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

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon]

not representative of that eras defense as a whole.

[/QUOTE]
you know what's representative of that era as a whole?

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

and according to the NBA, [url=http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/04/09/stujackson/index.html][u]more difficult penetration[/u][/url].

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

[B]2b.[/B] [I]"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 [B]with no time limitations[/B]. 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."[/I]

[QUOTE=3ball]you know what's representative of that era as a whole?

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

and according to the NBA, [url=http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/04/09/stujackson/index.html][u]more difficult penetration[/u][/url].

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

[B]2b.[/B] [I]"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 [B]with no time limitations[/B]. 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."[/I][/QUOTE]
Yeah I agree that much is true, but that only means this era is different for certain.....

.
[COLOR="White"]...............[/COLOR][B]THINGS THAT MAKE DEFENSES STRONGER:[/B]


[COLOR="White"]........................[/COLOR] [U]Previous Eras[/U][COLOR="White"]...[/COLOR] [U]Today's Era[/U]

No Spacing[COLOR="White"].................[/COLOR][x][COLOR="White"]................[/COLOR][ ]

Hand-Checking[COLOR="White"]............[/COLOR][x][COLOR="White"]................[/COLOR][ ]

Paint-Camping[COLOR="White"].............[/COLOR][x][COLOR="White"]................[/COLOR][ ]

Physicality[COLOR="White"]..................[/COLOR][x][COLOR="White"]................[/COLOR][ ]



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.

[QUOTE=Hey Yo]

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 - [B]([SIZE="4"]flooding and shading[/SIZE])[/B]

[/quote]
[IMG]http://s29.postimg.org/y32v1xeqv/overload.jpg[/IMG]


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.


[QUOTE=JohnMax]

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

[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2015/0107/Klay-New-03.gif[/IMG]


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 [I]advantage[/I] of taking on smaller defenders AT the rim (previous eras paint-camping), for a [I]disadvantage[/I] 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 [url=http://stats.nba.com/tracking/#!/team/drives/?sort=DTP&dir=1][u]the NBA's own stats[/u][/url] show teams score via dribble-penetration more than any other scoring method..

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon]

partial zones

[/QUOTE]
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..

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

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon]:coleman: for one I watched that era[/QUOTE]

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

[QUOTE]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.[/QUOTE]

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:

[QUOTE=3ball].
[COLOR="White"]...............[/COLOR][B]THINGS THAT MAKE DEFENSES STRONGER:[/B]


[COLOR="White"]........................[/COLOR] [U]Previous Eras[/U][COLOR="White"]...[/COLOR] [U]Today's Era[/U]

No Spacing[COLOR="White"].................[/COLOR][x][COLOR="White"]................[/COLOR][ ]

Hand-Checking[COLOR="White"]............[/COLOR][x][COLOR="White"]................[/COLOR][ ]

Paint-Camping[COLOR="White"].............[/COLOR][x][COLOR="White"]................[/COLOR][ ]

Physicality[COLOR="White"]..................[/COLOR][x][COLOR="White"]................[/COLOR][ ]



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.[/QUOTE]
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.

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?

[QUOTE=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?[/QUOTE]
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.

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon]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.[/QUOTE]
Do the ref called it often though? Or is it like carrying where they very seldom calls it.

[QUOTE=iamgine]Is it true though that in the past....lets say player X is on the left 3pt line, [B]the opponent don't wanna double team[/B]. 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?[/QUOTE]

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

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

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

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

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.

[QUOTE]Do the ref called it often though? [B]Or is it like carrying where they very seldom calls it.[/B][/QUOTE]

That.

[QUOTE=DonDadda59]If the opponent didn't want to double a guy, I assume everyone would just play their man, no? :confusedshrug:
[/QUOTE]
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.

[QUOTE=iamgine]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.[/QUOTE]

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):

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

^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

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

^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.

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

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

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

^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.

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.

some misinformation itt..