There was a discussion that broke down into a poop flinging discussion on off/def at a certain Div 1 level. There seemed to be opinion, but not much analysis.

I am interested in the thought process in the intentional matching off/def, other than sticking with the inherited off/def and recruting to it.

Under 2.0 there was the idea at D3 of recruiting higher level players with warts and matching them with players with different warts (not really and off/def strategy, but seems relevant to what I'm processing). Then there was the FB/FCP ATH/SPD/DEF at all costs strategy.

The topic that got me interested was matching Tri/Zone at low D1. Intuitively it made sense to me, as Tri relies on 3 scorers and Zone can smooth out differing player attributes. And matching Flex/Man was quickly dismissed.

So if you are mining undervalued players in building a program, what is an optimal off/def pairing?

Analysis please. And limited poop throwing.

I read here before that you need players that can score, defend, rebound, and distribute. If each player on your roster can do two of those then you’re in good shape.

Honestly, with the exception of fast break, I've never witnessed any real difference in offenses that I considered to be of a significance/magnitude great enough that it would alter the type of player I recruited. I just recruit to the defense I want to use (press, in my case, but the principle would still be applied if I ran zone or man teams) and leave the offense as whatever the team was running when I came on board in the hope the IQ's get me a W or two that I wouldn't otherwise get while the D is switching over.

I was one of the participants. I have UNC Asheville and 19 of the 24 SEC/ACC schools are coached by humans. My goal is to give UNC A their FIRST NT win. That's it.

My thought process: Due to location/human population, I'm only going to get flawed players. After scouting 150+ to level 4, I'm almost certain I will not get great athletes who can score, defend, pass, dribble and rebound. My hope is to get a 3-4 good defenders and 3-4 good scorers. It would be great if I could get a couple who do both but it's probably unlikely. I figure I can run a shorter bench with zone/slowdown. Maybe steal a win now and then.

So, with zone in hand, I hope to land a great defender and a scorer with my big men. I hope to get a great defender, a scorer and a player who can do a little of both in my backcourt/SF. Running a 3-2 zone, it will work.

And, with that, the triangle feels like a natural fit as it works best with an inside threat and two outside shooters. At least in real life. I assumed a similarity in HD.

If my goal is to get to the S16 four years in a row, FB/Press or Mo/Man is the answer. To succeed in FB/Press, one needs Ath De Sp Sta. Therefore, you can take guys where that is all they have a wreak havoc off the bench. You can't take ANYBODY with poor Ath De but you don't have to take anyone with Per or Pa.

With Mo/Man you can take build a crazy good team, while having .5 to 2 shooters and no bigs with LP. With Mo/Man you can run uptempo with 11 guys or slowdown with 8. All you need is Ath De Pa.

Tri/Zone teams are great if all you want to do is get to the second round, once, but very hard to implement. Triangle/Zone teams will get ****** losses, even if they all filled with talent.

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/History.aspx?tid=3448

Prairie View is a great example. They got great wins but had inexplicable losses, and got booted out of the NT. Zone is great in theory, you just can't actually win unless you have extreme talent. I'm all for zone at high DI, but even relatively talented teams like Cal got ****** sims, unfortunately two of them were in the NT (In 96 and 97).

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/History.aspx?tid=3266

Short Version:

Press let's you take a lot of ****** players with only Ath/De and have them work together as a team. Not good to recruit EE caliber players, but you actually get results.

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/History.aspx?tid=13790

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=6920

Its easy to see HOW zone would be appealing, but you need EE level players to actually make it work.

I, obviously, disagree. To get 1 NT as fast as possible, it's zone. Shorter bench, less well-rounded players. I'll admit that I'm not sure Triangle is the offensive answer but, in my mind, it seems to be.

Our disagreement began because the example of what your were touting had not won a NT game in over 20 seasons. That is not my goal with UNC Asheville.

there are lots of ways to build success - but you are right to think about location and the competitive environment

for example, in Hawaii I run zone - my goal is to keep the best Island players I can keep, whatever their skills

Then grab internationals and a few guys from the mainland. In that kind of environment, you cant be confident of getting players suitable for man or press

There is no one right path

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/23/2017 3:57:00 PM (view original):
I, obviously, disagree. To get 1 NT as fast as possible, it's zone. Shorter bench, less well-rounded players. I'll admit that I'm not sure Triangle is the offensive answer but, in my mind, it seems to be.

