BuzzerBeater Forums

In my scrimmage of last thursday I set my defensive matchups to be like this:

PG (Camps) to play defense as SF
SG (Daffner) to play defense as PG
SF (Torelló) to play defense as SG

But during the match I realized that:

Camps (offensive PG, defensive SF) was actually defending to their SG (Candenas)
Daffner (offensive SG, defensive PG) was actually defending to their SF (Budkinas)
Torelló (offensive SF, defensive SG) was actually defending to their PG (Gastone)

Both teams were playing Patience and Man to Man.
To be sure I loaded the tactic of this match to my next scrimmage (because the new defensive matchups are only for SC, that's why I had to wait until today to report this).

Here you have a picture of my loaded line-up and a moment of the match where my player Torelló was defending to their PG Gastone, when he should be defended by Daffner.

(http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj94/ebustelo/Imagen1....)

This is just an example, because these defensive matchups worked similarly (wrong matchups) during the whole match.

It is a little bit complicated to explain, I hope I did not make any mistakes.

Last edited by Emilio at 11/14/2009 12:57:12

Same by me, only the positions were different.

I guess I should re-post it here too, to this more specialized thread.

It may be a coincidence but I observed some unusual defensive matchup during my game. It almost look like defensive assignments from my upcoming scrimmage was used instead. I play a zone a lot, never noticed that positions guarding that opposite players on those places on the court. Could you please check that? Thank you.

SC defensive assignents:

PG gurading SG
SG -> PF
SF -> PG
PF -> SF
C -> C

Do you know whether this has been fixed or not?
In my last scrimmage I switched defense from SF and PF and I did not have problems,
but I´m afraid of using the same rotation (PG,SG,SF) and have something wrong.

i think i figured out what the problem was and have fixed it... it was only a problem when you did a 3 way or 4 way cyclic swap. like a->b, b->c, c->a. We implemented the cycles backwards.. i have fixed it now.

Sounds logical. Good job, just on time for the next season! ;-)