ya, Doc needs to use the zone for certain teams.

athletically I dont think we can keep up with Chicago/Miami one on one in man situations...you turn those games into a track meet and you play right into their hands.

what zone does is turn it into a halfcourt game, and both teams offensively struggle in that area

i agree fully.. man to man defense definitely won't work against either teams anymore

I'm not sure the Celtics have the personnel to use the zone as effectively as the Hawks this season / Mavs last season.  KG isn't the paint rover he once was, and Jermaine isn't particularly mobile, either.  Neither is as effective in that role now as Smith/Horford or Chandler, and we don't have the same length on the wing (Marvin Williams / Marion).

Still, for small stretches and in the right situations I'm sure Doc will employ it to good effect.

i would love to see the zone pulled out on teams more often... we already play great team defense as it is... with our age working a tight zone should be much more effective than letting younger guys beat us up one on one.

I'm not sure the Celtics have the personnel to use the zone as effectively as the Hawks this season / Mavs last season.  KG isn't the paint rover he once was, and Jermaine isn't particularly mobile, either.  Neither is as effective in that role now as Smith/Horford or Chandler, and we don't have the same length on the wing (Marvin Williams / Marion).

Still, for small stretches and in the right situations I'm sure Doc will employ it to good effect.

I strongly disagree.  KG has his flaws and I think age is taking it's toll on some aspects of his game, but I think he's still probably the top paint rover in the league.  He's lost some athleticism, but he's still really long, moves his feet extraordinarily well laterally and covers a lot of ground. Plus, he's prided himself on being a student of the defensive game and working to be the best defender in the league for a decade and a half.  That IQ and mindset doesn't just go away.

I wrote about this in the "is KG done?" thread.  I actually watched some of the Miami game on tape last night, and I thought he looked awesome in that zone.  We may not have the length at the forward spots, but we have Rondo up top who we can pair with Dooling who looked quite active in it as well.  We also didn't have Paul in the first Miami game who I think would be an added improvement to the zone.  He doesn't have the length of a Marion or a Marvin Williams but is one of the smartest and toughest help defenders around on the base line.

I also like the idea of seeing Avery thrown out there with Rondo to give it a go in the zone if he gets up to speed. 

I think we have the personnel to play it effectively as was evidenced during significant stretches of that Miami game.  Unfortunately, Spoelstra threw Norris Cole out there, and he provd to be a zone buster, finding some seams and hitting some big jumpers.   It was a good move in his part, and I believe the fact that Cole is right out of college and a shooter contributed to him feeling comfortable playing against a zone D.  That's the risk.  Shooters can take advantage of zones.

Anyway, I definitely want to see more of it against the athletic, slashing teams.

Two reasons we should be playing zone, especially against certain teams----first, rebounding. Players aren't running around switching on every pick and trying to pick up for missed assignments by others. Also, with better rebounding you greatly enhance chances in the running game. Can't run without the ball!
Second, it's a lot less tiring defense to play, which would definitely help our senior citizens! 

zone defense actually hurts defensive rebounding. rather than being right next to your assignment as is the case for man-to-man, you must search for someone to block out. this leads to giving up more offensive rebounds and second chance points.

Quote from: OhioGreen on January 08, 2012, 09:55:10 AM

Two reasons we should be playing zone, especially against certain teams----first, rebounding. Players aren't running around switching on every pick and trying to pick up for missed assignments by others. Also, with better rebounding you greatly enhance chances in the running game. Can't run without the ball!
Second, it's a lot less tiring defense to play, which would definitely help our senior citizens! 

zone defense actually hurts defensive rebounding. rather than being right next to your assignment as is the case for man-to-man, you must search for someone to block out. this leads to giving up more offensive rebounds and second chance points.

While this is true in general, the C's defensive system isn't really man to man.  It involves so much switching, it pulls guys far from their men anyways, and when they are at all late on the rotations (which they have been all year), then it is the rebounding that really suffers.

I think in the C's situation, the zone would actually improve their rebounding, because it will keep their big men closer to the basket than their standard defense, which will help them more than being close to their man would. 

Not to mention, because of the defensive 3 second, the zone in the NBA is different than a regular zone (which is where the theory you are talking about comes from).  In the NBA, they are rarely far away from a man, because they need to stay within an arms reach anyways, so it helps.

My question about the zone against the Bulls is whether they have the passing and shooting to beat it a lot more than the Heat.  The Bulls have a lot more guys who can spread the floor, and a guy like Deng is perfect for breaking the zone by finding the soft spot in the middle. 

I think if Rose starts gashing them, then they will need to go to it, but I just am not convinced it will be anywhere near as effective as it was against the Heat.

Quote from: jMo721 on January 08, 2012, 06:11:28 PM

Quote from: OhioGreen on January 08, 2012, 09:55:10 AM

Two reasons we should be playing zone, especially against certain teams----first, rebounding. Players aren't running around switching on every pick and trying to pick up for missed assignments by others. Also, with better rebounding you greatly enhance chances in the running game. Can't run without the ball!
Second, it's a lot less tiring defense to play, which would definitely help our senior citizens! 

zone defense actually hurts defensive rebounding. rather than being right next to your assignment as is the case for man-to-man, you must search for someone to block out. this leads to giving up more offensive rebounds and second chance points.

While this is true in general, the C's defensive system isn't really man to man.  It involves so much switching, it pulls guys far from their men anyways, and when they are at all late on the rotations (which they have been all year), then it is the rebounding that really suffers.

I think in the C's situation, the zone would actually improve their rebounding, because it will keep their big men closer to the basket than their standard defense, which will help them more than being close to their man would. 

Not to mention, because of the defensive 3 second, the zone in the NBA is different than a regular zone (which is where the theory you are talking about comes from).  In the NBA, they are rarely far away from a man, because they need to stay within an arms reach anyways, so it helps.

My question about the zone against the Bulls is whether they have the passing and shooting to beat it a lot more than the Heat.  The Bulls have a lot more guys who can spread the floor, and a guy like Deng is perfect for breaking the zone by finding the soft spot in the middle. 

I think if Rose starts gashing them, then they will need to go to it, but I just am not convinced it will be anywhere near as effective as it was against the Heat.

touche. as atrocious as our rebounding and man-to-man defense have been at times, i wouldnt mind seeing more zone. i dont think we need to come out with the mindset "we are GOING to play zone tonight" but rather use it as an adjustment during the game. its up to doc to make the adjustment soon enough.