BuzzerBeater Forums

Help - English > Should I use the 2-3 defense?

Should I use the 2-3 defense?

Set priority
Show messages by
From: Booshay
This Post:
00
215524.1
Date: 5/2/2012 8:12:43 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
I was abl to upset the top team in my conference last week and I am looking to make another upset this week. The team I am playing against ALWAYS uses "Look Inside". From what I can tell from the salary...He has two solid inside guys but one really good SG (getting paid more than the post players). Is it smart to play a 2-3 defense? or should I just stick to Man 2 Man? My team is pretty good defensively especially around the perimeter at the SG and SF positions. Opinions?

This Post:
00
215524.2 in reply to 215524.1
Date: 5/2/2012 8:53:46 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
211211
though it seems that he will most likely be playing LI but there is also a possibility of him playing a balanced offense which would utilize his highest paid player more than LI.
so i think that you should stick to M2M and guard his best inside shooter(according to the stats) with your best inside defender(probably your 10k C) by swapping the defenses.in this way u might make his players miss more shots cuz the best player will be defended by the best defender and this would put the pressure on the other players to score.

Last edited by BBall Champ at 5/2/2012 8:54:16 AM

From: shikago

This Post:
00
215524.3 in reply to 215524.1
Date: 5/2/2012 9:03:45 AM
Milwaukee Lethargy
III.8
Overall Posts Rated:
849849
Second Team:
Miłwaukee Lethargy
2-3 zone is arguably the worst defense against look inside. and it's definitely the worst defense against anything else.
(yes, by description it seems like 2-3 zone should be effective against inside offenses. but it's not.)


This Post:
22
215524.4 in reply to 215524.3
Date: 5/2/2012 9:53:16 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
you should have underlined the arguably.

This Post:
00
215524.5 in reply to 215524.4
Date: 5/2/2012 10:11:25 AM
Milwaukee Lethargy
III.8
Overall Posts Rated:
849849
Second Team:
Miłwaukee Lethargy
well, except for NT teams, & maybe in division 1, do you think 2-3 zone is a good idea? (talking about in general. not extreme cases).

I remember there was a poll of worst defenses a while ago, and full court press / 2-3 zone were both voted as the worst by a large margin. (it kept switching between them which was worse. FCP probably took the lead later on, but 2-3 zone had the lead for a while)

This Post:
11
215524.6 in reply to 215524.5
Date: 5/2/2012 10:38:36 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
when you know that your opponent playing LI i think it is the best choice, but you should play an "PF"(ID and rebounding less OD) on SF so when you try it with a common PG-like-SF the result wont be good.

PS: why it should work only for nt and div 1? Cause of the higher disparity of primary and secondary skills?

Last edited by CrazyEye at 5/2/2012 10:39:21 AM

This Post:
11
215524.8 in reply to 215524.6
Date: 5/2/2012 10:57:09 AM
Milwaukee Lethargy
III.8
Overall Posts Rated:
849849
Second Team:
Miłwaukee Lethargy
when you know that your opponent playing LI i think it is the best choice, but you should play an "PF"(ID and rebounding less OD) on SF so when you try it with a common PG-like-SF the result wont be good.

PS: why it should work only for nt and div 1? Cause of the higher disparity of primary and secondary skills?

for my team...
from division 5 through division 2, 3-2 zone was often the best defense against look inside. except against monster inside teams, (with centers making more than my entire team, but with very bad guards) then man to man was best.

i would sometimes play 3-2 zone and *hope* the opponent played look inside.

& until i made the NBBA, i *hoped* that teams would play a 2-3 zone against me when i used look inside. in fact, I still sort of do.

2-3 zone hurts outside defense too much to be worth it. i remember even my guards with awful-inept JS were shooting over 50%. & 2-3 zone gives up way too many assists. and 3 point shots.
remember, you don't exactly have dominant players in lower divisions... the game is a lot different there.

This Post:
00
215524.9 in reply to 215524.1
Date: 5/2/2012 11:15:50 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
I was abl to upset the top team in my conference last week and I am looking to make another upset this week. The team I am playing against ALWAYS uses "Look Inside". From what I can tell from the salary...He has two solid inside guys but one really good SG (getting paid more than the post players). Is it smart to play a 2-3 defense? or should I just stick to Man 2 Man? My team is pretty good defensively especially around the perimeter at the SG and SF positions. Opinions?


If you have some way of ensuring you can injure his SG in the first few minutes of the game, the 2-3 might not be a bad play. Otherwise, you're just ensuring that instead of getting killed down low, you'll get killed from outside and probably still down low.

This Post:
00
215524.10 in reply to 215524.8
Date: 5/2/2012 11:16:01 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
218218
In my case 2-3 zone works exzactly the oposite you say. It limits my assists to bigs, it limits their shot count and percentage. It increases guards driving to the basket but doesnt increase 3pt shoting. Offense seems to freeze playing Li against 2-3 zone. While in 1v1 my team usually scores 80% after assits to compare agains 2-3 around 50%.

This Post:
00
215524.11 in reply to 215524.8
Date: 5/2/2012 11:42:59 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
i usually play quite good against 3-2 defence with my LI, man to man is normally the better choiche i think, may depend also a bit on your sf.

The number of assist is quite normal, and the big advantage of 2-3 zone is the rebounding overall offense quality of the opponent isn't changed much, the shot distribution change a bit as you say outside but it is an exchange you can do without raising the point per possesion by your opponent.