Posted by jaymc2007 on 10/11/2014 1:55:00 AM (view original):
So I'm thinking for your sf/pf in a 2-3, it sounds like you want them more of a sf skill set who can rebound
i don't know for sure, but they use one formula, so it theoretically doesn't matter who plays where *from a defensive standpoint*. it definitely still matters from a rebounding standpoint, and offensively, and guard skills wise. its important to remember that... that zone is only different defensively, and all the reasons you had for wanting those players to do certain things, those still apply. don't over-cater to the zone at the sacrifice of rebounding and offense!
but in terms of just catering to the zone, my experience is it matters less than i thought, what your sf looks like. as long as you have strong defense at the 3 and 4, what kind of strong defense you have, it doesn't seem to matter as much. you still would rather have a more speed oriented defensive SF player in the 3-2, than in a normal defense. the pf in the 2-3 is tricky. him using a sf/pf equation suggests spd might be more important than in a normal set, but zone definitely values SB more than other defenses. usually the tradeoff is spd vs sb, strong ath/def players exist at all positions. and in terms of how zone affects that tradeoff, in the 3-2, you probably go more spd at the 3, more blk at the 4, but in the 2-3, you probably go more spd at the 3, and its unclear at the 4. in the end of the day, i still switch from 2-3 to 3-2 based on the opponent in many cases. my old theory on the importance of tailoring the 3&4 would suggest the team's natural alignment usually overshadows the opponent specific changes you could make - which is true in many defenses and systems all over the place (a lot of people will sacrifice natural alignment for opponent specific changes, to their detriment, its one of the top few most common mistakes of HD coaches in general). but i really don't think the specific shape of the 3 & 4 matters as much, that we all made it out to be more important than it really is.
in short, i still think the team-wide effects like going for a good amount of offense, keeping strong rebounding, having good guard skills at the 1 (especially passing) and 2, those kind of things are much more important than how you tailor your 3 and 4 to the flavor of zone you want to run. generally, i'd be open to running the 3-2 or 2-3. the 3-2 gets a bad rap in general (even more so than zone in general), but it is a really useful defense, from where im standing. it is hands down the best 3 point defense in the game, and you can get strong 3 point defense even playing a significant negative setting (in fact, i usually play the 3-2 from -3 to 0 against competitive opponents, sometimes i play a + but usually that is against teams who can only win if they get lucky on their 3s, like a sim or something, or sometimes against teams that are extremely reliant on the 3).