How has allowing the Zone defense helped the overall NBA game? The NBA said it would help with scoring,but in my mind it has done the opposite..not only has it helped hinder scoring in general but it has made the product on the court harder to watch at times. In an age of decreased fundamentals the last thing the league needed was something like the zone defense. The thing that I never understood is that the Zone would increase scoring and make the play more exciting,but in my opinion it has done absolutely the opposite and bogged down the game. The perfect example is Tracy McGrady early in the season,teams would run the Zone and Tracy would just hit a wall and really didn't know what to do. And not knowing what to do when confronted with the Zone goes back to the lack of fundamentals and learning. What does everyone here think? On an overall basis how is the Zone for the League? Is it good or bad?
Definitely good, it's made the games more difficult. Defense stronger, makes tougher games, which in turn brings about more entertainment. I know someone as knowledgeable of basketball as yourself, know that defense makes the game as well unlike some people who concentrate on the flair, finesse and offense. Any forms which make the game more difficult is good in my book. Zone just seems really effective in my opinion. Imagine a raw scorer being mauled by two great defenders, simply classic.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Magic Johnson:</div><div class="quote_post">Definitely good, it's made the games more difficult. Defense stronger, makes tougher games, which in turn brings about more entertainment. I know someone as knowledgeable of basketball as yourself, know that defense makes the game as well unlike some people who concentrate on the flair, finesse and offense. Any forms which make the game more difficult is good in my book. Zone just seems really effective in my opinion. Imagine a raw scorer being mauled by two great defenders, simply classic.</div> Thats exactly what the NBA was hopin' to avoid(supposedly)they want more scoring and more excitement..more driving thru the lane for dunks and all that jazz. Why would they keep the zone defense when it is having the opposite effect? Implimenting the zone defense is akin to Major League Baseball extening the outfield walls about 50 feet.
I like the allowance of zone defense...it's kinda of strange to me why you HAVE to play a certain type of defense (ie man to man).
Some could argue that zone defense makes a game more exciting. I like it because the drives to the basket are more tricky, the players really have to be skilled to do this stuff. When a team can just score every time they have the ball, that tends to take the excitement right out of it. Steals and turnovers really make it more exciting, at least for me. I think it's more like extending the outfield walls 20 feet. Maybe A-Rod doesn't get 50 homers, but the ones he gets are that much more exciting.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Big Nasty:</div><div class="quote_post">Thats exactly what the NBA was hopin' to avoid(supposedly)they want more scoring and more excitement..more driving thru the lane for dunks and all that jazz. Why would they keep the zone defense when it is having the opposite effect? Implimenting the zone defense is akin to Major League Baseball extening the outfield walls about 50 feet.</div> I think it gives great variety BN, more choices to do, it can provide great entertainment too. Like I said, an established shooter against the likes of two or even more great defenders, some people even become more open.
Zone could be very helpful, but once when they guard the person up-post, the guards wil be waiting for the three's. Man-to-man is really like a single-handed defense every man is on their own unlike zone where they help each other.
The purpose of the zone was not to encourage scoring at all. Why would anyone think that giving the defense MORE options would make for more scoring? While I am uncertain of the real reason behind the rule's institution I love how it makes isolation sets and one on one basketball a much more difficult route- as it should be.
Zone works well on half court offense teams. Teams that like to go inside will have to settle with outside jump shots. A great choice to make vs. teams like The Cavs, The Raptors, The Bulls. Teams with weak perimiter offense. The only off side of the Zone is it gives up offensive rebounds easily because of the spreaded players in one spot. But if you drive to the hoop in the Zone, you will definatly get alot of hands all over you. And probably cause a turnover.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Rocko220:</div><div class="quote_post">The purpose of the zone was not to encourage scoring at all. Why would anyone think that giving the defense MORE options would make for more scoring? While I am uncertain of the real reason behind the rule's institution I love how it makes isolation sets and one on one basketball a much more difficult route- as it should be.</div> well that was the NBA's reason for institutin' the zone.
Quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally Posted by Rocko220 The purpose of the zone was not to encourage scoring at all. Why would anyone think that giving the defense MORE options would make for more scoring? While I am uncertain of the real reason behind the rule's institution I love how it makes isolation sets and one on one basketball a much more difficult route- as it should be. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Big Nasty:</div><div class="quote_post">well that was the NBA's reason for institutin' the zone.</div> I was'nt sure why the NBA allowed the zone now. Thanks for clearing things up.
article on zone defenses There was a really good on article on the NBA site but I can't find it now..but here is another.. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Big Nasty:</div><div class="quote_post">Zone defenses may add scoring Players and coaches aren't sure how new defense rules will work. By JAMAL THALJI The NBA doesn't want its players to feel so isolated anymore. Nor does the league want to isolate its game from a flat fan base and a dwindling television audience. That's why on April 19 NBA owners voted 22-6 to approve sweeping rules changes. Their hope is that the changes, which referees implemented during summer leagues and the preseason, will boost scoring and bring flow back to a game that had grown dependent on this one play: Four offensive players stand on one end of the court, drawing four defenders, leaving the fifth offensive player with one defender between him and the basket. That bogged down the game too much. So, for the first time in 54 years, the league will allow teams to play zone defenses. The NBA also eliminated the confusing myriad of illegal defense rules that have baffled players, coaches and fans for years.</div> Link
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Big Nasty:</div><div class="quote_post">There was a really good on article on the NBA site but I can't find it now..but here is another.. Link</div> Cool man, thanks for posting that link.
The Zone defense was brought back for the sole purpose of making Shaq less dominant. I personally hate the Zone defense. Having to play 1 on 1 defense used to seperate the NBA from college ball and forced players to be more responsible on defense. I would like to see higher scoring games like they had over a decade ago. Scoring 100+ points used to be an after thought for most NBA teams, but now we are lucky to see 3 or 4 teams even average triple figures for an entire season.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting shapecity:</div><div class="quote_post">The Zone defense was brought back for the sole purpose of making Shaq less dominant. I personally hate the Zone defense. Having to play 1 on 1 defense used to seperate the NBA from college ball and forced players to be more responsible on defense. I would like to see higher scoring games like they had over a decade ago. Scoring 100+ points used to be an after thought for most NBA teams, but now we are lucky to see 3 or 4 teams even average triple figures for an entire season.</div> well all of it's crazy. It makes the basketball ugly. David Stern said himself that it was instituted for the sole purpose of opening the game up. He must think all basketball fans are idiots,because anyone with any knowledge of the game can see that it's done the opposite. I just hate it when the League does things because of an agenda but won't admit it then make up lame ass excuses for why they did somethin'.
Ugly indeed. They should rid themselves of the Zone defense and consider dropping the illegal defenses. I also like the idea of shortening the 24 second clock and allowing players more space to create and really show their athleticism.
The only good thing about the zone defense is that the game has changed a bit. The NBA is not about positions as much anymore, if you can play, they will find a spot for you. Endless players in the league now don't fit the typical traditional PG, SG, SF, PF, or especially the C. So playing zone helps make it a little more fair for some of these other clubs who have those typical traditional players. I'm 50/50 on it to tell ya the truth. The post up play has dropped off tremendously, so I believe the biggest reason why they put the zone in was in fact to speed the game up. One way to do that is to limit the amount of times the ball is fed into the post. Problems is when you don't have good shooting (and no college won't make you a better shooter) the scores stand a chance of dropping, which indeed they have.
i dont like zone defense, it kills post play....but at the same time these guys are the best in the world, and should be able to attack the zone/pass the ball/shoot the ball with efficiency. they dont. there is a more glaring problem for the NBA than what type of defense to use, and thats the deterioration of basic basketball at the lowest levels. there is no quick fix in the nba, unless you add more width to the court, or enlarge the bucket, which are only good until the next generations of players are even bigger, faster, taller ect.... the only way to fix the nba is on a grassroots level. (if they dont already) the nba should have annual middle school and highschool coaching seminars w/ opinions and insights from NBA coaches and scouts.
It makes more difficult the game, but that?s better. People will learn to play, and american player will learn more fundaments, they will know a more global game, it?s better. Until now, NBA teams have learnt how to defend in zone, they will learn how to attack a zone soon.
Basically, what the zone will do is keep all of the slashing, driving stars of the NBA out of the lane. It will make superstars into jump shooters. In the pros they play the game above the rim. It's exciting, it's athletic. This is not college. There is a lot of excitement around the basket in this league. The ability to play zone will result in a large man standing in the lane who will become a ticket-taker. The lane is clogged and the game is changed. If a move like this were to fail, it would be very difficult for the league to bounce back from it. The NBA should stay away from zones at all costs.
