Hoops Dynasty – College Basketball Sim Games - Team Profile

I did not think it was a championship team, but I did feel like it was better than the overall results. Dropped games to Sims and felt like overall underperformed. Want to feel frustrated with the Zone, but also aware that generally just may not have set up the team for best results.

All comments appreciated.

Just quick glance, I’d prioritize rebounding and block a bit more for the bigs you recruit. 3-2 is excellent against perimeter, even with a negative set (I often set my 3-2 at -3 or -4, if my opponent isn’t taking something like 30% of FGA from beyond 3pt). But you can get beaten on the boards, if you don’t have athletic rebounders manning the post.

Posted by 2xRedRaider on 8/4/2019 2:47:00 PM (view original):
Hoops Dynasty – College Basketball Sim Games - Team Profile

I did not think it was a championship team, but I did feel like it was better than the overall results. Dropped games to Sims and felt like overall underperformed. Want to feel frustrated with the Zone, but also aware that generally just may not have set up the team for best results.

All comments appreciated.

It's ok to feel frustrated with the zone. I haven't played D1 in a long time, and when i did, i sucked at HD, plain and simple. But at D2 and D3, it's more difficult to win big with zone.

I don't have data, but I'm sure that more titles are won with press and m2m, than zone. And likely by a wide margin.

1) As shoe said, you need more rebounding with zone. In fact, you have less rebounding than most bad D3 teams (not being mean, but a 29 team rating in rebounding is really bad).

2) You don't have much scoring on this team. Holland can shoot and Narron is decent. But that's it.

3) Look for guys that have two clear-cut strengths (and ATH and DEF are one and the same for the purpose of this exercise). I don't think you have a single guy that fits this criteria right now.

4) Try and avoid guys like Larry Glenn and Russo. Sure, they're decently well-rounded players but they don't really serve a purpose. They can't rebound well enough to be a 4, aren't fast enough to be a 3, don't score, and Glenn's BH and P actually hurt the team. Backlund could almost be a SF once his speed gets to 50 but his 18 passing hurts a lot.

Just my two cents and hopefully something in there helps.

Also, it's easier to build for 1 set than compared to building a team that can play both 3-2 and 2-3. I'm not sure your tendencies, but until you get really good, I'd focus on 1.

So in doing that, recruit your SF position accordingly. So if you're gonna play 3-2, recruit players for SF that are more guard-like. And if you're going to run 2-3, recruit players for SF that are more PF-like.

After another quick glance, your team as constructed is fairly well suited to move to FB/press. A straight zone really doesn’t let you capitalize on your stamina strength, and you’re not going to produce the turnovers to really feed your FB offense. If you can sign a full class, I’d start moving this toward press, maybe play a combo next season. Your scoring is ok for D2 FB, I think, although if guys aren’t hitting 33% of their 3s, I think you probably want to move them to -2 3pt tendency.

Thanks for feedback. .5 recruiting cycle not enough to change course, but points taken under advisement. A couple clarifications:

1. My intent was to recruit/build a consistent 3-2 team; which meant 5 "bigs" on the roster at a time. But this may be negatively impacting ability to Reb/SB.

2. A bit stubborn but I "want" to make the FB/Zone work. However the combo is intriguing; how do I do it while maintaining individual skill practice improvement.

If you're running 3-2, i don't think you need 5 bigs. Maaaaaybe, because you want to run fastbreak with it. But I've won titles with 4 bigs in press. Zone doesn't hit you with fatigue the way press (or even m2m) does. BUT.... those 4 bigs need to be able to REB and SB. All 4 of them do