Quote: Originally posted by arssanguinus on 2/08/2010Not the position assigned to the player, but the position they are playing. When I play the same post with perimeter at PF as opposed to playing him at center he hits more threes then he does playign at C.

ah, i see. thanks for clearing that up. that, i agree with :)

Quote: Originally posted by piratesfan23 on 2/08/2010My designated 3 pointer shooter on squad is Fletcher Wright he's 40.3% from three for his career at rhode island he's 61 ath, 24 speed, 63 def, 54 perimeter, 23bh, 55pass. Well i forgot about Postma who starts 41,6% from three in his career - his ratings are a tad bit better then wright in his career- 37 ath, 42speed, 30 reb, 41d, 67per, 71bh, 64 pass. Wright has 273 3pt shot attempts, postma 320.

the first guy is quite a compelling example for ath in 3 point shooting. but, you can get by with a lot in d3 on an 80 SOS that you can't get away with elsewhere. i play with guards in d2 all the time of the mold 20 ath, 90 spd, and i would pretty much guarantee there is no comparison in terms of 3 point performance with a 90 ath, 20 spd guy.

also in d1, a 50-60 ath, 90 spd, 90 per guard can be a very effective scorer. i think the large majority of high level d1 coaches would tell you a 90 ath, 50-60 spd, 90 per guard would be noticeably less effective.

I will say, Billy, that I have had several players that are lower(Not quite that low, but lower) speed and high ATH and PER that have been among my best three point shooters.

my sos should be higher a lot of the teams i played in out of conference are having bad seasons.

I'll also say I am separating pure three point shooting from other aspects. . and most of the really good three point shooters that were high ATH lower speed I played at SF

i have found that too, a_in_the_ab, and i think what we are saying is not at all at odds :) there are a lot of factors that go into everything. with 3 point shooting, and guard shooting in general, per, spd, iq, ath, bh (not in that order) are all pretty significant factors. yet, you can have a very effective scorer, and a surprisingly effective 3 point shooter, even without good per, which i think most would agree is easily the #1 attribute for 3 point shooting. so, i think a high ath/per guy could most certainly be a very effective 3 point shooter without great speed, or with great speed and without great bh, etc.

also, ratings are all relative. so, when you say you played the guy at sf, for his opponents, good spd for a guard may become great speed, for all intensive purposes. many of my most effective scorers are true guards, playing at the 3, for the same reason (all ratings are relative to the opponents).

Brian you can go - White pg, Clarke SG, Quinn SF, France pf, Porch C. - you can bring Glenn off the bench backing up porch with a 0 or -1 on his 3pt shooting so he could work on it against 2nd squad guys. You set Clarke and Quinn at +1.

I tend towards SF's for my scoring mostly. Of course, quite often my SF's end up being oddball collections of ratings. When I recruit a guy that just has allot of potential, but they have it in ways that don't quite line up with guards or posts. I have successfully run what was essentially a slow point guard at SF before. Of course, the only place I have played, really, where I wasn't taking on a rebuilding project was St. Mary's at dII.

Potts at Dartmouth is an example of a guard with a high LP and low BH and passing. .for a guard, but both of those features seem to work just fine at SF for me. Of course, Dartmouth is an odd combination of ratings all around. I fear my flaw in the game is that I have a tendency to want to constantly go mad scientist and try oddball things to see how the engine handles them. Probably leads me to a bit more losses than I could probably have going conventional.

Quote: Originally Posted By coach_billyg on 2/08/2010i think the answer is actually quite simple
1) poor schedule
2) small sample size

on a couple of the other points brought up,
spd > ath when it comes to 3 point shooting. i am very skeptical it is even close.

i am also very skeptical a C and PF with the same ratings, both with high per, have any difference in capability to hit the 3. im not sure where that is established, having never heard it before, but my guess it is because PFs are much better than Cs in general when it comes to speed and ball handling

There was a thread a while ago where people were talking about this. And there wasn't one person who had a center with a 40+ per that ever had success with them making 3s but there were a few who had PFs with similar ratings that did have success.

