Zone vs. Small Forwards Topic

aperi
Posts: 132 (0)
Hall of Famer
85
Prospect
Question for all who play zone or strategize against it. How do you think each set (2/3 vs 3/2 ) measures up against the small forward? I would guss it depends if he is perimeter oriented or not. But if a star scorer comes from the SF spot, do you switch things up? 
1/5/2015 3:09 PM
oldave
Posts: 1162 (0)
Hall of Famer
3 302 12
Pro
i think it depends whether he is primarily an inside scorer or perimeter player.
1/5/2015 3:21 PM
terps21234
Posts: 728 (0)
Hall of Famer
305 17
Prospect
Posted by oldave on 1/5/2015 3:21:00 PM (view original):
i think it depends whether he is primarily an inside scorer or perimeter player.
+1. I play zone and if there SF shoots 33% of his shots from 3, I play 3-2, if not 2-3. Also if he is the only 3 point threat and have good inside scorers I play 2-3 and double always the SF.
1/5/2015 4:23 PM
pkoopman
Posts: 868 (0)
Hall of Famer
88 6 20
Rookie

If you're playing 2-3, your opponents SF is going to be guarded by your SF-PF combo. Playing 3-2 means he'll be guarded by the PG-SG-SF combo. If you're "hiding" a defender in the zone, you'll want to take this into account. Other than that, I agree with what's been posted, if the SF is a star perimeter player, I'll tend to go with 3-2; if the SF is a star post player I'll tend to go 2-3. If the opponent's SF is not a significant offensive threat (ie, not one of the top 2 scorers), I'll stick with what my team is set up for. 

Having a versatile SF able to defend inside and out is a huge advantage when operating the zone, as it basically doubles your defensive options.
 

1/5/2015 9:05 PM
aperi
Posts: 132 (0)
Hall of Famer
85
Prospect
Thanks guys, I've been recruiting for those types in general. I think I've come to the conclusion that in the hierarchy of recruiting needs, A SF with those in/out skills is necessary but not necessarily ideal to man or press teams, so I look for them later in the process after people have made their moves. Or, even wait till after signings
1/5/2015 10:12 PM
milwood
Posts: 514 (0)
Hall of Famer
79
Rookie
When setting up my defense using a zone a look at each player as just a piece of the offense. And not what position on the floor they play. I wouldn't go off percentage of shots they take from behind the arc. There are a lot of players that take more than 1/3 of their shots from 3 but if they are shooting a terrible percentage I would what to encourage that guy to shoot more threes by positioning my defense.

Looking at one guy is almost never a good enough reason to switch between a 3-2 and 2-3. You need to look at the team as a whole and the players attributes and statistics as a whole. What percentage of the teams shots are from 3 and what are the key guys shooting from outside are a better barometer of the teams scoring than just looking at the one guy.

I just think it is a trap to base your positioning on just what player and one player at one specific position at that
1/6/2015 9:24 AM
aperi
Posts: 132 (0)
Hall of Famer
85
Prospect
Thanks Milwood, you're always a good source on zone knowledge. I use that theory a lot too, where a team overuses a weaker three point shooter and you can coax them into taking bad shots. It doesn't fool the good coaches, but it does pay off sometimes.

If they have one backcourt shooter and the rest of the strength upfront, I sometimes do the 2/3 -1 or 2 and double team. I only eyeball things, and it rarely looks to make a difference in the stats, but I find a win games that I shouldn't, It just disrupts things. If my SF has some speed, and low REB and BLK I tend to play more 3-2, but I've found that trying this strategy with a 3/2 -3 or -4 doesn't have the same effect.

Would you say  that when the SF has a much higher distro then everyone else and is a slasher (which is a style of player I see somewhat regularly at the 3). Do you think that 2-3 (in general) defends him better because it's simply 2pt shot vs 3pt shot ratio?
1/6/2015 3:13 PM
jaymc2007
Posts: 428 (0)
Hall of Famer
92 5
Prospect
When I am playing zone, and mind you I am just getting into it and not great at it yet, but I look at the whole team opposed to just the SF.  If the SF is a beat of a three point shooter, but 70% of the team's points is coming inside from their PF and C, I go 2-3.  Same with PG and SG.  Now, if the SF is the main threat, I think somebody said 33%+ of their points come from deep then shade toward that with a 3-2, I agree with that.  I actually go closer to 40% of his shots, depending on what his 3PFG shooting percentage is.  If he takes 20 three's a game and is only hitting 5 or 6, I look at other factors.
1/6/2015 3:17 PM
milwood
Posts: 514 (0)
Hall of Famer
79
Rookie
I really don't care who is shooting the threes. I've played teams that had a PF effectively shooting 3s. If the team shoots close to 40% of their shots from 3 or I think they will if I play a 2-3 I will switch to a 3-2.

