All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > How much of a disadvantage is zone defense?
5/7/2014 2:06 PM
Posted by milwood on 5/7/2014 9:55:00 AM (view original):
Scaturo, with all due respect, the team you're using for this experiment is not very talented and is extremely young. Im not sure that team is the best example of a zone team that you would want to use in this experiment. I think it is good to try to maximize your results by using the new information, but I would not expect to learn too much from that group of players.

I'm not saying stop posting your results or stop analyzing the results. However, what I am saying is be careful with what you think you are learning. That team is not representative of a good zone team and the results may be swayed by other factors other than the defensive makeup of the 2-3

Good luck with your team
I am comparing the defensive success vs my teams first six games.     This team ran a 3-2  for the first six games and a 2-3 the last 2.     It isn't a great baseline but I figured it was at least something.
5/7/2014 2:13 PM
Posted by milwood on 5/6/2014 6:56:00 PM (view original):
His rebounding wouldn't scare me off from playing him at the 3, but his ball handling and passing sure as he'll would. Yep, that guy is a trap player

Edit: just realized he was a freshman.....hope he has a lot of room to grow in bh and pa
If i did play him milwood - he be a solid bench guy. someone I could sneak in and use him for what he's good for. I couldn't start him though.
5/7/2014 5:06 PM
My zone team made the E8 in Allen last season. I don't think it's a disadvantage.
5/7/2014 7:18 PM
Posted by terps21234 on 5/7/2014 12:25:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/6/2014 12:04:00 PM (view original):
Posted by wildcat98 on 5/6/2014 9:20:00 AM (view original):
Etta, stop polluting all the good threads with your bullshit.
This was certainly much more valuable than recommending to someone that is interested in zone defense to study Syracuse.

Much more useful to make a pointless personal attack.
He's talking about the other post where you called the guy an idiot. That was a pointless personal attack.
This was certainly a useful post that added to the thread as well. Would read again. 

Y'all blame me for hijacking threads, but you do it to yourselves unless I'm expected to just bend over and take whatever abuse people want to hand out.
5/7/2014 7:20 PM
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/7/2014 7:18:00 PM (view original):
Posted by terps21234 on 5/7/2014 12:25:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/6/2014 12:04:00 PM (view original):
Posted by wildcat98 on 5/6/2014 9:20:00 AM (view original):
Etta, stop polluting all the good threads with your bullshit.
This was certainly much more valuable than recommending to someone that is interested in zone defense to study Syracuse.

Much more useful to make a pointless personal attack.
He's talking about the other post where you called the guy an idiot. That was a pointless personal attack.
This was certainly a useful post that added to the thread as well. Would read again. 

Y'all blame me for hijacking threads, but you do it to yourselves unless I'm expected to just bend over and take whatever abuse people want to hand out.
Etta, you are not a victim.
5/7/2014 7:21 PM
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/7/2014 7:18:00 PM (view original):
Posted by terps21234 on 5/7/2014 12:25:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/6/2014 12:04:00 PM (view original):
Posted by wildcat98 on 5/6/2014 9:20:00 AM (view original):
Etta, stop polluting all the good threads with your bullshit.
This was certainly much more valuable than recommending to someone that is interested in zone defense to study Syracuse.

Much more useful to make a pointless personal attack.
He's talking about the other post where you called the guy an idiot. That was a pointless personal attack.
This was certainly a useful post that added to the thread as well. Would read again. 

Y'all blame me for hijacking threads, but you do it to yourselves unless I'm expected to just bend over and take whatever abuse people want to hand out.
You hijack threads constantly. You're just not self-aware enough to admit it.
5/8/2014 10:13 AM (edited)
Game3

Zone Experiment #1

DEFENSE:
Guard Average:  52/65/61 (ATH/SPD/DEF)
Forward Average: 63/39/62
Center:  42/2/54

REBOUNDING:

Forwards:  11 and 52
Center:  87

BLOCK:

Forwards: 28
Center: 78

PLayed a 2-3 (-3)

TEAM
Opponent shot  21-55 for 2FG (~38%) but 5-10 for 3FG [EDIT:  More like 4-7, then went 1-3 in the last 3 seconds vs a 3-2 +3].    They were shooting about 47% and 37% going into the game.   The 10 attempts were a little over their median and mean for 3FGA for the season.

INDIVIDUAL:

Their primary scorer played PF.   He is 45 ATH,34 SPD 95 LP, 44 PER.   He went  5-15 with 3 FTA.     He was shooting about 53% from the floor and averaging about 5 FTA per game.  I did double team him.  In the play by play he went 2-5 with an assist when the double team was mentioned.

