This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally Posted By shagnew13 on 5/11/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By reinsel on 5/11/2010

Is it plausible that a shorter D1 talent guard can outrebound taller, D2/D3 level bigs, yes!

So why have height matter....ITS IN THE RATINGS ALREADY!

If you are 7'0" and have a 50 rebounding rating you are like a crappy Shawn Bradley. If you are 6'1" and have a 50 rebound rating you are close to the best rebounding guard in HD. Why is this a problem?




The problem all comes back to the No position penalty, if you have a 50-60 rated guard in REB, I better not see him playing the PF spot, if not the SF position

That's what I don't like, and with no position penalty, this may very well happen

I disagree here. There isnt a problem with a PG playing SF if he has decent rebounding. Why would there be? Magic easily couldve (and probably did) play the 3 sometimes and very successfully. Granted, thats an extreme example, but what about Jason Kidd (6-4 210), Tyreke Evans (6-6 220), Rodney Stuckey (6-5 205), etc.

Im sure there's a few other starting PGs in the NBA that fit this category too. Those guys could have played SF in college if necessary. If you're a major program and can recruit one of these studs above, then maybe you get rewarded with a very mobile lineup. Again, these situations will be (in theory) rare. Based on the numbers from the test world, these guards will be rare. Then you end up with a lineup similar to Villanova's which last time I looked has been working pretty well. 3 guard lineups should be able to work if you can recruit the blue chip guys.

SCottie PIppen played 'Point forward' in the NBA quite often. It seems like 'Point forward' woudl be exatly what a point guard playing small forward in would be.

Boris Diaw, LArry Bird. . .Grant hill:



COllege example, Jamont GOrdon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamont_Gordon

Terrence Williams(Louisville), Tyler SMith(Tennessee), Garrett Temple(LSU)

The thing that I'm thinking about that I haven't seen addressed has more to do with defense than rebounding. Let's say you have a 6'0" guard with 90 ATH/SPD/DEF, and you decide to stick him at center. Since we know height doesn't matter, and if there's no position penalty, does that mean he would actually be effective guarding a 6'11" C with 80+ ATH/SPD/LP? I'm not seeing any reason why he wouldn't be in this scenario. Those aren't unrealistic ratings in any way. Am I missing something?

Well, for one, he wouldn't have block, which matters in the post. ..

I think if they made the SF more of a versatile player and more integral in WIS it would take care of the problems with putting guards at center, and in the post.

Because you can get a strong, athletic SF at 6'7" to play the post, and if he has good perimeter ratings, he can also step into the perimeter. As with my experience the SF is not nearly as important as it should be in WIS since I have been playing.

Quote: Originally Posted By cappelgp on 5/12/2010The thing that I'm thinking about that I haven't seen addressed has more to do with defense than rebounding. Let's say you have a 6'0" guard with 90 ATH/SPD/DEF, and you decide to stick him at center. Since we know height doesn't matter, and if there's no position penalty, does that mean he would actually be effective guarding a 6'11" C with 80+ ATH/SPD/LP? I'm not seeing any reason why he wouldn't be in this scenario. Those aren't unrealistic ratings in any way. Am I missing something

Its not unrealistic in the WIS sense, and as far as the ratings are concerned. But in the realistic sense you would never see a 6'-0" PG guarding a 6'-11" Center in college or the NBA on a regular basis