleas in front of the rules committe let alone part owners/retired players? I know they accept video from GMs/coaches if it involves issues about reffing, but that's as far as I've heard. Sounds like complete hyperbole from Smith, but I'll give him benefit of the doubt. Any direct quotes/minutes from the meeting/other articles mentioning this?

[Hey Yo]

That doesn't make even a little bit of sense. Do they even let owners/current players make pleas in front of the rules committe let alone part owners/retired players? I know they accept video from GMs/coaches if it involves issues about reffing, but that's as far as I've heard. Sounds like complete hyperbole from Smith, but I'll give him benefit of the doubt. Any direct quotes/minutes from the meeting/other articles mentioning this?
:confusedshrug:

You have just as much access to try to find more info as I do.

[nba_55]

"But there was one that might be bothersome, the zone defense. It was the topic du jour at last month's All-Star Game, and Jordan was making an impassioned plea before the competition committee that had gathered to consider rules changes to enliven the NBA game. Jordan spoke passionately. If teams were able to play zone defenses, he said, he never would have had the career he did.

And that was Jordan's argument: He believed that allowing any defense, or a zone, enables teams to gang up on the star. Gone will be the highlight-show moves and plays, the ESPN-ization of the game that others contend has been detrimental to sound play.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2001-04-01/sports/0104010375_1_defense-recommendations-nba

Great quote :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[DonDadda59]

:confusedshrug:

You have just as much access to try to find more info as I do.

I have a shitload of articles spanning like 15 years from 1986-2001 documenting the use of zone, rule changes, etc in the NBA... like tons of articles... not one that mentions a retired Jordan using his lunch break to make 'impassioned pleas' in front of the rule committee. First time I'm hearing about that. :oldlol:

Prime example, Dick Motta was an NBA head coach for 25 years and per Stu Jackson was one of the handful of people picked by Jerry Colangelo to work on the rules committee to tackle the rule changes:


How was the select committee on rules formed?

Jackson: The select committee was chaired by Jerry Colangelo, who was designated by David Stern to form the committee. Then Jerry selected what I feel are some of the best basketball minds in the history of the NBA game, guys like Jerry West, Dick Motta, Jack Ramsay and Bob Lanier. The focus was really to try to get as many years of experience on the committee as posible.

Here's Motta in 1996:


What particularly bothers Motta is that many teams try to get away with zone defenses now, content to only be penalized by a technical foul. "Our teams are zoning now. Rule or no rule. We're not allowed to use the word `zone' but it's a zone," Motta said.

-THE NBA HAS THIS RULE ABOUT ILLEGAL DEFENSE, BUT WHO CAN EXPLAIN IT, AND WILL IT EVER GO AWAY? A TWILIGHT ZONE (LA Daily News April 14, 1996 Scott Wolf)


So one of the handful of guys charged with allowing 'zone' in the league was on the record (direct quote, take note) 5 years earlier in 1996 that teams were disregarding the rule and playing actual zone anyway. Can't find a word about Jordan going in front of Motta or anyone else on the committee to make 'impassioned pleas'. Strange.

[andgar923]

Great quote :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:
Too bad TRUE zone was never implemented.

It's mostly zone by name.

[andgar923]

Jordan spoke passionately. If teams were able to play zone defenses, he said, he never would have had the career he did.

Forward to years later and the very same man has mocked today's game and players. Because true zone was never applied.

[Blue&Orange]

If zone isn't effective, then why even have the rule?

Even Jordan and many others said they hated zone. Jordan didn't have to deal with it until he played with the Wizards.
Not this AGAIN! For the 343 in the last 3 moths.

KG, McGrady, Duncan talk how they don't like zone, zone becomes legal, they all have career highs in scoring.


That zone!


That goes to show how easy players have it today, they change the rules, including making this badass defensive scheme legal and still players score like never before.

[3ball]

Forward to years later and the very same man has mocked today's game and players. Because true zone was never applied.


Exactly.. MJ said the ban on hand-checking and physicality would allow him to score 100 points (http://uproxx.com/dimemag/2010/10/michael-jordan-if-i-played-today-i-could-have-scored-100-points/) - and every single NBA player that played with hand-checking agrees with him (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=183958).

MJ's comments trashing today's post-hand-check defenses are no surprise - there are countless other quotes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMacMfZYEr4) from players and coaches saying what is common knowledge - that it's harder to score on hand-checking, higher physicality, no-spacing, and paint-camping.

These 4 things more than offset zones, especially since zones are banned inside the paint anyway, due to the defensive 3 seconds rule that forces defenders to stay within armslength (http://www.nba.com/nba101/misunderstood_0708.html) of their man at all times while inside the paint - being forced to stay within armslength of your man is the opposite of a zone (it's man-to-man - that's right, the NBA forces defenders to play man-to-man inside the paint.. the zone is only allowed OUTSIDE the paint).
.

