I heard Rich and Charlie yesterday mention there are rumors that the NBA might legalize all defenses as early as next season. Imagine Cato parked in the lane just waiting for a shot to block. j ------------------
All defenses? Including zone defenses? Don't know if I like that...if that comes to fruition, team scoring averages could be a-droppin'...... ------------------
Damn, imagine all of the 3 pointers that would get jacked up if the zone would be legal. I think it would be disastrous for a league that's already seeing scoring and shooting percentages going down to change the rules that would ensure even more shots from the perimeter. ------------------ Never judge a man unless you walk a mile in his shoes, that way when you do judge him, you'll be a mile away and have his shoes.
I actually think the league might consider letting all defenses go. Consider this, now that the league has made the rule changes to "speed" up the league all it has done is slow it down even more. Because players aren't going to change the ways they play and we will still have low scoring, slow games. Why does there have to be a lot of points scored for it to be the NBA. I actually think there should be lower scoring games then college has, because everyone is so much better and offense shouldn't run the league. And with rules like we have now offense owns the league. Also, if they allow zone defenses there would be less fouls and actually create a faster game for everybody. But that's just my opinion. ------------------ DAMN LANKY is the best player to ever play the game. -Michael Jordan
Is this one of those "listen to it now, but hear it later type deals...or could it be hear it now, and listen to it later, er, uh never mind.. ------------------ Sometimes you gotta do the next best thing!
I don't really want to argue zone vs. man defense, but IMO the Zone defense has no place in the NBA and it will be a disaster. Personally, I don't enjoy watching zone defense as much as man. What difference does it make if the NBA point totals are down? IF the game is great (which it is), it will be fine. Artificially enhancing scoring by changing the game is stupid. ------------------ "Any answer that can't be questioned is no answer at all. It's gibberish. It's the jabbering of startled monkeys flinging dung at the moon" -- Scott Christensen -- www.ewav.com
Say NO to Zone D ... please !!! ------------------ If you are a positive thinking person but yet you listen to country music, isn't that odd?
This can't be true. Puhleeez say it ain't so. It doesn't make any sense. Zone defenses are one reason I can't stand watching the college game sometimes... ------------------ "I personally don't think Jordan would have enjoyed playing with himself." -- JeffB lets us all know that Popeye and Clutch aren't the only ones with inside sources... (also an example of a BBS "sound-bite")
If Zone Defense comes back then it certainly makes basketball a team sport on both ends of the court again. Also, just because a team is allowed to play Zone D doesn't mean that they WILL play zone! You'd probably find a lot of "match-up" zones going on with players picking up the person in their area, this will still cause mismatches and allow superior players additional freedom to get out there and score. PLUS offensive rebounding will probably increase because in a zone the players often miss their match-ups. I think zone would be a good idea. ------------------
I'd like to see it happpen... It would require teams to play AS A TEAM! Imagine that... No more iso with Mobes or Stevie... I think this could help to RAISE scoring... There will be more open jumpers and layups when there are zones... Games will either be high scoring as hell or really low... At this point, anything will help... You'll see lots of 120-115 scores or 75-70... That's fine with me... I'd like to see some diversity... I thought the illegal D rule was gay to begin with... Does the NFL tell teams how they must play D? Any sport for that matter??? This rule would help teams with good coaches... Strategy would be used in playing D... As well as straegy being used on how to attack the zone... I sure hope this happens... ------------------ Check out my homepage! Loads of sports pics! http://www.public.asu.edu/~sykim/
if the nba wanted to raise the excitement level (via ppg), all they have to do is lower that shot clock to, say, 15 sec. more fast breaks. less waiting for big men to trod down the court. no steve francis walking the ball up court. no boring waiting for plays to set up. get it and go.
