BuzzerBeater Forums

Why not 2-3? I still don't get going M2M when they have no outside threat. I think 2-3 is probably the best.

Because it's hard for your nimble point guard to steal the ball from an out of position center if he's off playing in a zone somewhere. And you don't want to make the passing lanes too open, to the point that even three skilled donkeys can hee and haw and get the ball down low.

I'd actually give more consideration to the 3-2 than a 2-3 unless you've got some really specific skills on your big men. All the inside scoring in the world isn't a threat if every possession is a bunch of Gigantors trying to figure out how to get the ball near the bucket and either turning it over or having to take long, contested jump shots.

3-2 can work as well yeah.

2-3 is troublesome in this case cause it will allow poor OF players from being forced into more mistakes. It will also allow mid range shots which his PF might be good at.

3-2 will force long range shots, and since they are bigs, their JR is probably lacking. Add that it will make their poor OF even more apparent, this might be the best approach.

Also, Manon is a genius. That is all.

Here is why I think 2-3 will work. I played a guy with a 107k Center and a 23k pg. I went 2-3. Their point guard was 7-24. They shot 36-102 for the game. I had a strong inside defensive rating. That is what I really need in this game against a team full of centers. And in a game in which I played 2-3 again the guy ran LI. He had a 10k pg, 13k sf, and a 22k center. Once again I had strong inside defense and they shot 34-90.

Lastly in his only loss it was against a 2-3. I have proflic outside defending guards but I don't think that's going to help me in 3-2. I just don't like the idea of 3-2. Also my team does not generate many steals, its not their game I rely on rebounding. From what I can tell my team preforms well in 2-3 and this guy preforms bad against 2-3. Also 2-3 provides more rebounding and that is what my team thrives on.

It took me awhile but I think I really like running a patient offense. I am an okay outside team but I like the idea that if I have an open inside shot my team can take it.

So against LP do I want to run a fast pace or slow pace. Thanks for all of your help even if I disagree against some of it. lol

mate I agree with manon.probably because there are not many players around who have more knowledge than him.if you put pressure on his Guards then you can use his weak offensive flow to your favour.moreover his GS is weak so that is a plus point for you.he uses 2-3 which is a slow defense so i would suggest you to use RnG cuz it is fast paced and will leave his 2 outside defenders baffled.
so RnG with a 3-2 for me.
don't use FTP cuz it really weakens your defense and rebounding and i have faced it once(defeated the best team in India and that is the only time i have been able to defeat him).
2-3 will leave your perimeter wide open and it will give his guards an easy opportunity to pass the balls to his big men and then it will all come down to ID and SB of your big men.if your big men don't have good SB then you should never use 2-3.

Yeah I was just wondering about a little on FCP but I pretty much decided to go 2-3. BBall champ he doesn't have guards, they are all big men. I actually thought I didn't need advice on offense but I did. I think I am going to run PTB. Its up tempo like BBall champ suggested and it isn't dominate in one area and I need some inside and some outside.

You dont need some inside and some outside. You only need easy points and to exploit weaknesses of your opponent. So many teams only play what their team is best for and totally forget to analyze their opponent and what will be the best way to beat them.
I'm not saying you should do this or that. You will win with a 2-3 zone, but you will win by more if you play a 3-2 zone.

So you're saying that if you're facing someone who does only one thing well, it's not a sound strategy to weaken the rest of your team to try to do that one thing not quite as well as your opponent? You know that BB users are a fairly conservative lot and this type of radical thought might not be well received! ;)

so it seems to me that you have pretty much made up your mind to use 2-3 against your opponent but i just want to quote a few lines from the BB guide written by RiP

Since the implementation of the new game engine a new school of thought that has arose is that the 2-3 zone is far less effective than it used to be in the old game engine. Advocates of this theory maintain that against an inside team it is now far more effective to use a 3-2 zone in order to prevent the opposing teams’ guards from getting the ball into their post players. The logic behind this is that with the new GE putting a stronger emphasis on passing it is much easier to stop the opposing team’s guards (which probably didn’t receive enough passing training under the old GE) from finding their big men in the post.

just give spare some time to read it.

So now you have me thinking even more. With a 3-2 would you not have a decrease iń rebounds?

I sorta of get what you are saying about offensive. But I don't think it's a good policy to run an offense that is your weakest. Outside is definetly weak for me.

2-3 Zone: Increased inside defense and rebounding at the expense of a lot of perimeter defense. Somewhat slow pace. (From Rules) It is generally regarded as the best defense to use against an inside offense but will be a huge problem should your opponent decide to use an outside based offense.
Best Against: Look Inside, Low Post
Worst Against: Run and Gun, Motion

3-2 Zone: Gives an increase in perimeter defense at the expense of interior defense. Slow Pace. (From Rules)
Best Against: Run and Gun, Motion
Worst Against: Look Inside, Low Post

Also would PTB give me more quality shots then R&G against a 2-3 zone?