BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > New inside zone or fix 2-3.

New inside zone or fix 2-3.

Set priority
Show messages by
From: Marot

This Post:
00
181900.182 in reply to 181900.181
Date: 6/26/2011 10:12:19 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
916916
But your game shapes were much better...

From: CrazyEye

This Post:
11
181900.183 in reply to 181900.182
Date: 7/3/2011 9:39:25 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
my "2-3" games of the last 2 weeks:

(32903150) - i believe you could talk about an underdog win here, with playing only with one starting guard out of position.

(32903123) - away without my best playyer(ok he subbed out for the sf who trained on sg for 7 because of 6 fouls), it was at least not an easy win, but maybe i would done it with mtm too.

(32832544) - the already mentioned game against frydek, ok i had the ebtter gameshape but it was still frydek.



This Post:
00
181900.184 in reply to 181900.183
Date: 7/4/2011 6:50:29 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
229229
That's cool. You were supposed to have lost all 3 games

Analising your ratings, it doesn't seem that your inside players have supernatural skills. They just look good enough. So what's your point here? Do your inside players have something special that others don't? Does it have something to do with SB? Or let's just settle down that 2-3 isn't that useless?

This Post:
00
181900.185 in reply to 181900.184
Date: 7/4/2011 8:34:33 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
The soup(boulillon) and Lloyd have both very weak ID(blocking 5/8), but OD 8. Dachsbau who play SF normally have OD 11(high Sub), and a good ID and low blocking(8). Alabora is the only bigs who play without OD(just 4), and the other one who had ID and blocking in an ok area(15/11). I often used an SF there also in the guard spot with 14 OD and 10 ID(just a little bit weaker then the first mentioned C's) and with none blocking(1).

So i don't think that my big are extra ordinary, besides the medium OD they got. But as i said, 2-3 works for me, the shooting percentage isn't much weaker, but i get extra possesion through rebound in comparision to mtm which improve my defense noticeable.

And i never had problems with the 2-3 Zone, when it used against an team actually playing inside even when nobody believes me - with weird reason that his offense didn't work because he choosed the wrong defense and so on.

From: Marot

This Post:
00
181900.186 in reply to 181900.183
Date: 7/4/2011 6:51:26 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
916916
Well i can't say if the zone worked or not in this close game by just looking the boxscore(and also i dont have time to see if it worked).

On the 2on match with m2m you were winning since your attack was better than his OD.

On the 3rd I have my doubts you did a good defense, but anyway your offensive flow won you the game.

From: CrazyEye

This Post:
00
181900.187 in reply to 181900.186
Date: 7/5/2011 4:11:00 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
Well i can't say if the zone worked or not in this close game by just looking the boxscore(and also i dont have time to see if it worked).


but you noticed that i played with only one guard(playing SF) and the weaker inside big men in game one, ok maybe you could count the backup SF and PF also as Guards?

On the 2on match with m2m you were winning since your attack was better than his OD.


Maybe i would win game two, but it would be close, and i though 2-3 was so broke that this is oimpossible? By the way my opponent plays mtm is it broke? And i could show you also many matches where you loose besides having stronger outside attack like that.

On the 3rd I have my doubts you did a good defense, but anyway your offensive flow won you the game.


did you expect that you don't need any offensive anymore when you play 2-3?

Last edited by CrazyEye at 7/5/2011 4:19:45 AM

From: Marot

This Post:
00
181900.188 in reply to 181900.187
Date: 7/6/2011 5:37:31 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
916916
(35705786)

50% in FG...

He lost due to the 2-3...

This Post:
00
181900.189 in reply to 181900.188
Date: 7/7/2011 2:46:58 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
906906
I've used the 2-3 Zone for the first time now in a league match and it seemed to work for me.
I won 98-91 against a team that hadn't lost any game so far this season.
Not sure if it was just due to my defense but it definitely helped.

(32910077)

We have both said a lot of things that you are going to regret.
This Post:
66
181900.190 in reply to 181900.188
Date: 7/7/2011 3:07:52 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
459459
It is really funny (in a sad way) how any time someone wins using the 2-3 you credit the victory to something else, but every time a team loses using the 2-3 you blame the defense.

It couldn't have possibly been that his two inside players logged 53 minutes so their performance dropped in the OT, or that his team shot 29% from behind the arc.

Or maybe his $300k lower salary. Or his twice as many turnovers. Perhaps if he had played M2M he would have lost by sixteen in regulation.

Once I scored a basket that still makes me laugh.
From: CrazyEye

This Post:
11
181900.191 in reply to 181900.188
Date: 7/7/2011 5:13:27 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
(35705786)

50% in FG...

He lost due to the 2-3...


his opponent had nearly the same fg percentage, with man to man and he even don't get an rebounding boost. Without his SF fouling out, and this weakens the defense because he have no backup(alreadxy when he is in foul trouble) he nearly wins against an stronger opponent. I would say he had a tight game because of 2-3.

This Post:
00
181900.192 in reply to 181900.189
Date: 7/7/2011 5:30:27 AM
Venomous Scorpions
Bartar
Overall Posts Rated:
296296
(25706998)

i think that out side offense is better than inside offense ...

Advertisement