I think a helpful oversimplification when judging how guards defend in the zone, is to divide them into 4 categories.
1) Guys who play good positional D and who also create a lot of turnovers.
2) Plays good positional D but doesnt create many turnovers.
3) Doesn't play good positional D, but makes up for it by creating a lot of turnovers.
4) Doesn't play good positional D or force many turnovers.
The fourth group is usually the domain of freshemn and most freshmen fall into it.
I think of GMac as the best example of group three. He was undersized and was never going to be a blanket defender, but he understood the zone really well, knew when he should take chances on going for a steal and got a lot of them. Enough to be a nusciance that offenses needed to worry about.
Triche is the perfect group 2 example. He understood the zone from day 1. Was tall and strong and always in the right place, but didn't steal the ball often.
For group 1 Ill give you my defensive Mount Rushmore (for the zone) ... Heart, Rautins, MCW, Gbinije.
I would put Richmond in group 3 (though the elite side of group 3). He got tons of steals, but didn't understand the rotations well and gave up a ton of open shots. There are, of course really good reasons for this. His team had no preseason and only about half the regular season practice time that a normal team gets. And at the end of the year when he should have been figuring everything out, instead he was hobbled by a knee injury. I have little doubt he would have jumped up to group 1 had he stayed. But just judging from productivity and not potential, Richmond doesn't touch the top 10 defensive SU guards.