[DonDadda59]

Not this AGAIN! For the 343 in the last 3 moths.

KG, McGrady, Duncan talk how they don't like zone, zone becomes legal, they all have career highs in scoring.


That zone!


That goes to show how easy players have it today, they change the rules, including making this badass defensive scheme legal and still players score like never before.

This is true. Plenty of players and coaches were panicking over the new rules hindering stars, bringing scoring down, etc... despite everything the people actually changing the rules were saying.

By 2006 when they got rid of handchecking, perimeter players were scoring at levels never before seen league wide.


The game’s elite players did not embrace zone defenses when they were introduced to the N.B.A. in 2001. They saw them as an infringement on the purity of their professional game.

Shaquille O’Neal detested the concept. Kobe Bryant feared his drives to the basket would be hindered by clogged lanes. So did Vince Carter.

“Hated it,” Carter, of the Nets, said recently. “A lot of guys did. It just changed the style of the game, especially if you played years before that, like myself. I wasn’t too excited about it, but as the years have gone by, the old ways have passed us by. So, you adapt to what’s going on.”

But the effect of zone defenses, since they became legal in the 2001-2 season, has been noticeable only to the trained eye. The concept of guarding areas instead of players is used fleetingly. It is largely viewed as a gimmick to be avoided in a league in which nearly everyone agrees that each player should be held accountable for guarding his own man.

To the originators of the change, however, the game is more aesthetically pleasing than before it took effect, when coaches were taking advantage of complex illegal-defense rules that encouraged a stagnant game.

“The game had become heavily reliant on one-on-one and two-on-two basketball,” said Stu Jackson, the league’s executive vice president for basketball operations. “The game was not being played the way most experts felt it should be played and that a more free-flowing, up-tempo type of game should be showcased.”

Dismayed by the slowed game and sluggish scoring, the N.B.A.’s competition committee convened in Phoenix, looking to pick up the pace. Owners endorsed changes that trimmed the time allotted to move the ball to the frontcourt to 8 seconds from 10 and eliminated the illegal-defense rules.

“No one knew what illegal defense was,” said Jerry Colangelo, a former owner of the Suns who was the chairman of the committee. “It was kind of left to the eye of the beholder.”

Zone defense, widely used in high school and college basketball, was also introduced with a significant caveat. The committee instituted a three-second rule for defenders in order to prevent teams from parking taller players in the post. The goal was to free the lanes and encourage cuts and drives through the paint.

With those changes, among other factors, offenses have opened up, and scoring has climbed. Teams are averaging 99.7 points a game this season, up from 94.8 in 2000-1, the season before the new rules were introduced. Still, the zone defense has not been embraced in the N.B.A. It is mildly effective in spurts, but often dismissed.

“When you see it in the league, they do it because they can’t guard somebody,” Quentin Richardson of the Knicks said. “If they’re having a hard time stopping this person or that person or a team in general, and they can’t do anything, teams play zone.”

The laundry list of the zone’s shortcomings in the N.B.A. is relatively deep. Long-range shooters are truer in the N.B.A. than at any other level, and open shots are more easily found in the holes of zone defenses. N.B.A. players are better passers, so it is easier for them to whip the ball around the court to find the open man. Teams can grab offensive rebounds more effectively against a zone because opposing players have no set assignments on block-outs.

Then there’s the stigma.

Asked how much zone defense the Cavaliers used, Cleveland Coach Mike Brown said none.

“It almost says, Hey, we can’t guard these guys,” Brown said. “To a certain degree, psychologically, it makes you feel like you’re conceding, and it could be a downer if it doesn’t work.”

Beyond that, some say that N.B.A. coaches are hesitant to install a zone defense simply because they do not have a longstanding history with it or an encompassing knowledge of its intricacies.

“You still have a lot of coaches, general managers and assistant coaches that are old-school former players,” Lakers guard Derek Fisher said. “And the league is based on solid man-to-man principles. That’s how they were taught the game. That’s how they grew up playing the game. And it’s difficult trying to teach something that you don’t necessarily have a great feel for yourself.”

Earlier this season, the Denver Nuggets looked to add wrinkles to their defense, and briefly experimented with zone defenses.

“We practiced one for one week, and it was awful,” Nuggets Coach George Karl said.

The Nets, the Golden State Warriors and the Dallas Mavericks are among the teams incorporating zone defenses to throw offenses off their rhythm or to guard an inbounds pass.

“You spend time teaching your zone and cleaning up your zone,” Nets Coach Lawrence Frank said. “But unless you’re totally committed to zone, you’re not going to spend nearly as much time on zone as you do your man defense. There’s not enough time in the N.B.A. workweek.”

When a team switches to a zone, its opponent can become somewhat flustered. Most N.B.A. teams continue using the offense they would have used against a man-to-man defense.

