Posted by tkimble on 11/12/2010 11:10:00 PM (view original):
I should have made it clear because I think I'm the only one who does this: These are the projected final ratings for both recruits (hence the multiples of 5).  This is about where both recruits will end up.

I do this all the time. You are definitely not the only one.

These guys are very close, it would depend on what the outlook of my team would be. 

Do I have enough offense from everyone else to take player B?

Does my conference have solid young offensive SF's from the teams you need to beat? 

Which player is better suited to step in early? Which one has better IQ's relative to my team?

I would probably take player B all things considered with a relatively low distro. Not everyone has to be an offensive stud. You need guys to play 15-20 minutes who help in other areas that don't need distro to make an impact. Some of my favorite HD players have been 99 reb, 99 sb, 90 def, 50 LP bigs or 90/60/90 ath/spd/def SF's. 

I ended up going after player B.  The ath/def combo was just too much to pass up IMO.  I love it when my opponent has no idea where his offense is coming from because all my guys are great defenders, and the other guy might have been my weak link.  Plus, I'm thinking about moving up soon and player B will be able to step in and contribute sooner. 

I feel that if the player is much better in ath/spd, he will score irregardless of his lp/per. I currently have a SF in D3 with 70ath/spd, lp/per in the high teens and 20s, and he's dropping 11ppg shooting in the high .500s. 

With IQ's more important now, the significantly better BH and PASS gives A the significant edge for me in this situation. Fastbreak would have definitely given B the edge for me.

I agree with tianyi.  I think B will score plenty for you.  Especially in motion that favors balanced scoring anyway.  I would have went for B too.