Quote:
|
Zone really started to become much more prevalent around '04-'05, especially against big men. Just from personal observation. If you watch games from the '02-'03 season, you won't see defenders sitting in Duncan/Shaq's lap before they have the ball, but you see it frequently now (with TD and Yao, at least).
|
Duncan
03-04 - 22.3 ppg .501 fg%
04-05 - 20.3 ppg .496 fg%
06-07 - 20 ppg .534 fg%
Yao
03-04 - 17.5 ppg .522 fg%
04-05 - 18.3 ppg .552 fg%
06-07 - 24.5 ppg .510 fg%
Of course Duncan and Yao are also both offensive bigs with midrange game, I'm just adding their stats to the conversation since you mentioned them. Again, there's no significant decline in offensive production here, certainly not enough to suggest a "neutering" of the C spot by the adoption of zone defenses. (Yao's increase is obviously due mostly to his maturation as a player, but there's nothing to suggest that he's been hampered very much by the zone. Duncan's production is similar, his fg% is up...)
Quote:
|
Also, note two things: one, I was speaking exclusively of traditional back-to-the-basket big men; players like Miller and J.O'Neal, who score several baskets each game off of 15-footers, don't really count. This point can be contested, since many "traditional" bigs like Ewing also hit several 15-footers each game. Secondly, and most importantly, however, is the fact that no one on that list (minus Shaq) is really a dominant scoring threat who'd need to be neutralized in the first place. J.O. comes closest, but not really. Shaq would have been a great case study had his prime lasted across the '01-'07 seasons. Unfortunately, his drop in production can be explained via either intrinsic (i.e., age) or extrinsic (i.e., zone schemes) factors, muddying the issue (and it's likely a combination of both, though perhaps more the former than the latter.)
|
But isn't Shaq too much of an anomaly, stylistically and statistically, to use as a representative example of anything about centers? Dominant offensive big men are just rare occurrences in any era, and this is true even moreso for "traditional" back-to-the-basket offensive bigs as opposed to more versatile ones. If there were even a single example of a "if not for the zone, he'd be a 30ppg (in the paint) guy," then I'd find the argument that the zone has neutered the 5 spot more convincing.
Quote:
|
I just don't believe that we'll see a big man who scores more than 85% of his points in the low post average more than 27-28 ppg ever again so long as zone is allowed. If it ever happens, you can say "I told you so."
|
I don't disagree that we (meaning you and I personally) likely won't see another big man put up those kind of numbers in the paint, but again, I think that has much more to do with the overall rarity of players like that coming along than with some alleged stifling of the position by the league allowing zone defenses (which are still far from the norm).
Quote:
|
A guy like Amare I can see averaging 28-29 ppg at some point, but it'll be off pick & rolls with Nash and activity, not post play.
|
It seems like you're defining every counter example out of the argument that the zone is neutering centers. I mean if nearly every example we have of good-to-great modern scoring centers (Duncan, Yao, J'Oneal, Shaq) seems unaffected at worst and aided at best by the adoption of the zone, then where exactly is the evidence that the zone's neutering centers? I think what is happening without a doubt is that the position is evolving, and modern centers are much more likely to have solid-to-polished midrange game, which only lessens the impact of the zone, not increases it.
Re: Mark Madsen Sticks Up for Kobe
