Ok, so I realize I'm considering doing what many vet coaches would say "NEVER" do. But puting that aside, if you had a team that was equally good at zone and man, against what match-ups would you play a man? Against what match-up would you play a zone? And try your best to refrain from the, "I'd never play zone" joke.

And if you'd really like to help... you can look at my roster:

http://whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=2285

I use quite a bit of zone in late game lead situations(3 - 2 zone) especially against teams that shoot allot of threes in those situations.

2-3 Zone works great against teams with poor outside shooting. You can really shut down an inside game with a - position 2-3 zone.

3-2 Zone works great against teams that shoot a lot of 3's, especially if you have a rebounding edge inside.

I also use the 3-2 in late game lead situations.

Doubleteams also seem to be more effective in zone than M2M in my experience, I'm not sure why.

On the other hand, man to man is significantly better than zone at rebounding, so I'd use the m2m if you are at a disadvantage in RB.

Also, I think if you have good defenders, M2M is a better all-around defense, especially against balanced attacks.

I always thought it would be better to play man against a team that shot the 3 ball well... 3-2 zone is better than m2m in that instance?

If you know they are likely to be shooting allot of threes rather than a more varied selection of shots, yes.

Quote: Originally posted by mccabemi on 10/09/2009I always thought it would be better to play man against a team that shot the 3 ball well...   3-2 zone is better than m2m in that instance?

Yeah, 3-2 shuts down the 3-point shot. That's pretty much all it does well, IMO.

It's bad for rebounds and for defending the inside game though, so you really need to pick your spots carefully.