verse, I think you and I are in agreement about the shot clock thing (and we may be the only ones on this board). Although I wouldn't lower it as far down as 15: I'd go for something more like 18 to 20 seconds. My goal is for a faster pace, but I don't want to see shots rushed. And also, certain plays (with multiple screens, motion, etc.) may take more time. I hate the zone defense. It makes it easier to shut down the best players and reduces open shots. They say that Dean Smith is the only person to hold Michael Jordan under 20 points per game. I say it was the zone defense. ------------------ "Thirty-seven?" -Randall, Clerks www.clutchtown.com
The ZoneD might make players have to play more as a team, but I think it will also make players lazier than the are now. With the zone, they'll depend to much on others to pick up someone that might be open. I dont like the 15-20 second shot clock either. That just means lower shooting% b/c players will come up court and not have time to set up the offense and jack up a shot over two guys. If the shot clock were 15, and in crunch time when being pressed, it may take 7-9 seconds to get the ball past midcourt. That means 6-8 seconds to set up an offense. Crazy! And one more thing...players could'nt walk up the court anymore to get a little breather after playing D since they need all the time they can get. ------------------ "Steve is good. Steve is real good." -- Cleveland's rookie point guard Andre Miller on Rocket rookie point Steve Francis
It seems to me that Zone Defense is exactly what the NBA does not need however. The zone minimizes the effect of stars by putting the burden on the whole team. While that may make for better basketball in one sense, it diminishes the NBA's desire. The NBA works on superstars -- it needs people like Vince Carter, Jason Kidd and Steve Francis. With a zone D, their effects would be much less and the game would be entirely different. Personally, I like to watch man defense better . . . I think it's more strategic, but that's just me. I still can't see why the NBA feels it has to alter their product to artificially affect it. It's a good product the way it is -- stop trying to redefine something that's good. ------------------ "Any answer that can't be questioned is no answer at all. It's gibberish. It's the jabbering of startled monkeys flinging dung at the moon" -- Scott Christensen -- www.ewav.com
I still think they should change the economics of the game Winners 2 million Losers 1 million [Distributed by contract instead of shaq gettin 20 mill a year he'd get 20% per gam - 400K wins] Add incentives Have a 100+ game you get 50K [let the other team get 100+ . . -50K] 120 + you get 100K, etc If kobe goes for 50 and the Lakers get 130 THYE TAKING MONEY OUT OF YA POCKET I bet Kobe will find getting 50 a lil more difficult Rocket River ------------------
If they allow all defenses, then maybe coaches will use more creative offensive sets to get shooters open and also, since half-court D will be so tough, teams till look to score in the open court more. Anyway, whatever rules changes they make won't make any differenc if the officials don't make calls consistently on every player and every team. ------------------
I don't see how Zone D will slow the game down at all. It's not like the shot clock gets turned off if a team starts playing zone.... Star players can still flourish playing against Zone defenses, look at the Euro leagues, they still have their stars even though they are allowed to play Zone. The Australian league allows zone, has 3 refs and a 24 second shot clock (for all intents and purposes it's the same rules as the NBA minus illegal D) and there are still plenty of players who score over 20 Ppg and plenty of teams that score 100+ on a regular basis. Andrew Gaze averages 30+Ppg over a career of playing against legal zone defenses. Zone doesn't slow the game down or remove the stars from the game, but it DOES take a lot of the isolation play out of the game ------------------
The NBA with a zone? Ugh. Someone get me tickets to the ABA. There are only two things that can happen with zones being implemented in the NBA : a) Coaches will design innovative offenses to get the whole team involved and who knows, someday teams might average over 80 ppg. or b) Coaches will go out and draft and teach players to play brawl ball to win 46-45 thrillers, scoring averages will plummet and the best players will flock to the ABA where they can really showcase their talents. Which one do you think will happen? Just look at the college game, its almost unwatchable now. Could you imagine a zone with Shaquille O'Neal, Kevin Garnett, Theo Ratliff etc, etc, standing in the paint to block shots? ------------------
Yeah, we would all turn into Chris Mullin, well the players anyway. ------------------ President of the Charles Barkley fan club...Oh he retired? When?
If Cato is worth 7 million dollars next year..... Then me and my boss need to have a talk, about what I am worth...
