Took a D2 in Rupp because they ran the F/B and had good IQ already.

There was a discussion on offenses a week or so ago but it devolved and I can't find it. I recall motion worked better with more even distribution. Triangle was essentially OK to load 2-3 good scorers. I don't recall the comments on Flex and don't really care. But I also don't recall where spreading out distribution was good for FB or if putting the scoring onus on a few was acceptable. I let SIMMY dist the first 3 games(0 across the board) and it seemed to lean toward SG/SF(my two best PER shooters).

So I'm wondering if C are too slow to get down the court. If that's the case, I assume it would be better to focus on the D end with big men.

Any help/advice/knowledge to share?

I haven't personally run a FB system, but in analyzing it to defend against it, it appears to me to tend toward a higher ratio of 3-pt shots taken than other sets, so I would definitely think tweaking distro toward those who are capable of scoring from the perimeter would be playing into what appears to be the natural tendency of the offense system. The degree to which I'd punch them up would depend on other factors with the player -- mainly where they're at for Ath/Spd/BH.

That said, I also know some coaches on here who have had decent success setting pretty much everyone on their FB team to -2 from 3-pt territory and just running the game like a war of attrition and trying to rack fouls up on their opponents. In which case the distro would be best served going toward players least likely to turn the ball over and who, hopefully, are efficient at the foul line.

Like I said, haven't used the set personally, but that's just what I've observed in trying to design defensive game plans to counter it.

I ran thru some of the "fastbreak" threads as they're very specific. None were recent, and had some conflicting advice, but I saw the -2 strat. Which, of course, rang a bell. The two players taking the most shots are +1. I think I have a couple at 0 and the rest are -2. I didn't think of that as something that would affect shots taken, just the # of 3s.

0nly, seriously, I have you blocked. You may have gems in those two posts but I'll never see them. If you're trolling and derail the thread, I'll unblock you long enough to report your posts. So, if you want, troll me in the other threads. I won't be the only person reading these and, if there is information to be gleaned, allow us to glean it. Thanks in advance.

Thanks for your co-operation.

On it's face, I don't really do anything much differently with FB vs Motion or Flex (Never played Triangle). I set the distro for my upperclassmen and guys with better scoring ratings (LP, PER) and then tweak from there based upon efficiency.

My CNU team runs FB and I had a really good offense this past season.
https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/Stats.aspx?tid=14727

http://imgur.com/l6Z8AUv

http://imgur.com/KvmzX7B

And here's my distro set up.

http://imgur.com/fl78jSl


I like to have at least 1 very good shooter in FB just to stay away from the -5 defenses and they seem to shoot pretty well in my experience. I know Only said it (before he deleted his post) that FB gets 3pt shooters more shots. TJ has said this too in the past. Maybe I'm just an idiot but I don't agree with this.

Awhile back we discussed it and I tried to show that you actually get more shots (i.e. FG attempts) in Flex than FB since you're going to be ending possessions in FTs more frequently in FB and therefore won't actually get a shot attempt. And since getting to the FT line is a strength of the FB offense and shooting 3s doesn't get you to the line, they counteract each other. You can read up on it here if you'd like.
https://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?topicID=492889

Thanks. I see very low dist # for C. They don't look like poor scorers in most O. Is that because they can't get down court or because of the FT grade?

Pullman could have gotten more distro, he was good enough. Maybe I should have given him more. I just happened to have better scorers who I felt were better to give the ball to (FT shooting is one aspect as you note). And guards also get to the line a lot better.

Stoll and Xiao will most likely score plenty for me next season when I lose all my seniors.

In my opinion, FB utilizes more playmaking (ath, speed, ball-handling), like motion, which FB reverts to when not in transition (which doesn't mean you need to practice motion, or anything, just that the scoring algorithms are similar). Flex and triangle utilize more shooting (LP and PER) and passing. Going all -2 with FB is one way to do it, but probably not the best way as you move up divisions. Being one-dimensional is always dangerous, no matter how good you are. So I do find having a few per shooters for FB (as with motion) really helps open it up. I always try to have at least one guy who I feel good about setting to 0 or +1, to burn an opponent who abdicates the perimeter.

