Posted by beachhouse on 5/13/2016 2:28:00 PM (view original):
Pretty sure I did fine in giving you an elite eight team..

You mean the Elite that was all my players?

You must be talking about the S16 a majority recruited by you and literally only 2 guards

Wasn't supposed to be an insult to you

Fleming is the PG next season, Jacobson will be SG.

It was 6 guys, so yes..5 turned out impressive. It was a S16 my mistake.

I base most on player ratings. Anything over 50.0 at a given position I consider good, am I incorrect? I've had guys in the 60+, but for me I've always deemed 50.0 as a good position fill.

Posted by beachhouse on 5/13/2016 2:34:00 PM (view original):
I base most on player ratings. Anything over 50.0 at a given position I consider good, am I incorrect?

not really maybe for things like ath/def over 50 is good, but for spd/bh/pas its terrible. 60 is still pretty weak for spd manageable for bh/pas

positional ratings, not player ratings.

positional ratings don't really mean anything their just an average.. nice to look at but don't gaurentee success or have an input onto the actual game. and they aer skewed because when looking at spd or reb your including both guard and big men, you could have 4/5 95+ rebounders and a all guards with 1 reb and have a relatively low reb compard to someone with 80 reb big men and 30 reb guards

Posted by beachhouse on 5/13/2016 2:36:00 PM (view original):
positional ratings, not player ratings.

Are you making your own formulas or using the WIS ones? I don't put much stock into that. Hughes has some the best formulas I have seen but I still don't use them.

I see your point. I just haven't been able to fill the positions and I have tried.

At a certain point you would be better going after those 15 ath/def guys with 70+ spd/bh/pas just to get someone that can play PG. I mean I'd rather have those guys than just keep recruiting a team of SF's

Posted by beachhouse on 5/13/2016 2:31:00 PM (view original):
Fleming is the PG next season, Jacobson will be SG.

O.K. Fleming should develop into an good D3 SG, he's probably there now, but he will be a turnover machine at PG. If you stuck a good PG on that team with Fleming at 2 and Jacobson at 3, then you'd have something. The things you will notice is that your team will have a depressed FG% and high turnovers without a good PG. Even next season, that team will struggle against any pressing team. If you happen to make the NT and play any press team, it will be a quick exit.

Early on you played Christopher Newport. These are guards: Salvador Huerta, Earl Risinger & Jason Teague. If you had any one of those 3, Keene St. would be a NT team.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 5/13/2016 2:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by beachhouse on 5/13/2016 2:36:00 PM (view original):
positional ratings, not player ratings.

Are you making your own formulas or using the WIS ones? I don't put much stock into that. Hughes has some the best formulas I have seen but I still don't use them.

Did he post them or not? If so, do you have the link?

smail hughes....he has a lot of them,

I have a good chance finally at getting one of these guys, I've gotten 2 close, one with 90+ lp and mid 60's per and the other had upper 70's potential and finshed with 61 blue per, but didn't max.

Michael Hancock (lol)

58 LP and 75 per still blue. So 78/95 potential right now. Will be interesting, not sure if he can max LP if it is 90+. He will start the next 2 seasons, but it will be close and if he does at the very end as he had 12 and is sitting at 11 growth in LP right now, to hit 90+ he'd be looking at close to 20 each season, which may happen as soon all he has left is lp/per.

Very hard to accept him however lol with how much emphasis I place on speed and he might not even hit 65 which I wouldn't even want in a player.

91/90

LP is black, PER is red