The reason? If teams do not have enough time to practice a zone defense, they surely do not have time to introduce offenses to attack it.

“When teams do zone, offensively, we’re not ready for it,” Atlanta Hawks Coach Mike Woodson said. “That’s the crazy part behind it. Because you don’t see zone that much, when you do see it, you’re caught off guard.”

Karl said: “My zone offense is to put three guys on the court who can make 3s and have them make a couple.”

But for Jackson, the N.B.A. executive vice president, how much teams use the zone is irrelevant. The goal was to open the floor and encourage a more balanced game.

“Our game today is more five-man orientated,” Jackson said. “The game looks better. There’s not as much standing around.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/28/sports/basketball/28zone.html?_r=0

Hilarious that from '96-'00 Kobe had one 40 point game (he was a 3 time all star and 2nd option on a championship squad in that time) and he was worried that the rules would hinder his game. Flash forward to 2006 and :oldlol:

[sdot_thadon]

So in other words you keep typing paragraphs to say absolutely nothing. 'Partial Zones', 'Shading', etc whatever you want to call it (times were it was known as 'help defense' :oldlol: ), that has existed for many decades. It's not some new never before seen defense that was invented by Tom Thibodeau in 2010. I showed you specific examples of that, you cried cherry pick and complained that the Knicks were the one time-travelling team from the future who went back in time to play that way. :oldlol:

Fact is- there isn't a single defensive scheme or tactic around now that wasn't used in the past. Call it whatever you want, nitpick as much as your heart desires. But the flip side is true- there are plenty of schemes (particularly full court pressure/zones) and tactics (hand checking/camping in the paint) that players now never see. The NBA explicitly changed the rules to make it easier for perimeter players to score. They weren't trying to hide their intentions. And it worked out exactly the way they planned.
It'd be much better if you just said I don't wanna talk about it bro and did just that.

[DonDadda59]

It'd be much better if you just said I don't wanna talk about it bro and did just that.

Come back when you actually have something to say, bruh.

[Im Still Ballin]

[3ball]

:biggums:

[3ball]

[QUOTE=Im Still Ballin]

[3ball]

By 2006 when they got rid of handchecking, perimeter players were scoring at levels never before seen league wide.


Zone defense, widely used in high school and college basketball, was also introduced with a significant caveat. The committee instituted a three-second rule for defenders in order to prevent teams from parking taller players in the post. The goal was to free the lanes and encourage cuts and drives through the paint.

With those changes, among other factors, offenses have opened up, and scoring has climbed. Teams are averaging 99.7 points a game this season, up from 94.8 in 2000-1, the season before the new rules were introduced. Still, the zone defense has not been embraced in the N.B.A. It is mildly effective in spurts, but often dismissed.

“When you see it in the league, they do it because they can’t guard somebody,” Quentin Richardson of the Knicks said. “If they’re having a hard time stopping this person or that person or a team in general, and they can’t do anything, teams play zone.”

Asked how much zone defense the Cavaliers used, Cleveland Coach Mike Brown said none.

Hilarious that from '96-'00 Kobe had one 40 point game (he was a 3 time all star and 2nd option on a championship squad in that time) and he was worried that the rules would hinder his game. Flash forward to 2006 and :oldlol:


Exactly.. When the league was considering allowing zone in 2001, some NBA players were initially disappointed..

But when the NBA instituted new rule changes in 2005, those same players along with every other player and coach felt the hand-check and physicality bans were far more impactful than zones and had turned defenses soft:

MJ said he'd score 100 points (http://uproxx.com/dimemag/2010/10/michael-jordan-if-i-played-today-i-could-have-scored-100-points/).. Kobe said the defenses were embarrassingly soft (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMacMfZYEr4).. McGrady said today's players were boys (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1675502-tracy-mcgrady-lebron-james-plays-against-boys-michael-jordan-played-vs-men) compared to the 90's... and on and on and on.. There are endless quotes (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=183958) of how soft the hand-check and physicality ban had made NBA defenses.

Ironically, off-ball players actually benefit THE MOST from spacing, less physicality and enhanced ball movement.. Meanwhile ball-dominators benefit from wider driving lanes and easier penetration from the hand-check ban.. So the only question is which part of Jordan's game would go MORE bananas in today's game - his off-ball game that had the fastest isolation pace ever (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=371913), or his GOAT ball-dominator game (http://www.complex.com/sports/2014/01/michael-jordan-point-guard-in-1989-posted-triple-double-10-of-11-games)?

He's the only guy ever that was elite at everything - the guy could morph into Stephan Curry in the 1992 Finals if needed, or score 55 in the playoffs on all JJ Redick catch-and-shoot (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U06ly1eN4tI) - whatever the defense gave him, he'd use elite ability (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11021030&postcount=6) to exploit.
.

