BuzzerBeater Forums

I wouldnt say its a junk defense from my in court experiance...Against teams that rely in 1 or 2 players max its really good and it can ruin the opponents game...specially if the star player thinks too much of himself and hasn't got the ball for 2-3 plays then he will probably make a really bad choice when he gets the ball in his hands....With one defender being overplay all the time when he tries to make his move he will have the rotation of the other defenders on him....Most of these "star" players will try to make the basket instead of passing to a teammate....
If the "star" player has brains and experiance he can ruin the defense easily though....

This is for amateur basketball, though. In professional leagues, box and one is a rubbish defence. They're more likely to discuss it as a team and accept to either double team, or over play and try for quick rotations.

I agree that this is not for pro basketball...But (for short periods of time) you can still see it in a game in pro leagues....

In all my time of watching NBA, NBL etc, I've never seen it. I've even only seen few amateur teams play it on very few occasions. A "box" zone defence is a strategic nightmare. Offensively it's just too easy to break down.

It may be a good idea for this game, though, considering some managers like to buy a behemoth to base their team around.

I'd like to see different full court presses, or have just the guards pressuring the ball from full or 3/4 court (which is very common in pro leagues). Even combinations of full court and dropping back to m2m or 3-2 zone would be good.

well there is one different factor: if the inside isolation ends up with best option playin guards at inside with rebounds pulled high there will be no more players higher than 196cm at all.. no inside players in game.. kinda weird isnt it?

i dont see a point to create anything against M2M defense while it is very vulnerable for 90% of teams in BB.. but that is whole different story..
i will analyse this one game and next games and tell you the result than. what is crazy is that this tactic never showed up to be tested. i think things should be tested first before they influence whole game in important games. becose if you try to compete with the best here it takes few seasons to build up strategy and buy or train players sutiable for that and after 2-3-4 seasons what is half a year of focusing to one competition maybe than someone just releases nonsens without reasonable testing that my friend would piss you out and you lose your faith (if you had) to the game.. this was all hypotetical yet but the fact is this game doesnt work properly especialy for those who play it for a longer period of time and trust me there are some dolars in their supporters..

There is no reason to defend BB's like you do in this thread. I really don't understand why Outside version of new tactics was for whole season in SC and inside wasn't. And even if they tested in their computers there is no knowledge among wide community and that's was zajino wrote. Now it can be lottery until we learn this tactics and long term strategies can failed against risk with unknown tactics. And also as soon as we have knowledge of new tactics some long-term strategies can be devalueted and the others capitalized ...
And about supporter and non-supporters and testing in PL matches. Non-supporters can find as many PL games as they want and they can study them even if they can't set the lineups.