Our disagreement began because the example of what your were touting had not won a NT game in over 20 seasons. That is not my goal with UNC Asheville.

Yes the coach was in his third year.

I have paired triangle with a zone/press on my quads for a long time with very good results. I don't think they necessarily compliment each other however, I just like how the mechanics of each works. I especially like doing the combo defense, as the halfcourt press generates a few more turnovers, and lets me have high enough IQ's to effectively switch to full court press late in close games. The zone gives so many options for court spacing and player groupings, and in rebuilds lets me hide a mediocre or poor defensive player much more effectively. In wooden, when I picked up my second team, after switching Off/Def to Triangle/Zone/HCP by the time my first recruiting class was SR's we were a top 10 RPI team. I jumped to DII, and same thing, after 4 years finishing RPI 2 with an elite 8 run. I am now in my second season in DI, but due to an absolutely awful second session recruiting period after taking over the team I fear it will take a couple extra seasons to get this team into tournament form. But I don't see why I cant use the zone/hcp to carry me to at least the second round by season 5.

As far as triangle mechanics, I think as an offense if definitly gives your the freedom to recruit some purely defensive players who will never touch the ball on offense--players that might go undervalued because of their lacking offensive skills. They don't really matter in the triangle, letting me focus on one or two big time recruits who will be offensive monsters.

Posted by cubcub113 on 12/23/2017 3:39:00 PM (view original):
If my goal is to get to the S16 four years in a row, FB/Press or Mo/Man is the answer. To succeed in FB/Press, one needs Ath De Sp Sta. Therefore, you can take guys where that is all they have a wreak havoc off the bench. You can't take ANYBODY with poor Ath De but you don't have to take anyone with Per or Pa.

With Mo/Man you can take build a crazy good team, while having .5 to 2 shooters and no bigs with LP. With Mo/Man you can run uptempo with 11 guys or slowdown with 8. All you need is Ath De Pa.

Tri/Zone teams are great if all you want to do is get to the second round, once, but very hard to implement. Triangle/Zone teams will get ****** losses, even if they all filled with talent.

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/History.aspx?tid=3448

Prairie View is a great example. They got great wins but had inexplicable losses, and got booted out of the NT. Zone is great in theory, you just can't actually win unless you have extreme talent. I'm all for zone at high DI, but even relatively talented teams like Cal got ****** sims, unfortunately two of them were in the NT (In 96 and 97).

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/History.aspx?tid=3266

With all do respect, this is awful advice.

You can win with almost any combo. That's the beauty of the game. Anyone who tells you have to do something doesn't see the big picture.

Offensively, the difference between the sets is something like this:


Triangle gives a boost to the players with the highest distro and stresses "basketball skills" above ATH.
Flex weights SPEED and PER more than other systems do.
Fastbreak value SPEED and ATH more and LP/PER less.
I don't know how the hell motion works (SPD and BH more, PASS/PER less?) but works best when all 5 guys on the floor have equalish distro and can score.

Using that as a base I think TRIANGLE works best with ZONE because both rely less on ATH. At the lower levels, you can take lower ATH guys which will go over looked.

FLEX works best with PRESS because you can focus on SPD more than ATH/DEF.

FASTBREAK pairs well with MAN and PRESS. You can really punt offense with FB and go pure ATH/SPD/DEF.

MOTION really works well with them all because you don't just kinda need averagish scores. You don't need to sacrifice defense for offense.

With that being said, I think the above only helps you find "unwanted players", good players are good in every system. A guy with 80 in all his cores is going to always be good. but the D2 SF with 80 ATH, 50 SPD, 90 DEF and no offense isn't going to be ideal in MOTION or PRESS but would be very useable in a TRIANGLE/ZONE.

Thanks Trenton. This is the most informative post I’ve ever seen on the offense/defense sets.

Yes, thanks TJ. My objective isn't to get flawed players but, due to location/human population, I think it's my destiny.

Thanks TJ; the kind of analysis I was hoping to get with the post.

I would not think anyone sets out to find the unwanted, flawed player, and all want the 80's across the cores. But it is nice to know how to use a contrarian strategy when your situation dictates it.