[Im Still Ballin]

Now why would the game be more 5 man orientated now compared to the 90's?

Take a hard long think about it gentlemen

[DonDadda59]

[QUOTE=Im Still Ballin]

[Im Still Ballin]

Stu Jackson said it brother

No discussion required

It's STU JACKSON!!!!!!

[Dro]

Jordan spoke passionately. If teams were able to play zone defenses, he said, he never would have had the career he did.

In 2001.........Two thousand fuking one.......Before the hand check rules....Or are you going to continue to ignore this basic fact because it ruins your argument? In fact, there has been all kinds of shit posted that ruins your argument. You're just stubborn or you just hate MJ that much.....Its not healthy.....

[3ball]

The NBA said it brother

No discussion required

It's the NBA!!!!!!


Here's the NBA officially stating how the rule changes had accomplished their objective of increasing dribble-penetration.. This is from the source - the NBA was the creator and implementor of the rules, so it's not subjective opinion, just like Warren Buffet's vision for Berkshire Hathaway isn't subjective opinion.. The NBA changed the rules to make penetration easier, and it worked - it's a fact:

http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/04/09/stujackson/index.html


NBA.COM: Since the hand-checking rule was interpreted differently beginning in the 2004-05 season, the game has opened up. Players are penetrating and the floor is spread. As a result, scoring has risen every season. Was this anticipated back in 2004?

STU JACKSON: Our objective was to allow for more offensive freedom by not allowing defenders to hand-, forearm- or body-check ball handlers. By doing so, we encouraged more dribble penetration. As players penetrated more, it produced higher quality shots for the ball handler as well as shots for teammates on passes back out to perimeter. When NBA players get higher quality shots -- having more time to shoot -- they tend to make more of them.


NBA.COM: Shooting percentages have risen since 2004-05 regardless of location -- at-the-rim shots, short- and deep-mid range and 3-pointers. Does this surprise you, especially the higher percentages from 3-point range?

STU JACKSON: It doesn't. With the rule and interpretation changes, it has become more difficult for defenders to defend penetration, cover the entire floor on defensive rotations and recover to shooters. With more dribble penetration, ball handlers are getting more opportunities at the rim.


NBA.COM: From an Xs and Os perspective, how have coaches adjusted to a more wide-open game? What have they done differently?

STU JACKSON: Coaches have utilized more space on the floor so to create more room for dribble penetration, two-man pick-and-roll basketball and dribble exchanges on the perimeter.


NBA.COM: When you watch the game today, does it closely resemble an international game or are there still distinct differences in the style of play?

STU JACKSON: Our game does more closely resemble an international game in terms of the style of play than it used to. However, there are distinct differences in the international game vs. the NBA game. The international game utilizes a pure zone defense (as opposed to the defensive three-second rule), which allows frontcourt players to stand in the middle of the lane and discourage cutting, passing and dribble penetration.

[Im Still Ballin]

Stu Jackson, baby

Cookin' up a Stu!

[Im Still Ballin]

It's a TEAM game now baby!

Stu confirmed it!

No more ultra scrubs putting up 30 a game like Adrian Dantley or Kiki Vandershitscrub!

[3ball]

Stu Jackson, baby

Cookin' up a Stu!


The NBA would never let him say that if it wasn't true.. He was officially representing the NBA in those statements.





Al Jeffereson would be a 2nd tier bigmen in 1996 - no better than the 12th-best:

Hakeem
Shaq
Robinson
Ewing
Alonzo
Sabonis (25 PER - unbelievable all-round talent)
Karl Malone
Barkley
Webber
Kemp

And he'd probably be behind Rik Smits, Vin Baker, Dino Radja, and certainly Derrick Coleman.


Not only is penetration easier today, but post scoring is too.. The post efficiencies of today's bigs lets us know how the superior bigs of previous eras would do today - Al Jefferson and others would be considered a 2nd tier bigs in previous eras, yet they are league-leaders in post efficiency today (http://stats.nba.com/playtype/#!/post-up/?dir=1&sort=PPP&CF=Poss*GE*200), and they're all at the universally-recognized standard for elite efficiency of 1.00 PPP.

This elite post efficiency from 2nd tier bigs flat-out proves today's defensive environment hasn't diminished post efficiencies... The only reason coaches don't use post-ups as much as before is because floor-spacing and the hand-check ban increased efficiencies on ball movement and dribble penetration, allowing these methods to SURPASS post-ups.. But Al Jefferson scoring 1.00 PPP on the post proves that post efficiencies THEMSELVES haven't diminished at all.

Also, if we are keeping it real, simple logic tells us that today's spacing and defensive 3 seconds rule force defenders to help from further distances on post players.. So even without the Al Jefferson proof, it makes sense that post PPP is higher today than it used to be.. After all, everything else (http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/04/09/stujackson/index.html) is.