As far as sp vs ath for 3 point shooters I do think it's much closer than you give it credit for, in the recent past I've had a couple of guys with above average athleticism, crappy speed but per and bh were excellent 3 point shooters, and I even had both of them set to +1 since I didn't want them driving because of their speed. Wow that sentence has to have a ton of errors it's just way too long, lol.

kmason - are you saying the position they are playing, or the position they are generated with?

i wouldn't be surprised at all if in a competent, well rounded guard, 2 additional ath was worth more than 1 spd in 3 point shooting (say, at the sg position). so im not trying to say the gap is huge. but i would be quite surprised if 1 additional ath was worth more than 1 spd.

for your example of poor spd guard, i say the same thing i said to aintheb, you can often still be good without being good in 1 category when several make up something. i like this extreme example, because i think it is one most of us would agree upon. i find 90spd 20ath guards with 80-90 per to be very good shooters in d2, and while i haven't had a 90ath 20spd 80-90 per guard, i really, really struggle to believe they would be anywhere near as good. this is because i see otherwise great guards struggle to shoot against high quality opponents all the time because of speed deficiencies. would you agree?

Allot of coaches probably disagree, but I have found more success with slower and more athletic guards in my triangle teams in the past than the other offenses. Perfectly willing to believe other factors could have caused this, but there it is.

interesting, and not an unreasonable viewpoint at all. just to clarify, would you take a 90 spd 20 ath 80 per guard (purely as a shooter) over a 90 ath, 20 spd, 80 per guard, or visa versa? or do you feel that is too unrealistic an example to be at all relevant?

Quote: Originally Posted By coach_billyg on 2/08/2010kmason - are you saying the position they are playing, or the position they are generated with?

i wouldn't be surprised at all if in a competent, well rounded guard, 2 additional ath was worth more than 1 spd in 3 point shooting (say, at the sg position). so im not trying to say the gap is huge. but i would be quite surprised if 1 additional ath was worth more than 1 spd.

for your example of poor spd guard, i say the same thing i said to aintheb, you can often still be good without being good in 1 category when several make up something. i like this extreme example, because i think it is one most of us would agree upon. i find 90spd 20ath guards with 80-90 per to be very good shooters in d2, and while i haven't had a 90ath 20spd 80-90 per guard, i really, really struggle to believe they would be anywhere near as good. this is because i see otherwise great guards struggle to shoot against high quality opponents all the time because of speed deficiencies. would you agree

I'm talking about the position they were generated as.

I see what you are saying in, and I agree. The two guys I'm talking about one was in D2 and he might've been the most athletic SG in D2 at the time his ratings were 92ath/63ap/85ish per and 80ish bh. The other guy was a D3 player who was 50ath/45sp also with 85ish per and 80is bh (funny how I remember the ath/sp exactly and only estimate the per/bh). The D2 guy shot 46.6% from 3 for his career over 570 attempts while the D3 guy shot 42% over 609 attempts.

Quote: Originally Posted By a_in_the_b on 2/08/2010Allot of coaches probably disagree, but I have found more success with slower and more athletic guards in my triangle teams in the past than the other offenses. Perfectly willing to believe other factors could have caused this, but there it is.

Funny you say that because the D2 SG I mention in the above post played in a Triangle offense. But the starting PG he played with for 3 seasons had 95+ passing his whole career including 99/100 in his soph and junior years.

That is a bit on the extreme side for me. In dIII, for example, my absolute floor on guard speed is 40, and that guard would have to be pretty impressive elsewhere to qualify at that rating. But often, once I get past the minimums I'm often looking more for an combined ATH/Speed number. Now quite often, the guards I get like this will end up being shunted to SF anyway, but if I have the SF adequately filled, I have been able to get some good play out of them as guards.

And again, I admit I often probably go more mad scientist on trying odd things than is good for me.