There is a lot to question about these statements.
1. If the zone allows the opponent to dictate the pace, it is only in the sense that they can't get good shots against it quickly. Isn't that the goal of a defense, to not give up easy shots?
2. Would you like an "exciting game" that we lose or a "boring game" that we win. Remember when we held Marquette to 39 points in an Elite 8 game and went to the Final Four? I found that pretty exciting.
3. If the opponent is having a decent shooting day and your team is having a lousy shooting day, it increases the chance that your team will lose in all situations. Whether you play the best m-to-m defense in history or you play zero defense at all.
Somebody said we are playing "meathead" basketball because our games have fewer possesions. I disagree. The slavish oppostion to zone because it is different is the definition of meathead. Here's a stat: in every single game, hundreds per week, 50% of the teams lose. Over 90% of those losing teams are playing buzzer to buzzer man defense. The zone is an elite level defense. It has won games at a high rate at all levels of the sport. Why is this still questioned??
This is really well said.
Sometimes when things get said over and over again, people come to believe it as fact without ever stopping to think about what it actually means.
"Playing zone allows the other team to dictate the pace of the game" is one of these things. Its nonsensical.
There is no way to force the opposing team to shoot the ball when you want them to shoot (if they do it right they'll be shooting exactly when you DONT want them to shoot) so whoever has the ball gets to dictate the play of the game for the 30 seconds they are allowed to have the ball.
Man D doesn't force teams to shoot any quicker than zone D does. Although teams almost always shoot quicker against bad defenses than they do against good defenses. Why? Its common sense. Teams aren't going to shoot early in the shot clock unless they are getting a good shot, why take a bad shot when you still have time to create a good shot? If you are a bad defense, you'll give up a lot of good looks at the basket, which teams will gladly take. If you are a good defense they have to work hard and hope they get a good shot somewhere along the way.
The only way to stop a team from dictating the pace of play is to take the ball from them, this is called forcing a turnover. And despite playing zone (actually because they play zone) Syracuse is always up towards the top in turnovers forced. Last year a guy named Frank Howard lead the ACC in steals ... I think Battle was 4th.
So whether you play man D or zone D, teams are going to hold the ball until they find a good shot, unless there's a turnover. On those plays where you can't force a turnover you WANT the opposing team to struggle to find good shots, which is exactly what happens regularly against SU zone which is why Syracuse is usually among the elite defensive teams in the country.
Its hard to imagine how short an attention span you'd need to have to prefer your team play bad defense rather than "have" to watch them play 30 seconds (tops) of playing successful defense.
