I took over a team that have been running a 3-2 zone. I cannot find much on this on the forums. I assume it is basically a 1-2-2 zone where a quick point guard on top would be a must. Just wondering if anyone had any ideas about how it works on HD.

in the 3-2 in HD your pg-sg-sf are all evaluated defensively, using the same equation, meaning the value of the ratings is the same, on defense, for all 3 of those players. your pf-c are also evaluated on the same equation. then, all 5 players are averaged together, to come up with a team defensive ability. the way the players are evaluated also varies by distance from the basket.

so, the zone concept in HD is rather general, not really that specific. a quick point guard is nice, but not really much more so (or less so) than in any other situation in HD.

you will want more SB in your pf/c in zone, than in any other set, that is a feature of zone in general (well, in the 2-3, the pg/sg have the same equation, then the sf/pf have the same equation, and the center has the same equation - so you REALLY want more sb in your c, in the 2-3, and the pf/sf as well to a lesser extent). you will also be able to run fewer players for longer, you get tired as a slightly slower rate, and foul slightly less. so, that means you really want to focus on getting some studs in there, to run the show, and you can worry less about depth than other teams. its not really that much different than man, in terms of depth required, the starters only play a couple extra minutes, although fouling slightly less also helps.

Posted by gillispie1 on 4/10/2016 3:23:00 PM (view original):
in the 3-2 in HD your pg-sg-sf are all evaluated defensively, using the same equation, meaning the value of the ratings is the same, on defense, for all 3 of those players. your pf-c are also evaluated on the same equation. then, all 5 players are averaged together, to come up with a team defensive ability. the way the players are evaluated also varies by distance from the basket.

so, the zone concept in HD is rather general, not really that specific. a quick point guard is nice, but not really much more so (or less so) than in any other situation in HD.

you will want more SB in your pf/c in zone, than in any other set, that is a feature of zone in general (well, in the 2-3, the pg/sg have the same equation, then the sf/pf have the same equation, and the center has the same equation - so you REALLY want more sb in your c, in the 2-3, and the pf/sf as well to a lesser extent). you will also be able to run fewer players for longer, you get tired as a slightly slower rate, and foul slightly less. so, that means you really want to focus on getting some studs in there, to run the show, and you can worry less about depth than other teams. its not really that much different than man, in terms of depth required, the starters only play a couple extra minutes, although fouling slightly less also helps.

very nicely and succinctly put yo...you should probably save that response so you can whip out quickly in the future.

Don't forget- zone IQ is for both 2-3 and 3-2, so you could keep the same IQ levels if you changed between them (some zone coaches do that as part of gameplanning)

Thank you guys for the great information.

you should definitely take advantage of the ability to switch from 3-2 to 2-3 depending on the opponent. One of the advantages of zone.

Posted by chadking on 4/10/2016 2:20:00 PM (view original):
I took over a team that have been running a 3-2 zone. I cannot find much on this on the forums. I assume it is basically a 1-2-2 zone where a quick point guard on top would be a must. Just wondering if anyone had any ideas about how it works on HD.

gil's comments are spot on. Switching is great too, but I like to choose which is my "base" zone; 3-2 or 2-3. The same idea holds. Simply put, in a 3-2, things work better when you've got 2 strong "C" type players (SB, REB, ATH, & DEF). If you only have 1 "C" (a good thing, if you really just want to put a good forward on the court over your next best C), then you will be favoring the 2-3 for exactly the reasons that gil mentioned.

Side note: a 3-2 isn't really a 1-2-2, but this game treats it that way in terms of its effect on perimeter shooting. IRL, I've only seen one team run 3-2 for long stretches. It's real weakness is that you are either leaving the high post or the top of the key wide open. The little understanding I have is that a 1-3-1 is really just a 3-2 with the post defenders stacked at the high & low post, rather than weak & strongside.

The major engine improvement that I'd really like to see (horribly unlikely ever to occur) would be to mix the 3 defensive IQs into different defenses. So, change press IQ, into practicing "trap". Then you could practice zone + trap and run a 1-3-1; man + zone = matchup zone; trap + man = a proper RL "press" (like you will see Louisville or VCU play). That would allow a team that practiced solely "trap" to run a pure press like you think of with the classic Loyola Marymount or Grinell "system". Apologies for the digression.

Posted by dacj501 on 4/11/2016 2:05:00 AM (view original):
you should definitely take advantage of the ability to switch from 3-2 to 2-3 depending on the opponent. One of the advantages of zone.

I really wish they'd let you switch between all the defenses without any type of penalty.

Then allow you to add an infinite amount of if-then statements:

Start game playing man to man.
If PER shooter gets subbed out run 2-3 zone.
If down 3 with 2 minutes to go run press.

etc.

Would put a lot more strategery into gameplanning.

Posted by dacj501 on 4/11/2016 2:05:00 AM (view original):
you should definitely take advantage of the ability to switch from 3-2 to 2-3 depending on the opponent. One of the advantages of zone.

I actually advise against doing this. You need different players for the 3-2 and the 2-3 at the 3 and 5. You can do it but it isn't as easy as some people think.

How diff tj, how interchangeable are my guards? I've started schaeffer at pg and sf in both sets. English at sg and sf in both sets, I prefer to go 3-2. Afraid to experiment, never had such a squad but curious if you would play either zone set with these guys

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=2626

I'm with trentonjoe on this. I run only zone, have had a lot of success with it (this will be my 9th 20+ win season in 10 seasons as well as 9 NT berths). I use only 3-2 zone, never touch 2-3 zone. I have my reasons for it, but trenton is correct, your team is probably set up better for one than the other.