While I normally don't build my Flex offensive set teams around good big men, a few fell into my lap that have turned out to what I'd think would be stud scorers for D2. However, on the year they have been underwhelming. Now I have played a brutal schedule, however most of those matchups weren't against elite defenses. Do big men perform worse in the flex offense than other sets like triangle/motion?
Hoops 101:
Pros
Doesn't require a big presence inside to be effective, allows the offense to spread the floor and use quickness to penetrate to the basket or draw the defense in for open outside shots.

Pang, Ramsey and Delaney are whom I thought would perform better.
https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/Stats.aspx?tid=3927

Flex is not the ideal set for their talent; of course that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t recruit that kind of player, nor does it mean you should switch sets when you get them. But flex performs best when utilizing perimeter scoring quite a bit, whether from guards or forwards, so if you’re depending a lot on players that don’t have it, you’re going against the grain. My feeling is that the optimal way to set your distribution is to flip the guards and frontcourt. I’d want Shor and Gain sitting at 8-10 distribution (on a 10 point scale) and Pang and Delaney at 5–7, individually all depending on matchups, but guards getting the primary looks. I think that will improve your efficiency and offensive output.

Bigs in the Flex generally should be using the PER number more than in other offenses. The purpose of the Flex is to allow for the interchange on offense; bigs outside, smalls inside. When bigs have a high LP and a lower PER, they may put up bigger numbers in other sets.

for an example this is my Arizona squad. Not really an apples to apples comparison, but hopefully it helps.
https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=4221

Thanks for the insight, I adjusted % and still had bad shooting night last night Shoe, think we will just hope for the best come tourney time and take our lessons learned on creating a balanced Flex offense. If only I could switch this team over to motion/man A IQ over night lol

Is motion offense the best for bigs? Or is the triangle?

Personal preference, but I like the triangle with a big LP number.
Like other offenses you need a balance within the triangle. Not necessarily 5 man balance, but at least one perimeter player that can score outside.
Triangle = one big threat down low. one perimeter player that can score from the outside. one wing that has flexibility to do either.

Posted by cbryant31 on 5/30/2022 2:37:00 PM (view original):
Thanks for the insight, I adjusted % and still had bad shooting night last night Shoe, think we will just hope for the best come tourney time and take our lessons learned on creating a balanced Flex offense. If only I could switch this team over to motion/man A IQ over night lol

Ok, but keep in mind it’s relative. You were facing a top 10 team and a very stout defense last night (and almost won!). It’s the kind of change that’s going to improve efficiency and offensive output over the course of a season, but you can’t really expect specific and drastic results in any one single game, the sim doesn’t work that way.

You can look at my flex teams, UConn and Minnesota, and see I have pretty good examples of these types of guys as well. Off the top of my head, Hicks on UConn and Burpee on Minnesota would both be scoring better in any other set (but especially triangle). They’re still entirely decent, but on flex teams they’re not often my primary scorers. Even when matched up against weak defenders, it’s better for my offense to only try to use them about 15% of the time, rather than 25-35%, which is where I’d want to be with them if they were #1 guys on a good triangle team. I *can* try to push it with them, and especially with Hicks sometimes I did (because his FT shooting is elite) but that hurts efficiency. The forwards who score well in flex either have good perimeter (see Smith at UConn), or as oldwarrior might be getting at, you can do it with the ones who have really good speed and ballhandling for the position as well, even without the good perimeter. So they’re not shooting 3s but they’re still playing like slashing guards, they’re still good flex scorers, basically. Otherwise, the more traditional bigs, I want them no higher than 3rd in the distribution chart, in general. If I need them higher for some reason, it’s because something is not ideal with matchups or my team overall.

differences between flex/mo/triangle are really subtle! just remember that. never have I thought “wow, this recruit would be great in flex but sadly I run motion so I can’t recruit him!”

The biggest differences are that passing PGs in motion are a bit better, and low ATH LP guys or low SPD PER guys do a bit better in triangle.

Flex can easily be stopped if you lack PER scoring (so can Tri/Motion, but Flex is ever worse), and it’s tough to feed your studs as much in Motion as you’d like, and Triangle you need at least some scoring at 3 (ideally 4 positions).

But these differences are all super super subtle. I’ve won a D1 title in Motion with my 1 and 2 guards averaging well over half my usage! I’ve won another title with only one elite perimeter scorer who I was able to feed the **** out of! These are both “no-nos” but these 3 players were elite enough it worked.

Posted by cubcub113 on 5/30/2022 7:01:00 PM (view original):
differences between flex/mo/triangle are really subtle! just remember that. never have I thought “wow, this recruit would be great in flex but sadly I run motion so I can’t recruit him!”

The biggest differences are that passing PGs in motion are a bit better, and low ATH LP guys or low SPD PER guys do a bit better in triangle.

Flex can easily be stopped if you lack PER scoring (so can Tri/Motion, but Flex is ever worse), and it’s tough to feed your studs as much in Motion as you’d like, and Triangle you need at least some scoring at 3 (ideally 4 positions).

But these differences are all super super subtle. I’ve won a D1 title in Motion with my 1 and 2 guards averaging well over half my usage! I’ve won another title with only one elite perimeter scorer who I was able to feed the **** out of! These are both “no-nos” but these 3 players were elite enough it worked.

they are subtle, but also not. i feel like when i am in it, they are all significantly different. then when i am not, they all seem the same. but i don't think that is really true...

i do agree that guys who are great in 1/3 of those sets are at least good in all of them. not saying its THAT different. but i think the same-ness argument is overdone.

FWIW i have no problem feeding my studs in motion. i struggle without having a strong big in motion more than otherwise, and i end up having more balance partially from that and partially because 2pt scoring guards tend to be a bit more available and work a bit better in motion, IMO (except fb - motion 2pt scoring guards are very fb-like, it seems to me). but the sort of, scoring leader deal, i haven't had an issue with that when i want it. running with 2 lead scorers is how i ran most of the really good motion teams i had at the end of 2.0, i think it works out really well. back in 1.0 like 10+ years ago, my really good motion teams tended to be less lead scorer oriented, but you also had more flexibility in crafting players, fewer outrageously talented players, and that just lead to fewer extremes in general.