[DonDadda59]

Stu Jackson, baby

Cookin' up a Stu!

This is you right now:

http://i380.photobucket.com/albums/oo248/scaredmomma3/WhiteFlag.gif

Game Over.

[Im Still Ballin]

Point guards dropping 25/10 and STILL not being an all-star in the 80's!

WOW!

[Hey Yo]

Here's the NBA officially stating how the rule changes had accomplished their objective of increasing dribble-penetration.. This is from the source - the NBA was the creator and implementor of the rules, so it's not subjective opinion, just like Warren Buffet's vision for Berkshire Hathaway isn't subjective opinion.. The NBA changed the rules to make penetration easier, and it worked - it's a fact:

http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/04/09/stujackson/index.html


NBA.COM: Since the hand-checking rule was interpreted differently beginning in the 2004-05 season, the game has opened up. Players are penetrating and the floor is spread. As a result, scoring has risen every season. Was this anticipated back in 2004?

STU JACKSON: Our objective was to allow for more offensive freedom by not allowing defenders to hand-, forearm- or body-check ball handlers. By doing so, we encouraged more dribble penetration. As players penetrated more, it produced higher quality shots for the ball handler as well as shots for teammates on passes back out to perimeter. When NBA players get higher quality shots -- having more time to shoot -- they tend to make more of them.


NBA.COM: Shooting percentages have risen since 2004-05 regardless of location -- at-the-rim shots, short- and deep-mid range and 3-pointers. Does this surprise you, especially the higher percentages from 3-point range?

STU JACKSON: It doesn't. With the rule and interpretation changes, it has become more difficult for defenders to defend penetration, cover the entire floor on defensive rotations and recover to shooters. With more dribble penetration, ball handlers are getting more opportunities at the rim.


NBA.COM: From an Xs and Os perspective, how have coaches adjusted to a more wide-open game? What have they done differently?

STU JACKSON: Coaches have utilized more space on the floor so to create more room for dribble penetration, two-man pick-and-roll basketball and dribble exchanges on the perimeter.


NBA.COM: When you watch the game today, does it closely resemble an international game or are there still distinct differences in the style of play?

STU JACKSON: Our game does more closely resemble an international game in terms of the style of play than it used to. However, there are distinct differences in the international game vs. the NBA game. The international game utilizes a pure zone defense (as opposed to the defensive three-second rule), which allows frontcourt players to stand in the middle of the lane and discourage cutting, passing and dribble penetration.
Jordan spoke passionately. If teams were able to play zone defenses, he said, he never would have had the career he did.

[ralph_i_el]

I haven't read any of this thread.

I bet that "Stu Jackson" has been mentioned >10 times. Somebody on this forum cares about Stu Jackson more than the mans own family.

[Dro]

Jordan spoke passionately. If teams were able to play zone defenses, he said, he never would have had the career he did.
I'm convinced you and I'm still balling are the same dude because you either are both dumb as ***, or can't read, or can't add, or are stubborn, or haters, or probably all the above..And I really try not to insult posters on this forum...But its very obvious you 2 have run out of arguments and you have nothing else to add.. I don't understand why you guys even continue to post in this thread or any threads related to this topic......

Look at the date of your article - April 2001 - MJ had no idea the new zone rules would LATER be accompanied by the hand-check ban in 2005, because when he found out about the hand-check and physicality ban, this is what he had to say (from 2010):

“It’s less physical and the rules have changed, obviously,” said Jordan. “Based on these rules, if I had to play with my style of play, I’m pretty sure I would have fouled out or I would have been at the free throw line pretty often and I could have scored 100 points.”

And in case you didn't know, 2010 is 9 years after 2001.

[pauk]

"No team played zone on more than 10 percent of defensive possessions last season, per Synergy Sports. Dallas became known as the zone team in 2010-11, but they played a hybrid man zone more than a straight zone, and they did that on a small minority of possessions.

The league overall actually scored more efficiently against zone than man last season, according to Synergy."

Grantland, 2012

Ofcourse? Randomly playing zone, against all players / teams makes no sense, then it isnt a zone.... the whole point of zone is to stop that one guy... and there are very few of those.... thats when it is initiated.... when the Lebrons play.... and that 10% now makes perfect sense, but for the Lebrons its 60-100%....

What "synergy" needs to do is find out how those superstar scorers produce zone vs man.... unfortunately that test wont turn out in your favor i can promise you that, because logically no guy scores better against 5 guys rather than 1....

This doesnt take away from Jordan, he was a great player, he would do great against any defense, but even he will tell you everyday that he would do much better without the zone.....

This is not about Jordan or Lebron/Kobe, era vs era...... this is strictly about Zone im talking about.... its bad, harder to score inside... any superstar scorer (especially the perimeter ones) will tell you the same....

