BuzzerBeater Forums

How about in the instance that my SF has a weaker ID than OD, does that mean i shouldnt play 2-3 zone then?

You don't set a C as SG in a RnG offense and in the same way i wouldn't set a low ID player at any position in a 2-3 zone.

I´d play them as my guards in case they are really good at it... ;)

You don't set a C as SG in a RnG offense and in the same way i wouldn't set a low ID player at any position in a 2-3 zone.

good for u but not the way the engine works :-)

(186170.1) got into 2-3 and SFs a bit.

it is worth thinking about what a 2-3 zone looks like compared to a man-man or any other defense and then compare this to the attacking teams offense/players skills

i take it the offense we are looking to counter is Look Inside and the focus here is at SF position.
If the team is playing Look Inside they either have the advantage/relative strength at PF/C and may play a PF at SF.

what they will do is try to get the ball into the key with a drive or pass for an inside shot or short jump shot which suits this situation.

so whether or not you play man-man or 2-3 you need an SF that can handle himself around the basket (decent ID and REB).
the advantage of 2-3 is your SF is more likely to be inside than outside on defense compared to man-man when the shot goes up (good for rebounding) or when his other inside buddies get beat (contributes to team ID/help defense).
the zone also means you end up with a mix of your 3 inside guys challenging their shots around the basket rather than each position matching up in man-man.

an sf with poor id/reb (also known as shooting guard) will leave a vulnerability to an opposition SF/PF playing the SF position whatever the defense

i play it often with my PF on SF(OD 11/ID 18) but also with with my regular SF's(ID 10 OD 14/12), and it works both ... But i think it loose value through the Rebounding of my backup PF(just 5 or 6) where i sometimes had the feeling that the one of my PF is usefull but overpowered so it haven't to be a superior skill in my eyes.

i play it often with my PF on SF(OD 11/ID 18) but also with with my regular SF's(ID 10 OD 14/12), and it works both ... But i think it loose value through the Rebounding of my backup PF(just 5 or 6) where i sometimes had the feeling that the one of my PF is usefull but overpowered so it haven't to be a superior skill in my eyes.

Sorry, but I did my best to understand your post about the difference between your PF playing on SF position and Regular SF. This is VERY interesting for me, but I could not get the idea. My english is not perfect, can you, please, explain again with simple phrases ?

Am I correct that you are not satisfied with your PF (OD 11\ID 18) on SF position ? Do you see difference in average reboundings of the same player on SF and PF positions (hopefully with same atack tactics) ? - Any problems with defence ?

Thank you in advance for the answer.

defense runs quite solid even better then with my regular SF(but you had to consider that he have 14/10 in comparision to 11/18 so it isn't a fair matchup), rebounding is in my eyes a bit less then on the PF/C position, and not so much better then with my regular sf who had just 10.
And i am satisfied with the Pf on this spot(at least with my old roster, where i had three quality bigs).

I am not so satisfied with my (regular) backup SF in this tactic, because he had just 5 in rebounding which kills the rebounding advantage you get through this tactic.

Thanx