BuzzerBeater Forums

(123801867)
I remember that if you played 2-3 and your opponent played an outside offense like Run and Gun, they will be raining open 3s on you and you'd lose miserably. That didn't happen in the game above. In fact, my best 3 point shooter actually went 2/9 from the arc, with most of his shots defended by opponents.

How did 2-3 suddenly become so good and what do we need to make it work?

+1 pt per minute when your starters were on the field, all this while playing away with a lower attitude.. His 2-3 defense has totally been outplayed

I mean, his players didn't have good game shape and the difference in player level is pretty big so I would probably outplay him even against M2M or 3-2. Just curious how my player who shoots 50 from both field and 3 last season end up missing more than half of his shots and most of his 3s. Even then his numbers also only picked up in the second half or his shooting splits would be worse.

That said, quite a number of them were defended shots as well, I guess it means that even when 2-3 is meant to defend inside offenses, it won't fall when hit by outside offenses as well. That isn't too bad an idea since 3-2 seems to be pretty strong against inside offenses as well. But since 2-3 won't leave your opponent's perimeter players wide open anymore, I wonder if that means that you can use if against any offense like 3-2, and the difference between the two is just a matter of how your players are built?

The 3FG% was saved by my SF, who miraculously hit 6/9 despite being a .30 outside shooter. But I really don't know how my PG's PP100 can be so high when he's shooting below 40% from the field and barely 20% from 3 (despite being a 50/50/90 player).

I know what 2-3 looks like, it was the go-to defense for my team(s) when I played competitive basketball while in school. But BB doesn't necessarily reflect real life. I was actually wondering what the finer points were. Back before the update, I remembered people once speculated that you'd need enough SB, while both forwards would need OD. Hence it was pretty hard to build for. Back then I've even seen suggestions of 3-2 being more effective against LI than 2-3 because it reduces the probability of driving layups, and that a good outside defense across 1-3 can limit the balls getting into the post (I'm not too sure how valid are these hypotheses but yes I have read of them in the forums before). You know, finer details or tips like these rather than a vague idea of what it is.

Last edited by BuzzRBeater at 2/27/2023 7:43:57 PM

I think your best player has been a bit unlucky from the 3pt line. There's a lot of randomness in each game, both IRL and IG, and overall your team did really good.
I don't know exactly how the zone defenses are coded but I think you can have as many defended shots as a man to man defense. As you said, the efficiency of the zone depends on how players are built. For 3-2 you'll need for instance a lot of SB for your PF-C, and in 2-3 you'll need a lot of OD for your SF-PF cause they'll defend a lot of long 2s and 3s

Last edited by slamdunk9 at 2/28/2023 4:55:52 AM

Hey guys. What about this game https://buzzerbeater.com/match/122082398/boxscore.aspx
League final 2 seasons ago.
I'm with 2-3 zone, opponent running push the ball, not outside oriented offense, but still shot almost 60% (13/22).
Now to the players what i know. His sg who shot 6/13 threes, has 21-16 js-jr with 19-21 handle/drive. He was defended by my sf, who has 2o-13 od/id with goog handle drives also. Now his pg who went 6/7 on 3s, as i remember when he was on tl he had around 18-15 js/jr. He was defended by my sg, who had 20/12 od/id with good handle/drive as well. In the end basically those 2 guys just torched my 20od guards. Also my sf was with 13 od and my sub for pg/sg with 16 or sth like that od if i remember correctly. Any ideas why things got that ugly ??

It wasn't a man to man defense so you can't say his PG was defended by a single of your players. His players shot on whoever was defending each area of your zone.
Apparently his guards were quite strong on the outside while you chose the inside oriented defense. So you'd need probably more OD in the PG-SG-SF-PF positions to compensate.
I'm not a 2-3 specialist but I don't think it's OP and I guess you'll lose often against strong outside offenses (including a push the ball with outside oriented guards)

About this particular game, it's more the rebound difference that is surprising to me, cause I feel like you could have dominated a bit more.

Agree about rebounding, there are lot more strange things in that game. 2 through 5 positions i had 20 IS on all players and that was the outcome in the end. 16 IS vs his 12 ID and my fg % is worse than his. Insane. Also he wasnt defending like 2-3 to say that was the reason.
I also understand its not m2m, but his offense isnt motion, rng or even priceton to shoot 60% on 3s with that much volume. I understand his guards werent scrubs but neither were mine with 20 od, so what i can conclude is that 2-3 tactic update wasnt that helpful when defending outside shots. If he attacked from outside he was supposed to shoot 70% maybe?? Insane. I know its a single game and u cant draw general conclusion, but it definetely doesnt speak about updated 2-3 tactic.

Last edited by Nicolas at 2/28/2023 11:37:37 AM

I would like to know your opinion about 3-2 def. How would attack this kind of def? Push the ball with decent flow and a m2m could be a good setup?