BuzzerBeater Forums

Currently yes because I just have two scoring guys at my team. But last season I had three guards with 18+ pts per game. These three did the most offensiv work. As soon as I aim for the second dvision I will buy again two other scorers and he will take less shots

Wolph,

This is going to be my last post to you in this thread so if you want to be the internet tough guy and get the last word in you go and do that. Your aren't arguing, you are what we call "poisoning the well." Even in the last line of your post, you try to pollute the content of my post by attacking me.

The version of the 2-3 zone that I linked to is Syracuse University Coach Jim Boehiem's 2-3 zone. Any coach who is worth anything uses this version of the 2-3. Its the most popular variation of the 2-3 zone. Your right that the NBA doesn't run it but what does that have to do with anything. Every NCAA DI Tournament team that ran a 2-3 last year ran it and every team that used a 2-3 in EuroBasket this year ran this variation. The USA NT uses it sometimes on sideline out of bounds plays and used it to shutdown Spain on the last play of a very close exhibition game before the last Olympics.

My knowledge doesn't come from an arm chair. ;)

I haven't read everything here but I wanted to say something.

Anyone think that maybe the 2-3 actually does what it's suppose to in the fact that it cuts down the shots from the bigs? Therefor the LI isn't as effective and it relies on the guards to drive inside or shoot outside. However, everyone says the 2-3 kills you and doesn't work. If you look at it though, it's figuring out how to defend the guards. With drives it takes SBing. In a Syracuse 2-3 the center is supposed to be a good shot blocker, but on BB people use guys with 10SB and expect to have a great 2-3. I want to know if you guys have ever used bigs with 16+SBing in a 2-3 and how effective that was ;)?

I guess when you compare 2-3 to 3-2 you also need to think about shot distribution. From my own observation it seems that the 2-3 forces the guards to shoot more where as the 3-2 gets the bigs to shoot a lot, no? So, in a LI which players should you be more afraid of? The bigs or the guards? I guess that depends on who you are playing and their players. I would rather take my chance having the guards in a LI taking shots and drives rather than the bigs since really efficient bigs can convert 60% of their shots.

Right you say guards will take more shots given it is a LI and it will be more with a 2-3 than man to man. By if you think about it, in man to man the bigs get lots of chances, which end in a higher percentage of makes. However, guards don't seem to have as good of a percentage (some may but lots don't) so the 2-3 defense forces more work on the guards which is actually better when playing against a LI. So if you know you are playing against a team that has stacked bigs then why not force the guards to do more work?