BuzzerBeater Forums

Help - English > 2-3

2-3

Set priority
Show messages by
From: CrazyEye

This Post:
11
186170.7 in reply to 186170.6
Date: 5/30/2011 1:36:33 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
Well even Charles says that Man to Man is the way to go.
If your players are good enough defensively to play it, the strongest defense will always be man-to-man. Any defense other than man-to-man is by design weaker than man-to-man, in the same way that any offense other than base offense is by design weaker than base offense, for teams that have strong and balanced personnel. Teams having more success with, for example, Look Inside are doing so because of an imbalance in their teams and their opponents' teams.

But what differs is that hes not saying that the 2-3 zone is broken.



the other thing is, i believe this is true for "all around" players, because my experience at least with base offense isn't that good. I believe you sacrifice more then you get as a bonus if you choose a specific tactics, but through skill differences(more shooters in a Run and Gun team then inside finishers) and that you take more shots at your offensiv focus it could be profitable there.

But man to man defence is very strong indeed, but if you set your zone right it isn't an disadvantage in my eyes. But maybe we have more balanced defensiv player then offensiv players ;)

This Post:
00
186170.9 in reply to 186170.8
Date: 5/30/2011 3:48:05 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
345345
well 2-3 zone is complicated, and i don't think it is that much related to shot blocking. But, the way I see things, in order for this tactic to work, you should have players in the 1,2 positions extremely high in OD, the center extremely high in ID, and 3,4 should be very balanced defenders(at least 10 in ID and OD or smth). I mean think about it, when you play against such a zone you always pass your way out of it, in to the corner to move the defense around, and if the guys in position 3,4 aren't able to successfully go to the perimeter and then back inside(thus the multitude of layups), 2-3 zone is useless.

This Post:
11
186170.10 in reply to 186170.9
Date: 5/31/2011 5:26:35 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
8989
maybe people who dont have a high opinion of the success of 2-3 do so because their SF is weak in ID and/or has a weakness in OD and / or their PF has a non-existent OD.

i say this because in a 2-3 the sf/pf have to move around to the perimeter/cover centre of the court to maintain shape/play help defense and if they dont then you'd expect the offensive team to find an open shot/drive and shot from mid range or an easy finish on the weak side.

thats not to say this is how the bb engine works, but this would be my view on the bball theory and knowing many teams have funny skill mixes at SF and centre skillsets at PF.

This Post:
00
186170.12 in reply to 186170.7
Date: 6/3/2011 7:22:12 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
5151
For this two game week I'm training JS for forwards, so two of my trainees will be playing 48 mins at SF and PF in the league game. They both have 11 OD and 9 ID. I've never played 2-3 zone but I'm willing to test it out with this formation.

My opponent has played LI for most of their recent games. Will a 2-3 zone be effective?

This Post:
00
186170.16 in reply to 186170.15
Date: 6/10/2011 8:19:15 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
2424
I don't really get where he says Base Offense is the strongest offense. It's clear in the GE that the best offense is solely dependent on your personnel. And not by being flawed either.

From: Johnson

This Post:
00
186170.17 in reply to 186170.14
Date: 6/11/2011 1:45:10 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
5151
Too bad I lost the game :(
I don't think I will play with 2-3 again anytime soon

Advertisement