Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Duke Basketball -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tarheel4life who wrote (30)	1/30/2000 8:02:00 PM
From: Puck	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 79

I must confess to a very great prejudice I have about styles of defense in basketball. My philosophy of how defense should be played has been shaped by Coach K and through him, of course, Bobby Knight. As a result, I believe that man-to-man is the only dignified way to defend and I go so far as to believe that it is more virtuous to lose playing hard nosed man-to-man defense than it is to win playing zone. I know that K's teams use the zone primarily to rest the team if depth is shallow, as with the '92 team, and I can accept it as a pragmatic short term departure; but I cannot accept it as a fundamental defensive philosophy. This, I think, may place me closer to Knight than K on the spectrum of basketball philosophy. My understanding of the Bill Foster teams is that zone defense was central to their concept of play, which Givens exploited maximally in the championship game by utilizing the holes in the perimeter defense that most zones afford. For this reason, I have truly mixed feelings about the Foster teams and cannot abide the Kentucky loss. I always think that if only they had played man-to-man that Givens would have had to work much harder for his shot selection.