Anyone know if this could be a legit gameplan? Effectively if you have some good big men and fast guards, this would work? The way i see it, your minus setting would cancel out the negatives of a 3-2 defense and being in a 3-2 defense will slow down perimeter shooting forcing them to go inside. It may give them a few more looks from 3, but i dont believe enough to hurt you badly unless all they do is shoot 3.

Anyone tried this with any possible success? I've run 2-3 for a long time and even run with a 2-3 press with success before, feel like it's time for a change. Thoughts?

I have 1 zone team (in DIII), and I've run a lot of 3-2 the last 4 or 5 seasons, usually at a -1, -2, or -3. The way I've run it, though, in games where I'd otherwise consider doing a 3-2 -4, I just run a 2-3 at -2 or so, on the theory that the other team isn't shooting 3s anyway. Haven't had a huge amount of success though.....

The whole idea of the 3-2 is to restrict perimeter shooting when an opposing team is very good at hitting 3s. I don't see the benefit of going minus with it. I suppose it could work once or twice a season depending on the opponent but to use it routinely seems counterproductive. Any coach that sees a team doing it consistently would load up on 3s. I would anyway.

I have found the 3-2 to be much more effective the past couple of seasons. 3-2 at minus 1 or 2 is tough to beat and the rebounding isn't that bad.

I agree with grecian. I used to find that the 3-2 was a guaranteed loss, but in the pasr 2 or 3 seasons it has won me a few games. I have a mediocre DI team, but one of my few wins was against a far better team using the 3-2 zone -5. I am not a playoff team so I plan to try it a lot and see how it works. Check back and see how I do.

Interesting, grecianfox. I wonder why? Maybe I will try experimenting with it. You have to be flexible in this game.

I was 27-4 this season with the 3-2 zone at Sacred Heart in Knight. I mostly used the 3-2 zone at a minus 2 or minus 3. I led D1 in FG% defense, was sixth in 3PT% defense and was third in margin of victory (25.0). Of course it helped that my center, McBratney, was the Defensive Player of the Year, but I played with three quick guards (95+ speed) and two big men (90+ reb) and it worked very well.

This is about what i was leading to. I have some solid big men and plenty of speed at the guards. I think the 2 bigs can hold down the paint if anyone slips through which now keeps more defenders for the perimeter shots.

As i said i've been using the 2-3 the whole time i've been in HD and have had success. Recently it seems to be less effective than before though and was looking at alternatives. I don't have the depth for a full press team or the defense for a M2M.

What kind of weakness can you really find against this? Yes they are going to jack up more 3's with you sagging a lot, but with more defenders on the perimeter with good speed, they should be able to contest most shots and when sagging this deep, you should still be able to rebound and defend the the paint pretty good.

I think that the 3-2 at a negative setting is an effective defense when the team you are playing runs a 3-guard offense (or the equivalent) but the perimeter shooting of the 3 guards isn't great.