BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > New inside zone or fix 2-3.

New inside zone or fix 2-3.

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
181900.204 in reply to 181900.203
Date: 7/20/2011 12:38:45 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
699699
I am not filthy, I have a very personal strategy regarding my microbial environment ;p

I am not advocating anything, I mostly stay away from 2-3 and use it very sparsely. I think there is a precise set of circumstances when to use it like FCP and 1-3-1. It's true it's hard to set up an efficient 2-3. In any case, I don't want to have to resort to an extreme defense, that would mean I am desperate and seriously overpowered. It should only become an option on very special cases.
What is certainly a wrong move is to pick 2-3 simply because the opponent attacks inside.

Besides I care A LOT about Clusis manager ;p

From: Phantum
This Post:
00
181900.205 in reply to 181900.204
Date: 7/21/2011 9:46:19 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
5050
1-3-1 zone against purely outside teams.
2-3 against purely inside teams

3-2 zone against balanced outside teams
2-1-2 against balanced inside teams

AND FINALLY BALANCE REACHED!

In order 2-1-2 to work

1 and 2 man

If you have two tenacious defensive guards, this might be the defense for you. Working together, these two players are responsible for protecting the perimeter from long distance shots. If they are caught out too far without help from the 5 man, they can make the defense vulnerable to the center lane pass.

These basketball players need to be quick in order to cover the large area around half of the perimeter. They also need to be able to make the burst long distance for the fast break.

In current BB this defense should work because many guys have great OD guards!

And in this defence the 2-1-2 the 1 guy should stop the driving because he's already near the rim.

This Post:
00
181900.206 in reply to 181900.205
Date: 7/21/2011 9:51:22 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
for 2-3 zone you don't need that extra ordinary OD guards, in my team it running quite well maybe because my sf and PF have OD and ID but my guards aren't that great outside defenders.

This Post:
00
181900.207 in reply to 181900.206
Date: 7/21/2011 9:53:59 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
5050
But for 2-1-2 in reality you need... Im just suggesting a new defensive zone.. that could stop inside defenses while having great OD players..

This Post:
00
181900.208 in reply to 181900.207
Date: 7/21/2011 9:57:25 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
oh sorry i though i am used for 2-1-2 as a collective term for the 3-2 and 2-3 zone and though you meant 2-3 because you mentioned 3-2 before.

Edit: just googled it, must tactic page say that the same then the 2-3, but it isn't used so far for 3-2 which could be named 1-2-2.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 7/21/2011 10:03:57 AM

This Post:
00
181900.209 in reply to 181900.208
Date: 7/21/2011 11:25:57 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
5050
Yes and basic differences between 2-3 and 2-1-2 would be:

2-3:
C: is near the basket
Boost in rebounding
C doesnt draw that many charges and SB is working against driving more than ID
C is mostly responsible for rebounding
PG SG doesnt need high OD since PF and SF are helping them more than in 2-1-2



2-1-2:
C is farther away
Not so big boost in rebounding
C draws charges and ID is working against driving because hes being near driver for a while
PF and SF are more responsible for rebounding than usually
PG and SG needs high OD since SF and PF are more responsible for defending bigs and rebounding than in 2-3

Last edited by Phantum at 7/21/2011 11:28:45 AM

This Post:
00
181900.210 in reply to 181900.205
Date: 7/22/2011 4:11:58 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
192192
A 2-1-2 would make sense... if the court was 20 feet wide.

If you're using 2-3 without good OD at SF and PF, you're doing it wrong.

Last edited by RiseandFire at 7/22/2011 4:12:43 PM

This Post:
00
181900.211 in reply to 181900.210
Date: 7/23/2011 3:31:47 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
(36138185) - another top team which couldn't beat my 2-3 ;) To get back to examples.

This Post:
00
181900.212 in reply to 181900.210
Date: 7/23/2011 7:15:26 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
5050
You havent read my message at all... i wrote in 2-3 SF PF are more responsible for outside than 2-1-2 im suggesting a new zone whatever it is 2-1-2 or any other because there is 2 outside zones and if you can find how to beat one with current lineup another will hurt you more while there's 1 inside zone and if you find how to beat it... well...

and 2-1-2 and 2-3 is actually the same thing but players are slightly doing different roles...

so youre sating that for 2-3 court must be 20 feet wide...

This Post:
00
181900.213 in reply to 181900.212
Date: 7/23/2011 9:27:01 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
192192
My point is that in a 2-1-2 nobody is guarding the wings. Nobody can drive on you but who cares when their shooters can stand in the corner with nobody even close to them. Try diagramming it. You'll see.

Last edited by RiseandFire at 7/23/2011 9:27:22 PM

Advertisement