I am having trouble with figuring out the proper +/- setting, surprisingly mostly related to defending 3 point shooting. It seems I have the same or even slightly better results defending the 3 when I set my 3-2 zone to a -3 as opposed to setting it at 0 or +2. I am new to playing the zone and it seems most coaches that use it, especially at the DII and DIII prefer the 2-3. I chose to go against the grain as that is my nature and I just thought it would make some sense to guard the perimeter well and find good rebounding and shotblocking to swat the small players drives to the basket and to gobble up the rebounds from the failed 3's as they would be well guarded. So what I am asking for is some tutelage in running the 3-2 and or the press/3-2 combo from some coaches that have played it or against it often enough to understand how it is most effective. * Note my two current teams are newer to me and plenty young so the IQ's are low and that could be a big part of the problem but I still feel there is a lot to learn as for defensive positioning. And if any of you are shy or don't wish to share some of your knowledge with the world I would be glad to receive site mail. Thanks and happy new year.

The idea of overloading the perimeter and having studs down low is sound. I've been playing with the concept and find once my IQ's are good at works well. Especially if you play a team that doesn't adjust, or a team that fires up 3's whenever they see a zone (they're assuming a 2-3). Some thoughts:

#1 Bigs MUST rebound. Block rating also very high.
#2 Speed at the perimeter.
#3 Recruit as if for man. But with a zone you can let the occasional low
DE get recruited. But the low DE guy better be awesome!

Just have patience. Wait for IQ improvement. Recruit better guys as prestige gets better. And as for + or - adjustment it seems you have common sense and are probably doing it right.

Thanks jenningss, that seems like some solid advice. I guess this defensive setting must be even more rare than I had suspected since no one else has advice or an opinion thus far.

Fatchance. I have played 2-3 zone with a slowdown and +3 over the last 3 games (3-0) even though the competition hasnt been all that great with my d3 Rhode Island team. You might be able get a 3-2 with slowdown with a plus +3 since you have way more ath and speed then i do.

I've played the zone a fair amount, and I alternate btwn the 3/2 and 2/3, it really depends on my team makeup and the team I'm playing. If I have a stud SF who can rebound than playing the 3-2 for some games is more likely, if the SF I have either isn't very fast or lacks rebounding I will run a + 2/3 against a good 3 point shooting instead of a 3/2.

Thanks guys, I guess I will tinker around with a math formula regarding how high or low to set my +/- setting while my players gain IQ. I had an easy scale(like some others have stated on here) I followed when I ran the press which involved how often the opposing team shot 3's as the main factor. With the 3-2 I have a feeling the scale starts at a different point but where that point is, I am still trying to find it. And then if that fails I will have to increase the value of opponents' speed, athleticism, offensive IQ, rebounding, etc. into not only my +/- setting but also on whether to use a 3-2 or 2-3 zone defense.

I'm a regular zone user, and one thing I've found is that certain zones match up better with certain offenses other teams run. Triangles, for example, need a strong forward or center to be effective. Therefore, I'll rarely run a 3-2 against it, as the big would have a fairly easy time posting up if I did. On the flip side, the flex offense emphasizes guards and perimeter play more, and as a result, the 3-2 is often my defense of choice against it.

When I first started playing a zone, I had read that some coaches would make the determination of 2-3 vs. 3-2 based the following: If the opponent had 3 or more players that averaged 1 or more MADE 3-pters per game, then they'd play 3-2. If not, then a 2-3. The +/- would then be determined by the relative rebounding abilities of the teams. Since then, I've hadn't played a zone in over 6 months until recently and have been looking at it from pct of 3 taken vs. all FG attempts with mixed success. I always try to put my team in a position to neutralize their 3s while giving me a good chance to win the rebounding battle. I've seen some coaches run out a 3-2 at a -5 with success, but I haven't tried that.

I don't take opponents 3pt tendency into account when choosing whether or not to run 3-2/2-3 (at least not as the main factor). Instead, I look at my team and determine if I have the biggest defensive deficiency on the perimeter or in the post.

If I have two poor defensive guards then I might put a strong defender with them and run 3-2. If my post is weaker defensively then I would put a strong post defender in there and run 2-3. The point is to hide the weak defender.

I feel the 3pt tendency and rebounding factors can be taken care of in the +/- settings.

Just my two cents...

Would a three two be a good place to run essentially a three guard lineup? Three players with speed and defense and guard skills along with two strong centers?

Maybe. I guess it could depend a lot on the third guard's rebounding numbers.

Also, if a team comes at you with a two center, 1 PF lineup your guard might have trouble guarding the PF down low. I don't know exactly how the engine handles that.

Oh, if I did it it would mainly be an opposing lineup dependent variant, not a base defense. But I've faced teams that had relatively weak interior players and a strong outside/guard game, and I wondered if that might be a means of neutralization.

You can always try it out in an exhibition game and report the results back to us! It would be interesting to see what happens.

Quote: Originally posted by kmasonbx on 1/02/2010I've played the zone a fair amount, and I alternate btwn the 3/2 and 2/3, it really depends on my team makeup and the team I'm playing. If I have a stud SF who can rebound than playing the 3-2 for some games is more likely, if the SF I have either isn't very fast or lacks rebounding I will run a + 2/3 against a good 3 point shooting instead of a 3/2.

When I first read that, my thinking was "Do you have that backwards?" But I see your logic now. I have a stud SF on my D2 team that can rebound and is fast. So you're saying I should try the 3-2? Even better, my PF and C can rebound and are excellent shot blockers. Hmmmmmm.

I used to despise the 3-2 and got blown out every time I used it, but this season I had good rebounding and the 3-2 covered for a poor defending PG. I guess it depends on the makeup of your team which zone will work best.