BuzzerBeater Forums

I'm only in Division V right now, so I know my inside defense won't be that great, but my PF has respectable Inside D and my C has proficient. Heading into my semi-final game, which will basically determine the winner of the whole division, I'm playing a team that already handed me my only two losses.

The last game I played against them, I used a 2-3 zone to try and stop their big men since he uses a Look Inside offense. His PF and C basically dominated the game. They kept dunking over and over, it got pretty ridiculous. So basically what I want to know is if I should use a 2-3 zone or go with man to man. I've been training in just Inside D ever since I lost that game, so my D has gotten better.

Any opinions?

man to man defense is less risk, since ur oponent can change offensive tactics to like motion, cause he have great guards, personaly i kept facing look inside or push the ball teams whole seazon and in my opinions my centers with 10 and 12 id played the best when i used man to man defense, and my oponents mid range shots were just awfull like 20-25%, since my guards also have like 10-11 od and 5-7id.

u can also try to buy pr manager with speciality to boost ur performance on the road by like 2-3 points, who knows, maybe it will be the key to win the game.

Last edited by Gajus Julijus Cezaris at 10/21/2011 2:52:40 PM

Personally, I think the 2-3 does work in the lower leagues. I've used it with some success. But if you talk to the owners of the top teams in BB, they seem in somewhat universal agreement that it doesn't work at that level.

the problem is not with 2-3

its more about many people just flip there players into the zone, got bad result and think it sucks

basically there are 3 types of 2-3
1. a 3C front court line up with so so OD SF PF. This bumps up the team rating in Reb and ID but usually under perform even again weaker opponent with 2 focused IS scorer @ 20 shot+. A game with prominent IS and prominent ID translate into 2IS scorer with 16IS against 3 front court defender with ~12ID. No matter which of the 2 IS scorer against the 3 defender its always a weak match up.

2. a defense with nomral SF, PF and C. A game with prominent IS and prominent ID translate into 2 16IS against the C with 14-16. Now there is 1 comparable match up but there is still 1 very favorable match up for the offense

3. 1 super C with 2 SF. now thats a bad match up in the very center of the zone, the 2 SF is not there to defend the inside shot, they act more as a wing defender to deny pass into the lane and allow the super C inside to contest all the shot and get 20+ reb. This looks cool until u realize the salary of the super C is 100K+ and the 2 SF is 2M+ at the cheapest.

there is also the fact that the high DR for guards on offense is impossible to stop, because the 2-3 always free 1 outside player. And the entry pass is much easier to make so the favorable match up can get the ball at a good position.

if that is not enough trouble for defense, there is also the FOUL trouble factor. Many team have sub par backup. If the 2 IS scorer are with high aggressive trend then the defender can be broke apart by simple getting shot at 20+ time.