So i know passing is highly important in the motion offense, but would we go as far as to say it's more important than cores such as per, lp?

Ex. i have a guard who has 75 per and 45 pass and another that has 75 pass and 45 per.

As far as i've known, the cores always take precedence, but could i be wrong?

Cores are ALMOST always more important. In your example, at least to me, I'd choose the passing guy if he was playing PG and the other guy if playing at SG. I guess what I'm trying to say is BH/PASS should probably be considered a core attribute for a PG. Kinda like REB for a big.

i would say that PA is a core for a PG or SG.

im not positive if that is true with all offenses... but pretty sure its true with motion.

is it more important than PE? Id prolly agree with jenn. though i dont necesarily differentiate as much between PG and SG.

What i mean is... i know i need some shooters (high PE guys) to be successful, but for me its okay if the shooter plays PG. (sometimes the SG is a really athletic and quick defensive player, with just soso PE.) that may not work in all offenses , but seems to work fine in motion.

so, if you are talking about a recruiting situation, then for me it would depend what my roster looked like... do i need shooters? then go with the first kid. if i already have two or three good shooters and this second kid can give me some stuff that the first one cant, then i might go with him.



make any sense?

I only have one season under my belt but I'm assuming that ATH and SPD matter because they will help him create. Motion means everyone is moving so you are going to need everyone with good passing plays so SG and PG should both have high passing. But I'd always put the higher passing at PG...the play always starts with him so you want him to have the best passing ability.

yeah, id agree that i would put the higher PA kid at PG most of the time. butif one of them has 72PA (but 37BH), and the other has 65PA (but 65BH) then there is a situation where passing would not determine which spot he plays.

i guess my feeling is just that there are alot of variables that go into it and, while i would *normally* put the better PA kid at PG, I cant say I'd allways do it.

Same with PE. If Ive got a kid in d3 with 75PE, I would like to put him at SG, but if he has the best BH/PA on the team, and one of the better IQs, then I would prolly put him at PG (and let him shoot about the same as he would have at SG)

Well yeah, obviously there are exceptions but I'm saying as a basis for making decisions.

Thanks for the input guys. It was a question because at DIV III i had decent success with the motion and in DIV II i am running a triangle and i just don't feel too comfortable with it. (Don't judge by this year's teams as i had horrible recruiting in the offseason so they look like crap)

Anyways, i'm thinking of going back to the motion, but was worried because i have had stud guards who have good spd and good per with decent BH and pass and great stam who really just aren't performing as i expected. Then i'll have one of my pg's who don't have very high distro due to their low per ratings, but they put up decent numbers and usually get pretty high percentage shooting.

Just thought maybe i should focus on fast guys with great passing and BH who could just become slashers and a higher focal point in my offense than the perimeter guys who don't always come through. Plus with lots of passing these guys will be smart enough to dish out to an open man if they are covered.

Of course this is assuming a real life type scenario as opposed to coin flip.

I'd take bh/passing over per for guards, but I don't care for bh/passing on my sf or bigs. I'll also take reb over lp for bigs, but MOST importantly is ath/speed by far.