No chance that happens to us again -- Kentucky is already out! Plus Givens is in his 60s now, he might not have the legs for so many jumpshots.
But in all seriousness, to assuage your fears, just remember how much the game has changed since 1978, in large part because of the three-point line. Among its many ramifications, two go to your question:
-Offenses are Designed for Three Point Shots
A good three point opportunity is more efficient than a long two point opportunity. So many offenses now are designed to maximize those opportunities. Yes, teams still know to attack the zone from the middle, but the goal is not to hit that jumper from the free throw line, the goal is to use that position as a fulcrum for getting layups or threes. So no one is looking to spend all game shooting 15 foot jumpers inside the zone.
-Players Are Less Effective From Midrange
A consequence of the above is that players don't practice that mid-range shot as much. Surprisingly few college guys can consistently hit from there during a game. Is it weird that they might even have a better percentage from three? Sure, but that's the shot they practice. Could someone get into the middle of the lane and hit 18 of 27 shots like Givens did? Unlikely, but possible. But if Givens had gone 15 for 27 instead, like most college guys today would (at best), Kentucky's six-point margin evaporates.
So I hope that demonstrates two reasons why it's unlikely we'd run into that sort of performance. Granted, there are other sorts of things that could be done to overcome our zone, but a Givens-esque game is unlikely.
But that's not really the question. The question is, what sort of defense gives this team, right now, the best chance of winning? The answer, as many of our stat-heads (and the eye test) can show, is the zone defense. So let's stick with it.