I got torched again by a PG.  It's to be expected I guess with the -3.   The PG (27 ATH,  82 SPD, 13 LP, 62 PER, 67 BH)   went 3-6 for 2FG, and 2-4 3FG.   Only 2 FTA though.   The PGs player log is all over the place (25 FGA one game and 3 another) but the attempts are around the median and mean.

His backup center, who played 23 minutes, went 6-20.   He is 31 ATH, 3 SPD, 80 LP, 8 PER guy.


We gone owned again on the boards (37/46 to 34/48) but I think that is more a function of us being bad rebounders.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
5/8/2014 5:23 PM (edited)
Posted by scaturo on 5/8/2014 10:13:00 AM (view original):
Game3

Zone Experiment #1

DEFENSE:
Guard Average:  52/65/61 (ATH/SPD/DEF)
Forward Average: 63/39/62
Center:  42/2/54

REBOUNDING:

Forwards:  11 and 52
Center:  87

BLOCK:

Forwards: 28
Center: 78

PLayed a 2-3 (-3)

TEAM
Opponent shot  21-55 for 2FG (~38%) but 5-10 for 3FG [EDIT:  More like 4-7, then went 1-3 in the last 3 seconds vs a 3-2 +3].    They were shooting about 47% and 37% going into the game.   The 10 attempts were a little over their median and mean for 3FGA for the season.

INDIVIDUAL:

Their primary scorer played PF.   He is 45 ATH,34 SPD 95 LP, 44 PER.   He went  5-15 with 3 FTA.     He was shooting about 53% from the floor and averaging about 5 FTA per game.  I did double team him.  In the play by play he went 2-5 with an assist when the double team was mentioned.

I got torched again by a PG.  It's to be expected I guess with the -3.   The PG (27 ATH,  82 SPD, 13 LP, 62 PER, 67 BH)   went 3-6 for 2FG, and 2-4 3FG.   Only 2 FTA though.   The PGs player log is all over the place (25 FGA one game and 3 another) but the attempts are around the median and mean.

His backup center, who played 23 minutes, went 6-20.   He is 31 ATH, 3 SPD, 80 LP, 8 PER guy.


We gone owned again on the boards (37/46 to 34/48) but I think that is more a function of us being bad rebounders.
I appreciate your having taken the time to write this little report. When I first started playing HD, I fiddled with a zone for a bit, but since then I've been mostly m-to-m, except recently when I've begun experimenting with FCP. I'm thinking of gradually shifting to a zone with my Nova team, as I'm just not able to get sufficient athletes to compete well in a man-to-man, at least thus far.

[ETA: I think everyone should now refer to "Ettaexpress" as "Ettaexpress, Esq." since he's busy closing cases.]
5/8/2014 5:49 PM
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/8/2014 10:44:00 AM (view original):
LOL two off topic posts directly addressing me right after I say you all hijack threads yourself with your hyperattention toward me.

Case. Closed.
Etta, you are not a victim.
5/9/2014 9:08 AM
Posted by zbrent716 on 5/6/2014 3:56:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/3/2014 5:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by zbrent716 on 5/3/2014 5:07:00 PM (view original):
Gillispie - Rebound. That's the next question in my mind and really a key. Are the 2-3 PF/SF averaged together for defensive rebounding purposes? And how does the "matchup" aspect of rebounding account for the zone?

If so, this is pretty huge, at least for the way I recruit SF. In the past, I've had no problem playing a High Ath/Def guy at SF even with low rebounding, thinking that his ~20 rebounding could be brought up reasonably by a 95+ C and 80+ PF (so the average is low, but maybe decent enough with very high Ath). If, instead, the SF/PF are averaged together independent of the C, now the average is down to ~50, at that seems too low to really work effectively. 

This is especially important if the relatively new "matchup" aspect of rebounding matches up the opposing PF against the average. In D2, that can often mean a 30+ advantage for the non-zone team on offensive rebounds.

oh yes, perfect, thank you. we were talking about this last night but i totally forgot about it today... its not clear to me if players are averaged together for defense, or also, for rebounding. what about fouls? good question.
Any feedback on the follow-up questions?

Seth Dillard really wants to know whether he will actually get to play this season or whether he's (under the engine) too slow to play SF in a 3-2 and too poor a rebounder to play SF in a 2-3.
At the risk of keeping the thread on the rails...

gillispie - have you heard back on the follow up question(s)?
5/9/2014 2:56 PM
Game 4

Zone Experiment #1

DEFENSE:
Guard Average: 52/65/61 (ATH/SPD/DEF)
Forward Average: 63/39/62
Center: 42/2/54

REBOUNDING:

Forwards: 11 and 52
Center: 87

BLOCK:

Forwards: 28
Center: 78

PLayed a 2-3 (+1)

TEAM

Opponent shot 20-43 (~46%) or 2FG and 10-23 (43%) for 3FG.  Although excluding the last 50 seconds the team was 7-18 for 3FGA which is ~37%.  That is above their team average and my defensive average.

