I think it's always a good idea to have other people look at my team. Does anyone have time to take a look and make any recommendations esp. with regard to depth chart?

I don't have a team in Smith so it's hard to say without seeing the skill levels of your recruits. Can you link them over to the Compare feature and then cut and paste them into this thread?

There you go. Thanks.

In my opinion, I wouldn't want any of these players. Then again, I have no experience in the engine. Here is my analysis: Long has extremely low ATH, Marshall can't rebound as a big, and Miller can't pass or shoot very well, although I think he is the best. From the def ratings, I assume you play man, so I think all will be decent defenders. Marshall, even with the high def, won't be that valuable because he can't rebound. Just my two cents.

You know the engine has been skewed in favor of speed and athleticism for too long when the totally untalented player who happens to have moderately better speed and athleticism than the other 2 is "the best" in people's minds.

Quote: Originally posted by dahsdebater on 5/18/2010You know the engine has been skewed in favor of speed and athleticism for too long when the totally untalented player who happens to have moderately better speed and athleticism than the other 2 is "the best" in people's minds.

Long is horribly unathletic and Marshall CAN'T REBOUND. None of these guys have much speed or athleticism, but if you hadn't noticed, speed and athleticism tend to be very important in real basketball.

Quote: Originally posted by tkimble on 5/18/2010In my opinion, I wouldn't want any of these players. Then again, I have no experience in the engine. Here is my analysis: Long has extremely low ATH, Marshall can't rebound as a big, and Miller can't pass or shoot very well, although I think he is the best. From the def ratings, I assume you play man, so I think all will be decent defenders. Marshall, even with the high def, won't be that valuable because he can't rebound. Just my two cents.

Well, if the areas you didn't like had high potential, then that would make it better, right?

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

Well, you have to realize that these guys (except Long) aren't going to be asked to be significant contributors to my team. I took Miller as a cheap recruit, 4 year player, with a high WE. Long is a 2 year help (JUCO transfer) and backup to my center. Marshall is my backup PF.

It's only my third season, so I am still learning the recruiting process.

Anyways, I was looking for some help with my overall team and depth chart... not just my recruits.

Well, I can't see your team very easily, but I can tell you that it doesn't make sense to me to recruit a player who you never expect to start coming in. Unless your recruiting class is 6 deep, there's no point signing a guy who wouldn't at least theoretically be able to start after the incumbent graduates without seriously hurting your team. Maybe you get lucky and bring in a better starter between now and then, but why count on it?

Seeing anyone's team is very easy. Click on their name, click on Hoops Dyansty, View Active teams. Recruits are another story. Can't see them unless you are in that world.

Anyhoo. Your guards a slower than I'd want them to be, especially Conerly. You don't really have a true point guard, so Mickleson will have to do. That shoud have been your focus this recruiting cycle, a good passing guard.

Conversely, your bigs are none too atheletic. I think you are getting the running theme here. ATH and SPD are cornerstones.

Outside of that, the overall defense is a bit low, abysmal on Clark; I might have switched to zone to hide the fact you aren't fast or atheletic and have some holes. You may want to consider it.

I would have dumped Steffes the minute I got the team; complete waste of space, no redeaming attributes outside of his shot blocking.

Long is actually a decent option to start at one of the post positions outside of his bad ath; should definately be at least 2nd in the depth chart otherwise. The other two recruits... eh. Not sure why you'd waste a roster space on a guy that should never start (Miller). If you can't find the guy you want, don't settle for a 4 year benchwarmer. Take a walkon and try again next season.

My starting 5 would be: Mikkleson, Clark, Sikes, Hunt and Long. Leaning heavily on Clark and Sikes for scoring, Long if he has the IQ. Switch to zone, keep playing man until you get up to around a C then switch.

My two cents.

I have to tell you, tarheel, this is a very difficult team to deal with. They are far from the worst team I have looked at but they will be a challenge. I have identified below how I would set the starters and primary backups. I think this gives you the best chance to be successful.

PG Mickelson/Miller

SG Clark/Sikes

SF Propes/Crafton

PF Hunt/doesn't matter

C Long/doesn't matter

Those 5 starters are decent and should give you a fighting chance. Your backups however are only marginally better than walk-ons. I would suggest that you use the Fatigue settings and set the PG, SF, PF, and C starters on Getting Tired. Clark and Sikes are both decent at the SG position and I would set the SG starter to Fairly Fresh so that Sikes can get more minutes. Mickelson has the edge in speed and defense so I would switch him between PG and SG (with Clark) so that he guards your opponents better shooter.

If you haven't already, you should read the pinned threads at the top of this forum especially the one by zhawks. Continue asking questions and studying successful teams to learn more about this game. You will winning division titles and playing in the postseason in no time. Good Luck.

Thanks guys. Still learning, but that's why I asked.

The quality of players at DIII isn't great, and to get good players w/o getting into a battle all the time is challenging.