BuzzerBeater Forums

3/ I have tested 2-3 zones several times (one full season using it with my utopia team in season 35 with SB specialists as PG and SG positions) and I think that this tactic is flawed somehow. It can work (versus inside offense) but only 2 or 3 out of 10 games, which is not enough. I can only remember one Euro final where it worked : (33956) So it is definitely a tactic I won't use at the NT level.

I will just add that I just went through an entire NBBA season never giving up 100 points, running exclusively 3-2 or 1-3-1, and I had a lot of SB. A couple seasons back I ran a 2-3 in a PL final against a team of not NBBA caliber and gave up well over 100. It was a limited sample but it's another point to add to yours - essentially, that SB isn't what's broken about 2-3, it's that the zone itself is too flawed.

I also don't know how you can compare me to Sahand

OoOoooh, that was a low blow! If this was a boxing match I’d almost certainly give Khenry a red card and he’d be forced to take a shower with your local rugby team whether he liked it, or not.

In your defense, you’re cousin is a total babe!

a 2-3 zone from every bit of testing i did was a tactic that simply didn't work as intended and until the day (if the day occurs) that it gets a tweak, there really isn't much reason for NT or u21 to consider running it.

maybe someone out there has some way of utilizing it that i haven't seen, but i just smh when it is run for the most part.

also, are tools broke or am i just not allowed into them? Not that i have much interest in this game at this point, but would be sad if they are dead again.

Last edited by FurY at 8/17/2019 4:20:42 PM

Roast me as you like, but when Knott is on NT guess who’s gonna be keeping him in good GS...

Not you...

Can we get a -1 ball function @Marin ;)

Sorry this took so long to get a reply. Picked up a number of extra shifts for the final weekend of the Iowa State Fair.

1) It will take continuing the growth and re-interest in participating in the NT that we've done. That includes further engaging Discord members(@everyone lol) and being more engaging on-site. My on-site posts dropped off after I got laid off from my job IRL, but I'm in a more stable position to retake those up again, as well as what was mentioned in my speech, for managers to join a kind of "email list" where I will BB-Mail essentially the same discussions being held regarding the team on Discord. I would also like to bring more responsibility with those assigned to opponent scouting, but I know the more people that are engaged and participating the more that jump at scouting opponents on their own. Having a regular schedule of someone doing that would help us in game planning and bring more responsibility to managers besides the NT head guy.

2) I'm a guy that has fallen more in love with SB each season, with part of that being a real life obsession with the defensive end of the floor. SB can be hard to see the impact of since altered shots don't show up in the box score, but that is definitely something that has an effect on the game. That said, a player does need to be able to impact the game with the ball. Where I disagree on its use is that you can only impact the game from scoring. Lower scoring but higher PA on a defensive specialist something I would say is more than sufficient at any level, depending on where any significant holes are earlier in the training years.

3) I'm in agreement that 2-3 may need to just get fixed, regardless of the players used. Last season where we experimented against China, much to the dismay of the French that would have preferred to see us go LI/M2M instead of trying things in a meaningless game for us, the small ball lineup in the 2-3 with Princeton on the offensive end was interesting. Would I use this in another game against a top team? Most likely not unless a distressing week of injuries and poor GS forced us into a desperate move, but even then a different defensive tactic would likely be better.

4) High TSP tends to be a good barometer for comparing players, but there are places for maybe a more niche player. I agree with Teemo here that the C spot is likely to be the one with the lower secondaries and you can safely get away with it more there. On the pure PG thought, I'd much prefer the guards be as high TSP as possible for versatility and PA seems to lose some effect past certain levels.

5) Having versatile, high TSP is valuable and so is getting the right skills on certain players. Having a high TSP big makes him versatile for a number of offenses, but so does having high primaries which leads to a higher salary. My argument for players with higher salaries would be the distribution of skills that lead to those higher salaries and their effectiveness not only for the NT, but also for the particular club team, if they can handle the finances. End of the day we have to work with club managers who pay the bills, and do our best to find a compromise that helps them and hopefully us.

6) I wouldn't say I hate RB, but I see the cap space it takes up and if its between RB and just about any other skill I'd rather have that other skill on the guards.

Less than two hours to vote! I, of course, ask that you vote for me, but I also ask that however the results turn out that everyone involved in this debate either by asking questions here or just reading with interest to continue to be involved with the NT as we get our team back to the top!

Go USA!