BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > 2-3 zone

2-3 zone

Set priority
Show messages by
From: Koperboy

This Post:
00
206656.66 in reply to 206656.51
Date: 2/8/2012 2:56:00 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
952952
3-2 is not the best defense against Motion. M2M is better.

With 2-3 defense he allowed 15 assists to opponent's PG and 14-16 shooting to his PF. Tell me how did 2-3 work in this game? Kalevan KoriKonkarit had better attack and his opponent chose a bad defensive tactic.

This Post:
11
206656.67 in reply to 206656.66
Date: 2/8/2012 3:10:27 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
20382038
3-2 is not the best defense against Motion. M2M is better.

With 2-3 defense he allowed 15 assists to opponent's PG and 14-16 shooting to his PF. Tell me how did 2-3 work in this game? Kalevan KoriKonkarit had better attack and his opponent chose a bad defensive tactic.



it all depends on the skills....paaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh...i won the championship usin 23 zone in all PO games!!!

i know its funny but did u guys didnt think the 23 and LI Haterade is empty!?!? :p

This Post:
00
206656.68 in reply to 206656.67
Date: 2/8/2012 3:21:25 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
952952
Miami Heat went to Europe for three months and won all their games using 2-3 zones, 2-3 zone rocks!!

/sarsacm

it all depends on the skills....paaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh...i won the championship usin 23 zone in all PO games!!! against inferior opponents who'd I win also with M2M


There's the correct quote.

This Post:
00
206656.69 in reply to 206656.68
Date: 2/8/2012 3:35:06 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
20382038
spreed ur hate..i dont care!! :-p

This Post:
00
206656.70 in reply to 206656.69
Date: 2/8/2012 3:59:17 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
952952
Very good argument.

Btw, I agree 2-3 can work with proper skillset of ALL players. But those players are infinitely harder to train and are more expensive, at least bigs (SB) than "normal" players. So I don't think we will ever see a team who can full utilize 2-3 zone.

Last edited by Koperboy at 2/8/2012 4:01:45 PM

From: ezlife

This Post:
00
206656.72 in reply to 206656.71
Date: 2/8/2012 5:03:00 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
127127
I totally agree with that: for example, why would you pay for 15 IS on your C if you're gonna play run and gun? Your C won't have many shot attempts, it's not worth paying for a high IS. You'd better train SB instead, so it will be useful to use 2-3 zone defense.

I enjoy playing inside offense and I'm not paying for a 15JR guard that will take 1 shot from downtown per game!

From: Koperboy

This Post:
00
206656.73 in reply to 206656.71
Date: 2/8/2012 10:21:33 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
952952
If 2-3 defense depended only on one specially trained player, more people would try it. What about SB on PF? And more important, what about ID on guards? How can you develop complete guards when you have to spend a lot of time on their ID?

From: Koperboy

This Post:
00
206656.75 in reply to 206656.74
Date: 2/9/2012 6:15:29 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
952952
I'm trying to build a team that can defend well Look inside...if it happens that my players will be able to do that via 2-3 zone, so be it. But for now it's M2M only.

Or do you think that the traditional builds of each player is the best build for any offense?


No, I think traditional builds of each player is the best build for neutral offenses. LI and LP are most efficient tactics right now (% of FG is highest among tactics), so I see a lot of PGs built solely for inside offenses and same for SGs and SFs. I guess LI and LP player's builds cost less as opposed to Motion or Princeton (JR) because Driving is so cheap and JR is so expensive.

I know that if you build your players for Princeton, you will have big salaries on guards and small salaries on bigs - kinda the opposite of Look inside and Low post. If only OD wouldn't be so overtrained...


Advertisement