INDIVIDUAL:

We got torched AGAIN by a PG (35 ATH, 80 SPD,  88PER, 82 BH) for 25 pts (7-15 3FGA, 1-2 2FGA) although two of the three pointers came in the last 30 seconds.  Now, this guy was way better (20ish points) then the dudes covering him.  His success isn't due to the zone....probably.

The rest of the team was pretty pedestrian except for their SF (27 ATH, 47 SPD, 60 LP, 23 PER) who was 5-7.   My forwards had a huge ATH advantage on him and the DEF vs LP was equal.   The only thing I can think of is that the forwards block score (28) is used pretty heavily.

REBOUNDING:

We got murdered on the boards again about 80% to 67%.


5/9/2014 10:26 PM
Posted by zbrent716 on 5/9/2014 9:08:00 AM (view original):
Posted by zbrent716 on 5/6/2014 3:56:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/3/2014 5:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by zbrent716 on 5/3/2014 5:07:00 PM (view original):
Gillispie - Rebound. That's the next question in my mind and really a key. Are the 2-3 PF/SF averaged together for defensive rebounding purposes? And how does the "matchup" aspect of rebounding account for the zone?

If so, this is pretty huge, at least for the way I recruit SF. In the past, I've had no problem playing a High Ath/Def guy at SF even with low rebounding, thinking that his ~20 rebounding could be brought up reasonably by a 95+ C and 80+ PF (so the average is low, but maybe decent enough with very high Ath). If, instead, the SF/PF are averaged together independent of the C, now the average is down to ~50, at that seems too low to really work effectively. 

This is especially important if the relatively new "matchup" aspect of rebounding matches up the opposing PF against the average. In D2, that can often mean a 30+ advantage for the non-zone team on offensive rebounds.

oh yes, perfect, thank you. we were talking about this last night but i totally forgot about it today... its not clear to me if players are averaged together for defense, or also, for rebounding. what about fouls? good question.
Any feedback on the follow-up questions?

Seth Dillard really wants to know whether he will actually get to play this season or whether he's (under the engine) too slow to play SF in a 3-2 and too poor a rebounder to play SF in a 2-3.
At the risk of keeping the thread on the rails...

gillispie - have you heard back on the follow up question(s)?
i just sent them in, i had wanted to wait a while to see if anything else came out, given that i had already bugged seble twice in rapid succession. will follow up here when i hear anything (possibly pending a clarification follow up)
5/11/2014 10:24 AM (edited)
Game 4

Zone Experiment #1

DEFENSE:
Guard Average: 52/65/61 (ATH/SPD/DEF)
Forward Average: 63/39/62
Center: 42/2/54

REBOUNDING:

Forwards: 11 and 52
Center: 87

BLOCK:

Forwards: 28
Center: 78

PLayed a 2-3 (-2)

TEAM:
Opponents shot 21-47 (~46%) for 2FG and 3-13 (23%) for 3FG. That's actually above their 2FG% and below their 3FG%.

INDIVIDUAL:

Their starting front court went a combined 18-43 against us.

The Center probably should have done better (42 ATH 98 LP).
The Power Forward probably should have done better (39 ATH 87 LP).
The Small Forward probably should have done better (49 ATH 53SPD 69LP 64PER 61BH).

The Shooting Guard went 3-7 from 3FGA. He is an interesting player (76 ATH, 41SPD, 72 PER, 42 BH). He was a 35% 3FG shooter coming into the game.

I suspect the -2 defense coupled with the 2-3 aided him.

Rebounding was basically a push 36REB and 12ORB for both teams. But our scores were very similar.
5/11/2014 10:21 AM
Posted by zbrent716 on 5/2/2014 5:45:00 PM (view original):
I (apparently) have a very different rule of thumb than most people with respect to how I play zone (generally, I tend to switch it up for particular matchups). I had good success with it at D3 and some moderate success so far at D2 in a brutal conference (but no NT title wins yet).

I generally use the +/- to account for 3-point shots, which is (I think) pretty standard in press and man as well.

I generally use the 3-2/2-3 option (I try to keep roster flexibility and may change starter based on the D I run) to account for *where* the scoring comes from. If it is a heavy-scoring backcourt I am facing, I go 3-2 - *even* if they don't shoot 3-pointers. I have, in the past, gone 3-2 (-5) against guard-heavy slashing teams, with some success. If a team gets most of its points from the post, I'll lean towards a 2-3. This seems to happen less often, as more teams seem to get scoring from their guards.
I am starting to see evidence of that last paragraph being spot on.
of 13
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > How much of a disadvantage is zone defense?

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999- WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.