BuzzerBeater Forums

I'm going to sound like a dick saying this, so I apologise, but note that the guys who are saying it isn't broken are in lower leagues - so the strong inside offences they'll be playing against will usually be paired with a much weaker outside one. As soon as you have a couple of competent outside threats, even if they don't go with an outside tactic, you are in a LOT of trouble with 2-3.

/League II dickishness.

Last edited by RabidCamel at 9/10/2011 12:49:19 AM

I completely agree with you. I've have been burnt at least 5 times using a 2-3 zone where my ID completely shuts down their IS but they end up winning because they take far too many jump shots from outside because they can't get the ball inside.

It was then that I concluded that 2-3 zone is broken.

alot of div 3 teams have both inside and outside scoring threats!! Like me for example!! but yes i agree that you find that more and more in div 2!

Read this if you can be bothered:

http://www.buzzerbeater.com/community/forum/read.aspx?thr...

I haven't read it, but I'm sure it will answer some questions :p

Oh, I agree, there are some very good div III teams out there who are a lot stronger than me (you're going to crush me in our scrim), but ask yourself this: when is the last time anyone successfully used a 2-3 Zone against you? :)

Can't remember!! M2m seems to be the d that everyone uses these days!

Read this if you can be bothered:

http://www.buzzerbeater.com/community/forum/read.aspx?thr...

I haven't read it, but I'm sure it will answer some questions :p

Just had a quick look through, most of the comments seem to echo what Camel and Monkey said - that 2-3 isn't great for higher levels and it often results in you getting torched from the outside.

It almost seems like the guards forget to play defence when using a 2-3 zone?

They dont forget.. the sf is just concentrating on inside defence leaving your pg and sg to defend the perimeter. If you play against a team with a outside focused sf he will most likely get a few more open looks... but once again the team has to have the passing to get the ball to the open man

You aren't a dick saying that you have actually hit the nail on the head. You can use a 2/3 zone if the opponents big men are dominant and the guards are pathetic. I have done it against the Smeltztroopers and won. But if you try it against a team with decent guards then they will kill you. You don't even get a great boost on your ID rating unless you have a SF with great ID. You do get a boost on your rebounds which can help. However you give up a TON of easy outside shots even with great defenders (my guards typically have around wondrous OD and still get owned). If it is against a strictly one dimensional team or one with big men who will be unstopable otherwise you can risk it. But even in inside offences often half the shots are taken outside and lowering their inside % from 80% to 70% isn't worth raising their outside % from 30% to 60%.

I know a player who recently bought a "great PG" in his opinion who could pass and defend but who had awful JS and JR. Against him a 2-3 would be ideal, but you aren't going to find a lot of opponents like that. Once again just using my team (mid range division II) as an example my guards tend to have around tremendous JS and the worst on my team is my young trainee who has proficient but who has many seasons to improve. Even he can torch a 2/3 zone.

Yoda, you just saved me a few minutes of typing, those are my thoughts (and some experimenting) exactly. In ABBL I would probably never play 2-3 just because the teams have at least one good small who could get 40 if you play a 2-3 .... not worth the gamble in my opinion.

What constitutes a decent enough guard then? Are we talking someone with jump shot, or passing, or both?

So essentially, don't use 2-3 unless the opponent's guards are total scrubs?

@ everyone: does anyone have experience with inside box-and-one? Does this work at all, or is it safer just to stick with man-to-man?