But also sometimes your team may just not be set up to play a 3-2 and then you are always better off playing a 2-3. It really depends on much more than a SF. Just look at the SF as an offensive player and disregard the position.

I also almost always recruit a guard to play Small Forward so maybe that changes things? I dunno
1/6/2015 3:29 PM
jaymc2007
Posts: 428 (0)
Hall of Famer
92 5
Prospect
milwood brings up a good point, if you don't have a swing SF (one that can play defense in 2-3 and 3-2) then it doesn't matter.
1/6/2015 3:37 PM
terps21234
Posts: 728 (0)
Hall of Famer
305 17
Prospect
I agree with milwood on pretty much all. OP was specifically asking about zone vs opponent sf position. If slasher and best scorer yes 2-3 and double. But how do you know who doubles out of 3-2 and 2-3? Also reb and defense. Remember 2-3 the sf and pf def and maybe reb ratings are paired and c stands alone. If you have weak c then 3-2 because than pf and c are paired. If you have real good guards and sf scores inside but team shoots a ton of 3's than don't be afraid to play 2-3. But remember def ratings, how they are paired, rebounding for you and opponent, your c, and if their sf has good reb ratings. Just my opinion
1/6/2015 7:46 PM
terps21234
Posts: 728 (0)
Hall of Famer
305 17
Prospect
Posted by milwood on 1/6/2015 9:24:00 AM (view original):
When setting up my defense using a zone a look at each player as just a piece of the offense. And not what position on the floor they play. I wouldn't go off percentage of shots they take from behind the arc. There are a lot of players that take more than 1/3 of their shots from 3 but if they are shooting a terrible percentage I would what to encourage that guy to shoot more threes by positioning my defense.

Looking at one guy is almost never a good enough reason to switch between a 3-2 and 2-3. You need to look at the team as a whole and the players attributes and statistics as a whole. What percentage of the teams shots are from 3 and what are the key guys shooting from outside are a better barometer of the teams scoring than just looking at the one guy.

I just think it is a trap to base your positioning on just what player and one player at one specific position at that
+1111
1/6/2015 7:47 PM
aperi
Posts: 132 (0)
Hall of Famer
85
Prospect
Well there is definitely a strategy to recruiting this, and I think we all agree, the makeup of the team is more important or at least as important as the defensive set. If you have a guard at SF, you are def set-up to play 3/2. This actually may be an interesting idea to try on a Flex team. 

I thikn Terps brings up a good question, not just who doubles out of the 3/2 vs 2/3 but how much is that three weighted in each set? If he's a guard type and has some speed, how much is he adding to the 3/2 against a team that 2/3 is just undeniably the best set (like types that shoot 2-5 threes a game). If he had poor REB/BLK would his contribution of simply being in that position in the 2/3 outweigh his effectiveness as a 3/2 or, do you play a 3/2 -3 or -4 to get your D set-up similarly but sluff off enough (and assuming hes shooting less threes bc he has good bigs who your PF and C need help with).
1/7/2015 2:50 AM
mikvitu
Posts: 304 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 61
Rookie
My guess is that in a double team the average maybe gets weighted towards the better defender, but then the sim has to pick which is the better defender, and I haven't been able to reconcile that part yet.
Early this season I tried to play exclusively 2-3 zone with a rebuild team, and I did notice the opposing small forwards torching me, but the rest of the team would be average. Doubling the SF did seem to work, and we were holding that spot to fewer points, but the rest of their team usually made up for it because we had terrible I.Q., and were really young so I'm assuming it just exposed us. 
1/7/2015 3:01 AM
Zone vs. Small Forwards Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 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.