I know there are other ways to look at it, but I generally don't worry so much about how even distribution is, or how many scorers I need for a given set. I set distribution based on 1) who is a good scorer based on attributes/IQ weighted for my set, and 2) where my opponent may be vulnerable. Slow bigs do have trouble scoring efficiently in FB, but fast (relative for division) bigs can be very effective. Jason Terrell was player of the year from the PF position. https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerHistory/Stats.aspx?pid=3306771

I only have three vs humans games left so it really doesn't matter how much strategy I talk openly(it's chapelhill and byeages so they'll destroy me either way). What I've thought of doing was putting 12-15 on my top 5 most efficient shooters(highest FG), whether they start or not, and then distributing the other 30ish with my other 6(redshirted 1). I hope that helps me identify which guys will work with FB the best.

I honestly felt like my C could be my best scorer but SIMMY seemed to be muting him a little. Felt like he was getting most of his shots off rebounds. Sort of like my fast guys busted it down the court, fired one up and he got there in time for a rebound. If that was the case, I was just going to recruit defensive centers. One dimensional guys.

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/14/2017 5:05:00 PM (view original):
I only have three vs humans games left so it really doesn't matter how much strategy I talk openly(it's chapelhill and byeages so they'll destroy me either way). What I've thought of doing was putting 12-15 on my top 5 most efficient shooters(highest FG), whether they start or not, and then distributing the other 30ish with my other 6(redshirted 1). I hope that helps me identify which guys will work with FB the best.

I honestly felt like my C could be my best scorer but SIMMY seemed to be muting him a little. Felt like he was getting most of his shots off rebounds. Sort of like my fast guys busted it down the court, fired one up and he got there in time for a rebound. If that was the case, I was just going to recruit defensive centers. One dimensional guys.

Yeah, for comparison's sake, a guy like Alan Brumfield - https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerHistory/Stats.aspx?pid=3387899 - would have been a much better scorer in triangle and even flex. His offense was not fully utilized in FB. Compared to Terrell, he was just basically there for defense and boards. 7-10 ppg isn't nothing, but it's not POY material, even though his attributes are likely just as, if not more desirable to a lot of coaches not playing FB.

Exactly. You'd think he'd take twice as many shots per game and put up 18 ppg.

Posted by Benis on 3/14/2017 3:52:00 PM (view original):
On it's face, I don't really do anything much differently with FB vs Motion or Flex (Never played Triangle). I set the distro for my upperclassmen and guys with better scoring ratings (LP, PER) and then tweak from there based upon efficiency.

My CNU team runs FB and I had a really good offense this past season.
https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/Stats.aspx?tid=14727

http://imgur.com/l6Z8AUv

http://imgur.com/KvmzX7B

And here's my distro set up.

http://imgur.com/fl78jSl


I like to have at least 1 very good shooter in FB just to stay away from the -5 defenses and they seem to shoot pretty well in my experience. I know Only said it (before he deleted his post) that FB gets 3pt shooters more shots. TJ has said this too in the past. Maybe I'm just an idiot but I don't agree with this.

Awhile back we discussed it and I tried to show that you actually get more shots (i.e. FG attempts) in Flex than FB since you're going to be ending possessions in FTs more frequently in FB and therefore won't actually get a shot attempt. And since getting to the FT line is a strength of the FB offense and shooting 3s doesn't get you to the line, they counteract each other. You can read up on it here if you'd like.
https://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?topicID=492889

In what % does ath/spd/bh contribute to the LP/PER in "scoring"?

I'm not really sure to be honest. At D3, you can have very little LP/PER but great Ath/Spd and still score. But the most important part of 3 pt shooting is still PER. You're not taking a 90 spd guy with 40 Per and start jacking 3s at an effective rate. a 40 spd and 90 per guy would be a better 3pt shooter. He may be a worse all around player but he'd shoot 3s better.

Fastbreak is super flexible, you can jack up 3's or build a FT based team. As per distro, it's similar to flex as in don't be as balanced as motion but don't be as top loaded as Triangle.