RealGM

In an effort to talk about something other than:
1) Nash's personal life
2) Stalkers and Stalkees
3) Trades that are never going to happen

I'd like to talk about Phoenix's use of the zone: It's not a gimmick. People only think that because it was illegal in the NBA until recently. A sophisticated, well-practiced zone is perhaps a more complex defensive scheme than man-to-man. In football, soccer, ultimate frisbee, etc zone is generally considered more advanced than man. Yeah, sure, on some junior high teams it's an excuse to be lazy, but that's only on junior high teams. Good college zones are excellent, complex defenses.

While the rest of the NBA is usually playing man, Phoenix can blindside teams by playing excellent zone. Teams will not spend much of their season preparing for it. Zone can help minimize our size disadvantage, minimize the effects of superstars like Kobe, minimize defensive weaknesses like Nash and Turk, and maximize our fast-break.

Thing is, we need to really practice it for it to be effective. Gentry uses it more as a secondary option; I think he needs to make it primary. HIre a zone expert from the college ranks or Europe as an assistant coach??

Utah Jazz are embracing it some of the time

There's nothing wrong with the zone, though in my day it was often dismissed as "what you do if you can't play man-to-man" but in truth, it's very effective against teams that overmatch you one on one. Depending on which one you run, and how well you have it down.
I like seeing us play it - it helps with some of our deficiencies. It was a nice changeup last year in the playoffs, and it takes a disciplined team to break a zone. That's one reason why it works so well in the pros - lots of guys who think they can beat it by themselves.

Also, it's easier to spot the hot chick Nash is having an affair with when they're playing zone, as the floor is more spread out .....

Maybe the hot chick Nash is having an affair with has an NBA executive stalking her. She can use that as leverage to assist the organization with making a trade.

Nash would embrace our new assistant coach/zone expert if she was a hot chick. I'd take her over his current lover--good trade IMHO. MIght turn the jilted lover into a stalker though...

YFZblu wrote:Maybe the hot chick Nash is having an affair with has an NBA executive stalking her. She can use that as leverage to assist the organization with making a trade.

Is that the same chick that has an entire thread dedicated to her on our board? And is that NBA executive maybe a poster by the name of NBAforever1 ?

Coincidence? I think not!

Kerrsed wrote:

YFZblu wrote:Maybe the hot chick Nash is having an affair with has an NBA executive stalking her. She can use that as leverage to assist the organization with making a trade.

Is that the same chick that has an entire thread dedicated to her on our board? And is that NBA executive maybe a poster by the name of NBAforever1 ?

Coincidence? I think not!

Which thread ?

Oh! You mean that shrine??

and here i thought no-one would get it ......

OK, but seriously: zone.

Anybody know what zones we've used and when? I don't get to watch enough of the games. Pretty much all 2-3 against the Lakers last year, but they've used some 3-2 this year, I think. Is that right?

Have they done any 1-3-1 at all?

I'm not impressed with our 3-2. I think they should try 1-3-1 instead, especially with Warrick in on the bottom.

I dunno. I think we should save the zone as an ace card. That means it wont become old hat.

sunskerr wrote:I dunno. I think we should save the zone as an ace card. That means it wont become old hat.

I think so too. If we practice our zone and keep it in our pocket until we need it, teams won't be able to scout it out and it'll throw teams off when we do employ it.

One thing you have to realize before applying zone as full-time scheme - it's biggest weakness is defensive rebounding. We're one of the worst rebounding teams on defense of all-time...

Well, I'm not saying we won't win any games because we can't rebound, but we have to improve in that area and zone isn't the right way to do so. Implement it when neccessary, don't do it regulary.

bballno21 wrote:One thing you have to realize before applying zone as full-time scheme - it's biggest weakness is defensive rebounding.

You have a point...but we're bad at defending and rebounding. Pick your poison.

I'm not sure zones are inherently worse for rebounding. A mediocre zone is worse at rebounding than a mediocre man, that's true, but what about a really good zone? Is Syracuse bad at rebounding? No.

A refined, well-coached, well-practiced zone, in which the players jump to box-out the most dangerous rebounders, is very capable of excellent defensive rebounding.

Well, college basketball is different from NBA even in what's successful on defensive side of the ball. That's different story though.

But I'm glad you mentioned box-out. The problem is that once a shot is shot, every player has to be in right place to box his man out. Sticking with your man is not enough. It's not necessary a difference for inside defenders (most of the time you have someone in the paint) but backcourt players can easily go for an offensive board as they're not covered at all.

Suns should practice fundamentals rather than implementing somewhat new defensive scheme. Altough I'm in if it's our way to be successful. Our best rebounder is Bill Cartwright who was adequate at best during his career... This couldn't be an issue if we'd rebound great as a team. C'mon, get the knack for the damn ball...

EDIT
2-3 zone against Miami doesn't work. Open shots, missed boards, Nash defending LeBron...etc.

bballno21 wrote:2-3 zone against Miami doesn't work. Open shots, missed boards, Nash defending LeBron...etc.

Not sure about that. It's taking away their size advantage and drives. They're shooting a lot of jump shots. Yeah, there are definitely too many defensive breakdowns, but I think that's because we're not playing it very well...because we haven't practiced it enough. Our crappy zone is still better than our man right now.

As much as I love Gentry for his work, for me it was his fault this time running 2-3 instead of 3-2. He had to adjust it a lot more. On the other hand the zone wasn't play properly, you're right. Turks looked terrible as he didn't know where to rotate and when he decided to do so he didn't run at all. Just one terrible game, altough I'm afraid that we'll be as 'good' defensive team as we're man to man so far. But we're still searching for our identity, we don't run second unit as we did last season, ...etc. I said to wait till december and that's what I'm going to do.