Re: The Defensive Twilight Zone

["Dan Forant" <dforant1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Points well taken however we don't have  anywhere near the players of the
past mentioned. And we certainly aren't going to test the Zone deep into the
playoffs this season. The zone is for teams like the Celts who don't have a
clue till they get better overall players and coaches. The Pitino and OB
years have just been wasted away.

DanF

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Trond E. Jacobsen"

> DanF likes the zone.  I do not, at least not for the games that count
> the most.  The zone is like a drug: makes you feel like you don't have
> to work, and does a pretty convincing job of that...most of the time.
>
> Then the playoffs come and you are facing better teams with better
> players, better coaches, better schemes, and all of sudden the fact
> your team has become listless and gutless surfaces and you go down in
> flames.  Same type of reason Pitino-ball failed and that the zone looks
> SO effective in college.  The zone only looks good as an alternative
> for otherwise weak defensive teams, or teams with many weak defensive
> players.
>
> Sure, if we had a whole squad of Barry's and other (defensive) losers I
> too would support the zone, but only because we'd have no superior
> alternative. Give me some guys who can play some defense.
>
> It's like saying I don't need a roof over my house because a tarp can
> work nicely in the summer.  Then the gale fore winds and sub-zero temps
> arrive and I am hating life.
>
> Let's look even further back than Bird's Celtics.  Russell was best
> defensive center in game.  Satch was best best defensive PF in the
> game.  KC was best defensive guard in game.  Hondo wasn't too shabby.
> See a pattern?
>
> Trond Jacobsen