Just took over N. Alabama in (blank: all the world names blend together for me). One, depth chart was set to target minutes, which is truly some Banana Land ****.

Two, guy was running zone/ press such that the IQ’s are equally mediocre in both. I’ve never run a zone before and I’m thinking it sounds fun. Can anybody think of some zone teams that have won championships? I’m sure they’re out there; I just can’t remember any.

Follow up— what would a zone championship team even look like? I.E. would it still have the same high defensive attributes and capitalize on committing fewer fouls while compensating for fewer forced turnovers and either more open 3’s in 2-3 or more offensive rebounds in 3-2?

Or would you lean maybe a few attribute points lower on A, Sp, D, and Sta in order to just max the **** out of offensive ratings?

Plenty of zone teams have won champs.
In my old conference Penn State won it all. With the right roster and settings its tough to score on.

Doing some research this morning, I found some zone/ press hybrids in D1, but I struggled to find anything at D2/ D3. I just don’t remember playing against any really top tier zone teams in the lower levels. Seems like around 70% of the top 10 run press and the other 30-ish run man. I’ve always stayed away from zone just because I never encountered many people trying it, let alone doing really well.

Have you noticed pronounced roster differences between great zone and man/press teams? I guess I’m principally looking for some perspectives on whether using zone is a waste of high athleticism, speed, D, and stamina.

I’ve done decently well with HD, but I’m coming back after not playing and have forgotten some things. Also, it strikes me that, even after a few hundred seasons, there are still so many intricacies that I’ve never learned. I feel like I have theories that are based on eyeballed correlation, but it’s still sometimes guesswork as to just how effective something will be with all of the moving parts. I’ve won championships with teams that I thought would maybe make the 2nd round at the start of the season, but I also had a Lincoln team that was stupid talented every year but I think(?) never made a final 4. I attributed it to not knowing how to run triangle very well, and I haven’t run it since.

I wouldn’t say it’s a waste of athleticism or speed, and certainly not defense. Slight imperfections in Ath and Spd won’t kill you in press/zone, and stamina is not normally an issue, unless you’re also running fastbreak, or are trying to go with a 8-9 man lineup. Athleticism (especially for frontcourt) and speed (especially for guards) still matter on defense; but if you can always have some elite defenders on the floor, you can also find ways to use guys with less than optimal defense who have elite skills elsewhere (rebounding, scoring, distributing). You can utilize skills, and worry less about defensive flaws.

With zone, you are trying to win by suppressing the other teams FG%. You get a small rebounding penalty, so I try to make rebounding a little bigger priority. And you don’t foul as much. On the flip side, it’s harder to produce turnovers, which is the big reason I use HCP. I generally spend about half the practice minutes on the press as on offense and zone, since you’re only using it for roughly 1/3 of a possession.

Play 3-2 and double team two guys on always every game, especially the opposing SF if he's a scorer.

Scoring is underrated. I won NTS with defensive minded teams but the only ones that pulled it out, regardless of seed, were the ones with three potent scorers, one off the bench. I have a team which has underperformed the last two seasons considering the talent it has. I am peaking this season but I am less than confident I will make it out of the S-16, I did not recruit enough scoring. It comes down to Gillespie theory about skills for players not stats.

Posted by ab90 on 2/2/2019 10:00:00 AM (view original):
Doing some research this morning, I found some zone/ press hybrids in D1, but I struggled to find anything at D2/ D3. I just don’t remember playing against any really top tier zone teams in the lower levels. Seems like around 70% of the top 10 run press and the other 30-ish run man. I’ve always stayed away from zone just because I never encountered many people trying it, let alone doing really well.

Have you noticed pronounced roster differences between great zone and man/press teams? I guess I’m principally looking for some perspectives on whether using zone is a waste of high athleticism, speed, D, and stamina.

Yep Yep when I was doing research on my hotbeds Zone Press is the one eventually you want to master it creates a killer defense and scoring spread that always cover.

Posted by zorzii on 2/2/2019 3:37:00 PM (view original):
Scoring is underrated. I won NTS with defensive minded teams but the only ones that pulled it out, regardless of seed, were the ones with three potent scorers, one off the bench. I have a team which has underperformed the last two seasons considering the talent it has. I am peaking this season but I am less than confident I will make it out of the S-16, I did not recruit enough scoring. It comes down to Gillespie theory about skills for players not stats.

The way I always try to set up zone teams for profit and division champ is one scorer off the bench is the reason why I start out with 2 top ended highly recruited players.

I can’t say I know anything about winning Champuonships... but it’s the internet and if you make a typo you must be punished.

Posted by Jdizzpimp on 2/3/2019 8:43:00 AM (view original):
I can’t say I know anything about winning Champuonships... but it’s the internet and if you make a typo you must be punished.

Noticed that after I typed it. Rule is if the letters are next to each other on the keyboard, then it’s a permissible error. After I checked, I and U were next to each other, so I felt justified enough to not have to change it

Look no further than piman at UCLA in Tark.

Posted by ToughLuck on 2/3/2019 4:15:00 PM (view original):
Look no further than piman at UCLA in Tark.

Piman's a great coach.

I dabbled with zone because I thought it would pair well with the FB offense I was running. I figured running zone was a good way to offset the extra fatigue factor that running FB causes. I was never able to have much success with it though. Consistently gave up very high 3 pt shooting% despite having pretty good defensive players. Kind of scared me away from zone for good.

FWIW I won a D2 title running zone and have since been back to the championship game twice. I know there are others who have had success in D2 with zone.

I find that my zone team tends to have better FG% allowed than my man teams and they commit fewer fouls. The downside is rebounding and turnovers. I recruit similarly to my man teams and target ATH/SPD/DEF. It is true that you can better protect a weaker defensive player in that he will be pick up fewer fouls and can't be specifically targeted by the other coach. However, a weak link will affect your entire defense more than it would in man. In man, I can try and hide a weaker defender on a non-scorer, but with zone I don't have that option.

Another reason I enjoy zone is that I can better target a weak defender on the other team, without worrying about the individual defensive match up on my side. So if I have one post who is a scorer and one who is a stud defender, I can move the scorer to get the best match up and my defense won't be affected.

I still slightly prefer running M2M, but I will always keep a zone team as a fun alternative.