I've noticed some trends in what attributes are desired by and seem to breed success for the top human coaches on a repeated basis and can (if done well continually) lead to a real dynasty being built.

Is there only one real way to successfully build a team around recruits with certain attributes? In other words, if you don't focus specifically on a certain few attributes, is there a way to win by using another offense, defense, or some other strategy?

Because I've also notice this has led to a great deal of recruits being highly coveted for specific skills while others with decent numbers overall are left by the wayside because they lack one or more of these specific ratings being very high.

I will name the attributes which seem to lead to success no matter the offense, defense, or strategy  if anyone doubts what they are, but I assume most people already know. The rest of the attributes are like extra sugar on top of an already good food - nice, but if you don't have them in some or most of your players, you can still win or even build a dynasty.

So bottom line, is there one recruiting strategy to win as I suspect, or are there other serious ways to recruit and still win without those specific attributes being rated high in most or all of your players?

why dont you list them and be clear what you mean... im not sure everyone has the same set. ill just guess you mean ath/def. sure, they go a long way, but i think one thing that has been proven time and time again is, there are many ways to win. top coaches can't agree if per matters for bigs, what is most useful for a sf, how many scorers you need on a team, etc... i dont think there is just ONE type of player out there.

the best team takes a bunch of specialized players, and will have strong defensive players lacking in offense, and strong offensive players lacking rebounding. it will have strong rebounders with some other weakness, strong guard abilities to run the point or control the ball, with some other weakness. so i think with each team looking for a mix of players, and so many teams out there, there is definitely not just 1 successful recruiting strategy!

That said, players without at least average ATH and DEF for a S16-caliber team are unlikely to be able to contribute very much to a NT-caliber team in the vast majority of occasions, regardless of their other ratings.  It's possible to get quality minutes off the bench from a guard with high SPD/PER/BH, but if he can't defend it's a real juggling act.

I agree with billyg.  I'm not as accomplished a coach as others, but have had decent success with a bunch of different style teams - teams that were guard-oriented, big man-oriented, teams with athletic, slow guards, teams with unathletic fast guards, teams with good LP/Per, teams with good Def/Reb and a lot of other permutations.  There are certain things I look for in all recruits, speciifcally Ath, but what I want and what I can get in recruting are sometimes two different things, so you make do with what you have.  It's what makes the game fun for me.

Fine, I'll be specific.

I've noticed most teams that are truly successful - above and beyond mere wins but in terms of dynasties - are almost never built without the coach or coaches involved focusing on ATH and DEF, and it seems to a lesser extent, SPD, and WE.


It seems there is no way to be continually successful in the post season without this focus, which is why I ask if there is merely one way to build a team like that.

This seems to be the consensus everyone comes to. Sure, people have teams with or without other attributes such as LP, PER, and REB, and some are successful. That's not what I'm talking about.

The result is players with high ATH or DEF and sometimes SPD and WE are always coveted, while a player with great overall rating and some other good or solid attributes is left by the wayside if ATH or DEF is lacking.

So, bottom line, is there any way to be a NT Championship contender without specifically focusing on recruiting players with high ATH and DEF?

to win a DI championship your players need to be pretty darn good and ATH and DEF are important skills

if you focus on what you said in your original post "is there only one way to build a successful team" the answer is no

What I mean by the question "is there only one way to build a successful team" is:

Can you build a successful team without focusing on ATH and DEF ratings and just concentrating on either overall ratings or other specific ratings?

When I recruit I look for players that have the skills I look for which depends on the needs I have and what the other players on my team bring to the table. If you look at my NWU team right now which is over 600 rated as a team and ranked #2 in the country I have some holes but I didn't recruit players only on ATH, DEF. I recruited based on their total package of skills but ATH and DEF are normally decently high on my list.

concentrating on overall ratings never has and never will work. overall ratings mean ****. now, if you have good player who are really strong in other cores, instead of really strong in ath/def, yes, they can compete. but if you are just getting guys with high durability, yeah, you are pretty much boned :) i mean i know thats not what your saying, but do you see what i am saying?

the reality is ath is overall the most important rating. defense is up there, speed for guards and rebounding for bigs. you aren't going to be able to build a good team if you suck at those things. but you dont have to be the best in them. a great d2 team might have 65 ath/def. you can have 60 ath/def and have better ratings in other attributes, and definitely can have the better team. can you have 45ath/def and be best in the nation? no, i dont think so - because there just aren't players that are good enough in d2 to overcome that huge advantage. 

for guards, they have a number of cores - ath, spd, def, bh, pass, and for scorers, per, lp, ft%, and reb is pretty useful, too. so you can definitely have lower ath/spd guards and still be successful. overall rating isn't going to help though, you have to have real tangible advantages.

for bigs, they have a decent number of cores too - ath and reb are often 1 & 2, def is very important, sb is in some cases, lp/per are important for scorers, and bh/pass are moderately useful. so, you can have 10 less ath on each of your bigs than another team, and have better bigs. but can you have 30 less? probably not.

so, to answer your question, yes there are other ways to be successful - but the bottom line is, you have to have real advantages in the core ratings to overcome deficiencies in other core ratings. doesn't matter which they are. if a big has low REB, he needs some ath, def, lp to compensate. if a guard has low speed, he really needs ath/def and hopefully some strong bh/pass to compensate. if you want guys with low ath, def, spd, and work ethic - you are really eliminating much of the pool, and ath/spd/def are 3 of the cores for guards, and 2 for bigs, and work ethic is pretty important in this engine. but you don't have to be the best in the country in those areas to be the best team in the country.

So the general consensus among most successful coaches, then, is that ATH is the most important attribute?

Because it certainly seems that way with what people are saying and how they recruit.

The key concern that colors your decision as to which are "important attributes" is the defensive and offensive system that your team plays.  IMHO, I think that it's better to think, for each position within your system, which category you can ignore, rather than what is the most important overall.   

As an example, in m2m or press, you probably cannot ignore ATH at any position or your defense will be far less effective, but it's still less important for guards than for forwards.  On the other hand, you might decide that you are willing to live with an athletically challenged guard in a zone, if he had other core attributes to make up for it (e.g. SPD, PER, BH & PA).  Likewise, in a fastbreak offense, you need ATH & SPD advantages to be successful, but you might be able to ignore LP entirely (and PER also, for all but a couple players on your team).  One final example, in a zone you might take a C that has lower ATH in order to get dominant REB & SB ratings, while a m2m coach will probably favor that higher ATH C every time.

So sure...ATH & DEF are always important, but the real question is: for each position what might make you prefer a recruit with somewhat lower projected ATH or DEF?  I imagine that successful coaches would give a wide variety of answers to that question.
 

You can't win championships without solid ath and def, but I've seen guys win championships without elite ath and def.  In D3, if both are around 50, you've got a chance.  Depends how good you are at everything else.  But obviously you can't punt ath and def completely.  If you have 40 team ath and 40 team def at D3, I defy you to win a championship.  It won't happen.

I'm really tempted to take you up on that challenge jack.  Not that I disagree with your point, but still.  The word "defy" just flips a switch in my brain I think.  Kinda like in Back to the Future every time they say "what are you, chicken?"

If you can win a championship with team ath <= 40 and team def <= 40, I will buy you a bucket of chicken.

Johnson St did it in Crum 6(?) seasons ago - with elite PER/SP and ridicously elite rebounding. It was an upset, but it can happen. Sorry to ruin the challenge for you, KB, but you can still try it yourself.