what are the most important skill ratings for each position? (d3)

 

Ath, Spd, Def - anything in the others is bonus - applicable regardless of offense or defense - I do not have any NC's, and the reason is because I was slow to learn and apply

You need ATH and DEF at every position, at least 50 of each and more if at all possible.  Speed helps, at D3 I'd like my guards to have 70+ speed if possible, certainly 60+.  SFs should have at least 40 speed, posts I don't care so much about, although if you play a press defense they should probably have 35+ and 20+.  I also think having 60+ BH and Pass at PG is almost necessary, 65+ BH and as much passing as possible from your SG, and 40/40 from your SF.  It certainly helps to have posts who can rebound.  Everything else is sort of optional on a per-player basis, but you need to have some guys who can score.  There are a lot of combinations of ratings that make that possible.  A little observation of the good teams will give you a feel for all of this much faster than somebody like me spouting numbers at you, but a few baselines never hurt anybody.

Thanks for the feeback, I am heading in the right direction then, I was building my team by getting more athletic, speed, and defense and the  secondary skills I tried getting everyone to pass and ball handle good for their position, even players out of the post.  (i did this cuz i wanted a team that would execute an offense well)  Then on top of that I would target guys who can play multiple positions.    Also trying to get guys that do different things, like mixxing it up with a outside shooter, defensive guard, athletic slashing guard like that, cuz I figured it wasnt good to have too many players good at the same thing outside of the ath.spd.def, cuz that would devalue their output.  Basically making sure players complimented eachother.

Caveat: Lake Land is a zone team.  So, you do not need def at every position.  Zone teams can hide one poor defender amongst a group of good ones.  As an example, when you play a 2-3 and one guard has a poor def rating, then the other must be good or your D will suffer on the perimeter (vice versa for a 3-2).   Also, zone teams quickly have trouble on the defensive boards, just ask Boeheim.  So, you really have to value REB in big men.  

In my opinion, for a motion & zone team, the top 5 skill ratings by position are (in order):

C - REB, ATH, LP, BLK, DEF.
PF - REB, ATH, LP, DEF, BLK
SF - ATH, SPD, DEF, LP, PER
SG - SPD, PER, BH, P, DEF
PG - SPD, BH, P, PER, DEF

^thats a misconception that people have of a zone. A zone with all good defenders will certainly be better than a zone with a poor defender or multiple poor defenders mixed in. With a M2M, I can try to 'hide' a poor defender by playing him on an opposing player that doesn't look to score. But obviously having all good defenders will make for a better man defense as well.

Motion/Zone

C   - ATH, REB, DEF, LP, BLK
PF - ATH, REB, DEF, LP, BLK
SF - ATH, DEF, SPD, LP, PER
SG - ATH, DEF, SPD, PER, BH
PG - ATH, DEF, SPD, PER, P

I think the biggest point of contention will be: (1) def over reb in bigs; and (2) speed over ath/def in guards.  In another defensive set, I would agree on (1), but because zone is so naturally weak in rebounding and bigs just seem to be less effective scorers in general, I put reb over def in a zone, although def is still really important.

As to (2), I think guard speed is overrated.  In fact, just won a national championship in Wooden D3, going undefeated, with only one player on the roster over 70 speed.  

Posted by pjbrankin on 2/18/2012 3:50:00 PM (view original):
^thats a misconception that people have of a zone. A zone with all good defenders will certainly be better than a zone with a poor defender or multiple poor defenders mixed in. With a M2M, I can try to 'hide' a poor defender by playing him on an opposing player that doesn't look to score. But obviously having all good defenders will make for a better man defense as well.

I think that makes my point.  It is easier to attack a single poor defender in M2M, than it is in zone.  The point I am trying to make is about trade-offs in recruiting.  I'm with you that too many coaches think they can get away with teams full of mediocre & poor defenders in a zone, but they can't.  

Also, Isack, I don't recall that team playing much zone.  I would instantly agree with you that speed is far less important for guards to play M2M, than in zone or press.

Ha, no zone for me.  

Interesting, though.  You think guard speed is more important in zone than man?  I would think it would be the opposite because getting beat on the perimeter isn't as big of a deal, but maybe I'm wrong.