[DonDadda59]

Ofcourse? Randomly playing zone, against all players / teams makes no sense, then it isnt a zone.... the whole point of zone is to stop that one guy... and there are very few of those.... thats when it is initiated.... when the Lebrons play.... and that 10% then makes perfect sense, but for the Lebrons its 60-100%....

Holy shit, in a sea of misinformed posters you may have just won Belle of the Ball :wtf:

First the point of playing zone or 'zone' isn't to stop one player. It's a way for a coach to hide weak defenders by taking them off specific players. Depending on the set, it can help prevent drives to the basket, trap the ball in specific areas (including the backcourt on presses).

And where are you getting that LeBron sees 60-100% zone? :oldlol:

That's just a ridiculous number you pulled out of your ass.

[ILLsmak]

Answer this basic question or your thread is a fail. If zone is so effective, why don't teams play it more than 10% of the time? Simple question...

I Think this era of ball is shat, but I can, without watching the video, make a comment.

It's easier not because they play full zone but because the d cant be moved like it used to. You can't force an iso, esp in post.

If im guarding reggie evans and you bring him to the weak side, I dont have to follow him. That's enough to drastically change the game.

And without touch fouls I bet scoring would be v low.

-Smak

[Im Still Ballin]

Zone stats are stupid

What's a zone. Define it. Now does man to man defense, with one or two players sagging off effectively covering floor to stop a superstar from getting to the hoop count as zone according to the stats?

**** no

[DonDadda59]

Zone stats are stupid

What's a zone. Define it. Now does man to man defense, with one or two players sagging off effectively covering floor to stop a superstar from getting to the hoop count as zone according to the stats?

**** no

It's known as 'help defense'. It's an industry term.

[Im Still Ballin]

It's known as 'help defense'. It's an industry term.
And are we stupid to think that help defense is the same as it was 20 years ago?

[DonDadda59]

And are we stupid to think that help defense is the same as it was 20 years ago?

Post some examples of the sort of help defense that exists now that didn't exist 20 years ago. I'll wait.

[Asukal]

Ofcourse? Randomly playing zone, against all players / teams makes no sense, then it isnt a zone.... the whole point of zone is to stop that one guy... and there are very few of those.... thats when it is initiated.... when the Lebrons play.... and that 10% now makes perfect sense, but for the Lebrons its 60-100%....

What "synergy" needs to do is find out how those superstar scorers produce zone vs man.... unfortunately that test wont turn out in your favor i can promise you that, because logically no guy scores better against 5 guys rather than 1....

This doesnt take away from Jordan, he was a great player, he would do great against any defense, but even he will tell you everyday that he would do much better without the zone.....

This is not about Jordan or Lebron/Kobe, era vs era...... this is strictly about Zone im talking about.... its bad, harder to score inside... any superstar scorer (especially the perimeter ones) will tell you the same....

^After this I have zero doubts in my mind that pauk is a pretentious idiot. :facepalm
If you are not going to post that Jordan flop video don't bother posting at all clown. :whatever:

[Asukal]

And are we stupid to think that help defense is the same as it was 20 years ago?

You are stupid to think bran is better than MJ. :roll:

[Im Still Ballin]

I don't have to don

The rulebooks SAYS so

yes they might miss some illegal defense calls but it was a rule and players abide by it

[DonDadda59]

I don't have to don

AKA your hoe card was pulled yet again and as always you bitched out.


The rulebooks SAYS so

yes they might miss some illegal defense calls but it was a rule and players abide by it

A History lesson for you...


It takes about 1,000 words to define the NBA's meticulously crafted version of an illegal defense.

The authors of this less-than-historical document had reason for their long-windedness, writing with more than the integrity of the game on their minds.

``The owners told us to come up with something or they would,'' said Dallas Mavericks coach Dick Motta, one of the founding fathers of the illegal-defense rules.

...
So a committee that included Motta, Phoenix Suns coach Cotton Fitzsimmons and then-Milwaukee Bucks coach Don Nelson came up with the current illegal-defense rules.

Dick Motta is a central figure in the History of NBA rule changes, specifically pertaining to defense. He was one of the people who actually came up with the illegal defense rules and he was also on the committee in 2001 that abolished them. Here's what he said in 1996 about how effective the rules he literally created were in stopping the proliferation of zone defense in the NBA.


What particularly bothers Motta is that many teams try to get away with zone defenses now, content to only be penalized by a technical foul. "Our teams are zoning now. Rule or no rule. We're not allowed to use the word `zone' but it's a zone," Motta said.

-THE NBA HAS THIS RULE ABOUT ILLEGAL DEFENSE, BUT WHO CAN EXPLAIN IT, AND WILL IT EVER GO AWAY? A TWILIGHT ZONE (LA Daily News April 14, 1996 Scott Wolf)

But what the f*ck does he know right? Random nigguhs like you and Pauk know more than him.

Take a bow. :applause:

[3ball]

You can't force an iso, especially in post.

