Throughout the many years of HD, I somehow remember that playing a minus defense (-5, -4, -3, etc) helps out with defensive rebounding. Also, playing a plus defense can lead to more turnovers due to more pressure being on the opposing guards. I don't remember if I read this on the forums or if I just made it up and decided that it was fact.

Does anyone have any evidence of the exact effects of using different +/- defensive settings? This, of course, does not refer to the effects on the opposing team's shot selection or shooting percentages. Those seem evident.

What secondary statistics (Reb., TO, etc) can be manipulated through defensive +/- settings, and how great is the effect? I'd also assume that different defensive sets would lead to different results. For example, if playing a plus defense (+5, +4, etc) can lead to more TO's, then the press defense would benefit most from this.

i don't have evidence but i can give a solid summary.

- obviously the 3pt % is better against a negative as you mention and reverse for 2pt scoring, especially close to the basket (i consider mid range jumpers in the middle and long range 2s hurt by +, but less than 3pt scoring). but i do want to mention it also impact attempts in a significant way, which is worth considering. for example, someone who takes a lot of 3s, but sucks at them - you may want to let them take them rather than trying to defend them better.

- rebounding is the next most prominent effect IMO. i'm not sure the effect is as extreme at the edges - like, is a -4 to -5 as beneficial as a -1 to -2? maybe. i definitely think within the +/- 2 or 3, theres a substantial effect, like a -2 and +2 are really obviously different. in general, i play those extremes less, so my confidence interval is not ultra high - but i feel like for most of the secondary characteristics, if you will, the effect is blunted at the extremes (which may be true for everything actually). the impact on rebounding between for example, a -2 and a +2, is very significant. i don't think this varies much by set, its just that 3-2 basically sucks at the boards and man has a slight edge over the other 2 (probably man, press, 2-3, 3-2, if you really want to split hairs, but i feel like the only major difference is 3-2 is sucky on the boards).

- turnovers are definitely part of it, but i think its more about the negative side of the board. the more negative, the fewer TOs. i dont find a +5 to give much benefit over a +1 or +2.

- fouling is a big part of it. the negative side especially, increases foul trouble. this is extremely important for high fatigue situations where depth is a factor. zone teams can write this off a bit as they foul less, but not so much as to ignore it completely. for like, 10 deep press teams and stuff, i am extremely reluctant to play - sets. i do it - but i might run a -3 against a 0 3pta team, instead of the automatic -5 most teams should play. against a team who i'd normally go -3, i'm between -1 and -2 depending how severe the 3pta deficit is. so maybe folks don't consider that extreme, but it feels like a pretty huge factor to me.

there's definitely ample room for reasonable folks to disagree about the magnitude of the above, and especially on what that means for +/- implementation, which inherently is very situational to start with. however, i think these effects existing and being meaningful enough to consider is approaching the territory of being a fact.

Thanks for the details gillispie. I'm pretty sure you've forgotten more about this game than I ever knew.

i think i have forgotten more about this game than i ever knew.

ponder that.

I've always believed that the negative impacts of -5 is overexaggerated. I go -5 all the time when its warranted - even when running Press.

You would be surprised to know that positioning doesn’t really impact 3pt shooting %

Posted by mullycj on 6/29/2020 10:06:00 PM (view original):
You would be surprised to know that positioning doesn’t really impact 3pt shooting %

haha that's true! I did run +5 for an entire season. 3pt attempts went way down but % wasn't unusual

Posted by Benis on 6/29/2020 10:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 6/29/2020 10:06:00 PM (view original):
You would be surprised to know that positioning doesn’t really impact 3pt shooting %

haha that's true! I did run +5 for an entire season. 3pt attempts went way down but % wasn't unusual

That can't be right. Is this some sort of fraternity hazing joke? Is there not a meaningful difference in 3pt% when running +5?

Posted by Benis on 6/29/2020 9:58:00 PM (view original):
I've always believed that the negative impacts of -5 is overexaggerated. I go -5 all the time when its warranted - even when running Press.

i do as well, in general - but with limited depth press teams, i don't. that's all i was getting at. a good old 12 deep press team, no hesitation on the -5.

