with 2 big men with good defense would a 3-2,zone be better?

3-2

Lots of work to do with that team. Build by recruiting players that fit your zone.

This is my first year. I want to build around big men I want to play zone. Would 3-2 be the way to go?

Or in a 3-2 are you big men extended out to the perimeter?

Posted by Indianajoinz on 3/7/2017 9:50:00 PM (view original):
Or in a 3-2 are you big men extended out to the perimeter?

In a 3-2, conceptually, the bigs are on the blocks

I know you seem set on running a triangle/zone at D3, but I have to say if you really want to have success at the D3 level triangle/zone is probably the 2nd or the worst combination to be running at D3.

That being said if you were trying to figure out which zone to run it depends on SF and C

In the 2-3 the Center is isolated on defense and requires high ath/reb/def/sb The SF/PF play outside the block. and the PG/SG are averaged together defensively
In the 3-2 the C/PF are averaged together so the C doesn't require as much reb/sb as required in the 2/3 and the SF plays on the perimeter instead of down on the block

So it comes down to if you can consistently recruit a 90+ reb/sb with good ath/def Center who can lock down the paint and what type of SF are you recruiting, your 3rd guard or a "standard" SF with solid reb and less spd.

Posted by 0nly on 3/8/2017 12:06:00 AM (view original):
I know you seem set on running a triangle/zone at D3, but I have to say if you really want to have success at the D3 level triangle/zone is probably the 2nd or the worst combination to be running at D3.

That being said if you were trying to figure out which zone to run it depends on SF and C

In the 2-3 the Center is isolated on defense and requires high ath/reb/def/sb The SF/PF play outside the block. and the PG/SG are averaged together defensively
In the 3-2 the C/PF are averaged together so the C doesn't require as much reb/sb as required in the 2/3 and the SF plays on the perimeter instead of down on the block

So it comes down to if you can consistently recruit a 90+ reb/sb with good ath/def Center who can lock down the paint and what type of SF are you recruiting, your 3rd guard or a "standard" SF with solid reb and less spd.

Curious...... why is triangle/zone the worst? What makes it a bad combo?

Any elite team in D3 is going to have an ath advantage over most schools. Triangle utilizes ath/spd the least and wastes the ath/spd advantage you have over the opponent, ie more upsets by teams with weaker ath/spd. It requires the most lp/per of any offense, D3 can be tougher to consistently recruit that offense.

Zone is the most complicated defense. It slows possessions(less possessions in a game more chance for variability) Requires consistent recruiting of an elite center if you run a 2-3 and a 3-2 requires consistent recruiting of 2 big men with reb. Since zone defenses slow things down -> less fouls along with the less impact ath/spd has on offense ->less fouls

So harder more specific recruiting, less possessions in a game increases the chances of an upset, less fouls drawn

Sure it has some benefits, Less depth required can focus AP on a smaller group of more talented players, stamina is not as important. You can clean up the boards if you recruit right. Zone defenses generally are the weakness of fb/press teams you see at D3. You can go after those offensive players with no defense since you can "hide them" in the zone.

However the negatives outweigh the benefits and 99% of any triangle/zone team is going to be better run with a more common offense/defense.

Go try and find any consistently good team running triangle/zone or even combinations of triangle and/or zone. I can think of a few real good ones(and I'll say they'd have had more success running any other system)

If you want to run triange/zone wait until you get good at the game and pick up a 2nd team to experiment with, not for your first team trying to learn the game

Interesting thoughts... thanks for that. I run motion/zone and flex/zone with my teams (both at D3). Just was curious as to why triangle specifically was a bad match with zone because I almost went with it instead of flex for my 2nd team.

What I'm trying to accomplish is to develop a strong ATH/DEF zone defense with my motion/zone squad. Gave some thought to a combo D or M2M, but decided that zone would allow me the occasional weak D scorer that would be a liability in other Ds.

Here is probably the most successful current D3 team I can think of that runs zone Carlbuzz Becker Knight

He runs pretty much what you want to be doing it looks, super high ath/def zone with a few sacrifices for a couple low ath/def guys but good guard skills

Here, this team has the type of Bigs you'd want for a D3 zone team

Best current Triangle/Zone team in D3 of any world that I can think of