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/911d3cac30b219754c53b4b156428f49.gif


The GIF above shows that you're mistaken - this play could be run on every single possession in today's game.. However, the NBA changed the rules to enhance ball movement and dribble penetration, so these options are normally preferrable to post play.. But all we have to do is look at the post-up efficiencies of today's weaker bigs to estimate how the superior bigs of previous eras would do.

Al Jefferson and others currently lead the NBA (http://stats.nba.com/playtype/#!/post-up/?dir=1&sort=PPP&CF=Poss*GE*200) in points per possession (PPP) on the post, and they're all at the universally-recognized standard for elite efficiency of 1.00 PPP.

But if this were 1996, Jefferson would be no higher than 11th, behind Hakeem, Shaq, Robinson, Ewing, Alonzo, Sabonis, Karl Malone, Barkley, Webber, and Kemp.. The elite post efficiency from today's 2nd tier bigs flat-out proves today's defensive environment hasn't diminished post efficiencies.





If im guarding reggie evans and you bring him to the weak side, I dont have to follow him. That's enough to drastically change the game.


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/573113292e852dcb8f5fe242c53e3982.gif


You are forgetting that floods aren't applicable to no-spacing environments - floods naturally occur in no-spacing environments because defenders are already in such close proximity.. Does it LOOK like a strong-side flood is needed in the GIF above?.. That would be like telling a girl with double FF's that she needs an enhancement.

Btw, why hang your hat on floods anyway?.. Strong-side floods leave the weakside a man down, so someone is always open.. Paint-camping is much better - infact, floods are only necessary because paint-camping was banned.. This is a fact - so it's not rational to brag about floods.. Previous eras can hang their hat on factors far more impactful and significant than floods, including no spacing, hand-checking, physicality, and legal paint-camping.
.

[sdot_thadon]

Come back when you actually have something to say, bruh.
I already explained what my message was man, if you want to keep up this little kid shit go ahead, you say shading a player on the floor is help defense right? You keep harping on how the rules are different and pasting paragraphs dipshit, obviously there's a correlation to how help defense can be initiated. Whether or not guys did it as a rule breaking strategy that they could get away with at times is not my concern. The thing is its freely available without having to "cheat" in order to execute it in the modern day, so it's not a let's see if we can get away with it deal.

Last time I say this, as bulls fan if you can't understand the importance of being able use elements of zone in coverage then you're either:

A. An idiot
Or
B. Being a b*tch for no good reason on the net.

Either way it's not a good look.

[3ball]

the importance of being able use elements of zone


Shading and flooding gives up paint and rim protection.

Also, people mistakenly think it's a problem for guards to face multiple defenders on the perimeter.. By definition, that's exactly what a ballhandler's strength and advantage is.. Ballhandlers love taking on defenders on the perimeter - it's much more preferable than facing defenders and resistance in the paint.

From the big's perspective, shading forces bigs to give up their advantage of contesting smaller players at the rim (previous era paint-camping), for a disadvantage of contesting guards on the perimeter (today's flooding/shading).

Also, you are forgetting that floods aren't applicable to no-spacing environments that allow paint-camping - floods naturally occur in no-spacing environments because defenders are already in such close proximity.. Does it LOOK like a strong-side flood is needed in this GIF (http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/573113292e852dcb8f5fe242c53e3982.gif)?.. That would be like telling a girl with double FF's that she needs an enhancement.





the importance of being able use elements of zone


And why have your entire argument rest on floods anyway?.. Strong-side floods leave the weakside a man down so someone is always open, and the compensating rotations open up room for error.. Also, by forcing defenders to defend outside the paint, flooding/shading give up rim and paint protection.. Contrastingly, paint-camping allows everyone to stay at home and defends the paint much better - paint-camping has been long-proven as the most equitable and least exploitable way to defend the floor, especially the paint..

Infact, floods are only necessary because paint-camping was banned.. This is a fact - so it's not rational to brag about floods and hang your entire argument on them.. Previous eras can hang their hat on factors far more impactful and significant than floods, including no spacing, hand-checking, physicality, legal paint-camping, and more difficult penetration (http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/04/09/stujackson/index.html).

[sdot_thadon]

Shading and flooding gives up paint and rim protection.

Also, people mistakenly think it's a problem for guards to face multiple defenders on the perimeter.. By definition, that's exactly what a ballhandler's strength and advantage is.. Ballhandlers love taking on defenders on the perimeter - it's much more preferable than facing defenders and resistance in the paint.

From the big's perspective, shading forces bigs to give up their advantage of contesting smaller players at the rim (previous era paint-camping), for a disadvantage of contesting guards on the perimeter (today's flooding/shading).

