BuzzerBeater Forums

I agree. How do you think I should have fought his LI tactics if 2 - 3 wasn't right ? An inside box perhaps ? Of a simple Basic defense with an Inside defense strong SF (typically, a PF playing as SF) ?

@moutinho : my bad, I thought exactly the contrary :s On the other hand, I still think that ratings do not match team ratings, whichever one is input and one is output.

Thanks for your feedbacks anyway.

http://www.buzzerbeater.com/match/36180357/boxscore.aspx

My enthusiasm is 12, he struggled more, his PF's scoring average so far was 18 while playing in good shape, all of a sudden he explodes for 28, with 7 GS, defended by my 15 ID PF. Also my whole backcourt plays very good OD. So, the only explanation I could find was enthusiasm, but it still doens't look like it could overcome such big difference in the ratings :S

That's why I don't like 3-2 defense against Motion - because a lot of times, certainly more than you'd wish, opponent's SGs and SFs are shooting from corners over your PFs and Cs. Look at

(http://www.buzzerbeater.com/match/36346412/boxscore.aspx)

Can someone please explain me how on Earth I lost this, with a better TS than his (I was at 8, he was at 5) ?

I guess you learned the hard way that 2-3 defense is not good against LI unless opponent has atrocious guards who can't pass the ball, shoot and drive. And in that case, 3-2 is even better.

I just don´t really understand the result of saturdays game: (36213187)

Its not about that I lost, but how and primarily why its so clear. When I look at the tactical ratings, I see myself slightly better on the inside, my opponent a little more better on the outside. But I have better flow, play at home and the rebounds are 50:31 in favor of my team. We both played TIE

but when I look at the position ratings, they are almost all in favor of my opponent. Arent the tactical and the position ratings contradicting each other?

maybe somebody can help me bring light into this

Well, anyone who plays 2-3 defense IMO shouldn't be surprised if he looses against a sub-par team. 2-3 defense is BAD. It boosts your rebounding, yes, but in addition to leaving big holes in outside defense, it also boosts opponent's offensive flow. Now Match ratings show your opponent had worse OF and still had 10 assists more than you. Well guess what? 2-3 defense! His PG shot 5-8 for 3, that's great percentage for Patient. His FG% was more than 50% and almost 40% for 3. If you played M2M, you can be sure you'd win easily. His SF had 8 assists while averaging 3.6 AST/game during season. 2-3 is only good against teams who play LI and have bad outside players, but against such teams also M2M is good enough, so I don't see any reason why anyone should play 2-3 defense ever. I know there are some who advocate 2-3 in certain situations and I have a question for them: Show me the game with 2-3 defense where 2-3 would be a better option than M2M. I don't think it exists.

(36208912)

Why im winning that game?? I lost everything from match up to teamratings ? or better, to be in context of this thread why did my opponent did NOT WIN ?

Cheers

Will