Posted by mlitney on 6/30/2020 12:30:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 6/29/2020 10:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mullycj on 6/29/2020 10:06:00 PM (view original):
You would be surprised to know that positioning doesn’t really impact 3pt shooting %

haha that's true! I did run +5 for an entire season. 3pt attempts went way down but % wasn't unusual

That can't be right. Is this some sort of fraternity hazing joke? Is there not a meaningful difference in 3pt% when running +5?

there's definitely a difference on 3pt% but the bigger difference is often the reduction in 3pta, at the higher + levels especially - and there's sort of an effect where reducing their 3pt shot selection increases 3pt% a little bit, it seems. however the + definitely cuts into 3pt%. no doubt a +2 leads to significantly better 3pt% defense than 0 and by far over -2. its not even close. it is possible i suppose in the right set of circumstances that between a +3 and +5, the reduction in 3pta causing conservative shot selection by the D means the increase in 3pt% could offset the decrease in 3pt% from the extra +2. maybe even be worth more?

i've never been a big fan of +5, it doesn't work as well as like, a -3 to -5. i typically stop at +3 in extreme cases and +2 in sort of normal play. however, to generalize and say that positioning doesn't really impact 3pt shooting % is... not something i would agree with. the difference between -2 and +2 is definitely meaningful.

"however the + definitely cuts into 3pt%. no doubt a +2 leads to significantly better 3pt% defense than 0 and by far over -2. its not even close."

The difference is negligible. If you are seeing different it is because of a small sample size. I don't agree with the logic but it is true. Check with CS if you want confirmation.

Posted by mullycj on 6/30/2020 10:43:00 AM (view original):
"however the + definitely cuts into 3pt%. no doubt a +2 leads to significantly better 3pt% defense than 0 and by far over -2. its not even close."

The difference is negligible. If you are seeing different it is because of a small sample size. I don't agree with the logic but it is true. Check with CS if you want confirmation.

please don't tell me your comment is based on that dumb one liner from support a decade ago that 'the +/- settings don't make much difference anyway'. besides, what the heck could going to CS even accomplish here? you can get solid yes/no answers from them when context and nuance are minimal to none. trying to get an answer on this question from them, IMO, would fit the definition of insanity. assuming sufficient exposure to how they work - which you have.

to me this is 100% the same as the 'you need 7 minutes to not lose ratings' tickets that led to years of confusion and ***-backwardsness. sure... if you want to give a bone headed, context-less, misleading answer - its perfect. a 1 we player with 0mpg needs 7m. normal players do not, and reds don't move meaningfully in any case. how many years, how many dozens of threads did it take to beat back that nonsense? man, i still am ticked about that one (how is it so hard to convince coaches to try ONE ******* rating at 0m to see if maybe, just maybe, one of the top coaches in the game is on to something). literally years to turn that tide. now everyone who isn't a complete idiot takes 'my approach', whether they know the back story or not. no interest in spending another 3 years beating back some idiot nonsense from CS. hard pass. you are dead wrong - and frankly, the CS part of your comment makes you a fool. i'll leave it at that.

I agree with Benis about the negative impact (specifically the fouls committed) is greater when running a (-5). I'm not saying you won't commit a couple more fouls but the general consensus on the forums seems to be half the team will foul out if you run press and (-5). I also agree with mully (and Benis) the 3pt% allowed isn't terribly affected by a +5 or -5, but with one caveat-that statement, IMO, applies when shooters/teams are really good from behind the arc. A majority of the time a team with 3 stud 3pt shooters is going to shoot > 40% regardless if you play +5. Now, you may limit the number of 3's they take by going +5 but not by many.

im just going to clarify my take on the 3pt scoring issue -

1) the biggest impact of +/- on 3s is on attempts. i didn't say this as strongly in my initial post but this is a long and deeply held belief.

2) the extremes of +/- impact shot selection in such a way that their impact on 3pt% becomes somewhat unclear.

3) there is no question in my mind that a -2 and +2 diverge meaningfully in 3pt% and attempts both. even though attempts is the bigger piece.

You on edge this morning or what? holy christ ...