Also, you are forgetting that floods aren't applicable to no-spacing environments that allow paint-camping - floods naturally occur in no-spacing environments because defenders are already in such close proximity.. Does it LOOK like a strong-side flood is needed in this GIF (http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/573113292e852dcb8f5fe242c53e3982.gif)?.. That would be like telling a girl with double FF's that she needs an enhancement.



And why have your entire argument rest on floods anyway?.. Strong-side floods leave the weakside a man down so someone is always open, and the compensating rotations open up room for error.. Also, by forcing defenders to defend outside the paint, flooding/shading give up rim and paint protection.. Contrastingly, paint-camping allows everyone to stay at home and defends the paint much better - paint-camping has been long-proven as the most equitable and least exploitable way to defend the floor, especially the paint..

Infact, floods are only necessary because paint-camping was banned.. This is a fact - so it's not rational to brag about floods and hang your entire argument on them.. Previous eras can hang their hat on factors far more impactful and significant than floods, including no spacing, hand-checking, physicality, legal paint-camping, and more difficult penetration (http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/04/09/stujackson/index.html).
I agree that if you flood you have to give something up, there's a way to beat each defense it's been that way forever. My "argument" doesn't rest on floods at all, I asked a question that a fool couldn't answer straight so he resorted to acting like a child. It's mind numbing that you guys can't admit the smallest inconsistency in your arguments. The most obvious downfall to facing floods/shading is guys being forced into jumpshots in spots on the floor they don't want them in. That's really the goal most times isn't it? I'm not the one with the agenda here though, that much is obvious. I do recognize the difference in the eras but it just means exactly that. They are different, can't really say one is more difficult than the other because they face different obstacles.

[chips93]

"No team played zone on more than 10 percent of defensive possessions last season, per Synergy Sports. Dallas became known as the zone team in 2010-11, but they played a hybrid man zone more than a straight zone, and they did that on a small minority of possessions.

The league overall actually scored more efficiently against zone than man last season, according to Synergy."

Grantland, 2012

95% of defense today would be considered zone defense based on the old rules.

the definition of zone defense today, the one that synergy uses, is different to the definition of zone from the old rules.

if you are playing a 2-3 today, im not surprised that you would get lit up, but thats not the point.


It's known as 'help defense'. It's an industry term.

today thats help defense, 15 years ago it was illegal zone defense


Post some examples of the sort of help defense that exists now that didn't exist 20 years ago. I'll wait.

the video in the op is full of examples.

[sdot_thadon]

95% of defense today would be considered zone defense based on the old rules.

the definition of zone defense today, the one that synergy uses, is different to the definition of zone from the old rules.

if you are playing a 2-3 today, im not surprised that you would get lit up, but thats not the point.
Exactly

[DonDadda59]

I already explained what my message was man, if you want to keep up this little kid shit go ahead, you say shading a player on the floor is help defense right? You keep harping on how the rules are different and pasting paragraphs dipshit, obviously there's a correlation to how help defense can be initiated. Whether or not guys did it as a rule breaking strategy that they could get away with at times is not my concern. The thing is its freely available without having to "cheat" in order to execute it in the modern day, so it's not a let's see if we can get away with it deal.

Last time I say this, as bulls fan if you can't understand the importance of being able use elements of zone in coverage then you're either:

A. An idiot
Or
B. Being a b*tch for no good reason on the net.

Either way it's not a good look.

Again you type paragraphs about absolutely nothing. When you're off you're period and you want to discuss basketball, let me know.


95% of defense today would be considered zone defense based on the old rules.

Uh, no... no it wouldn't/


the definition of zone defense today, the one that synergy uses, is different to the definition of zone from the old rules.

Yeah... no. People just don't know the difference between an actual zone and man defense with help.


today thats help defense, 15 years ago it was illegal zone defense

the video in the op is full of examples.

I posted a ton of examples from whole games of teams playing actual zone, 'shading' with help, etc from the early 90s and even late 80s without any violations being called. Everything in the video and then some. People caught feelings and accused me of 'cherry picking' :lol

[Blue&Orange]

Ofcourse? Randomly playing zone, against all players / teams makes no sense, then it isnt a zone.... the whole point of zone is to stop that one guy... and there are very few of those.... thats when it is initiated.... when the Lebrons play.... and that 10% now makes perfect sense, but for the Lebrons its 60-100%....

What "synergy" needs to do is find out how those superstar scorers produce zone vs man.... unfortunately that test wont turn out in your favor i can promise you that, because logically no guy scores better against 5 guys rather than 1....

This doesnt take away from Jordan, he was a great player, he would do great against any defense, but even he will tell you everyday that he would do much better without the zone.....

This is not about Jordan or Lebron/Kobe, era vs era...... this is strictly about Zone im talking about.... its bad, harder to score inside... any superstar scorer (especially the perimeter ones) will tell you the same....
what a delusional facking idiot this bald f@g is. I wish you stop making my head hurt with your effeminated dumb opinions.