The teamrankings site is a favorite of mine looking at figures. While I agree on the talent there are 3 key factors where the zone fails that the above is missing.
1- Preventing teams from shooting where they want open shots. The zone offers and fails to prevent good shooters from getting set and getting an open shot if the ball moves well. Mtm prevents this far better - the 3man weave articles I posted yesterday do a great job pointing this out.
2- While overall efficiency hasn't changed a lot, the volume of 3ptrs taken, made and the reliance on them has shifted a great deal in the past 20 years especially the last decade. This is especially true with P6 teams and the top 150 or higher teams overall. Thus the one tool in the toolbox that if executed well can crush a zone- is now far more common and with far more players at this level capable of wielding it.
3. The number of shooters on the floor has increased. That is the basics of a heavier reliance but it reduces the ability of the zone to shade towards the shooters quickly enough and also forces us to over rotate to compensate.
With all of the above a clear issue, the zone is still something every program should have in its toolkit, just not as a primary defense. When deployed with the right players but even more importantly as a situational or matchup driven weapon, it's extremely effective.
Lastly- I think all of our preference should be for getting a coach that excels in bringing in top talent every year so that even though the zone is an issue- we are still able to push through to 20 wins nearly every year with what defense we play being moot. I realize that is what many are saying and high level talent is the biggest issue. We should play a defense that said talent wants to come here to play. If I'm dead wrong in that those kids want to play zone then hand me my crow and we go win with zone again and a Fab 5 on the court.
