Which PF would you play regularly? This is a backup guy, and would also see a little bit of time as a backup C


ATH: 16-l or 38-l
SPD: 20-l or 33-l
REB: 87-a or 68-a
DEF: 27-a or 54-a
BLK: 69-l or 50-h
LP: 81-a or 35-a
PE: 18-l or 42-l
BH: 30-h or 51-l
P: 29-a or 36-l
WE: 56 or 72
FT: C or C+

Basically, player 1 will get to 24 ATH, 96-99 REB, 42 DEF, 77 BLK, 90-94 LP, 50+ BH and 45 Pass
Player 2 should get to 38 ATH, 41 SPD, 77-84 REB, 63-64 DEF, 70+ BLK, 44-53 LP, 42-47 PER, 57-62 BH and 36-40 Pass

I think my question boils down to: is Player 1's low ATH/SPD playable at the Division 2 level as a backup PF/C, or is he too slow so I should use an otherwise average player with higher spd/ath (Player2)

Any feedback and discussion is appreciated! Thanks

Definately 2 but both players aren't very good. You need much better athletes especially in the frontcourt.

These two are my fourth and fifth options, I've just struggled over which should play more. Other three bigs are much better.

I think both those guys are reasonably solid backup bigs.   I would think #2 is the better PF because of the SPD/ATH and DEF advantage.  The first guys better LP and REB are a bit negated because of the low ATH.

Player #1 is nearly worthless with that level of ATH. Go with #2 - he has an interesting skill set and can be an effective backup. 

thanks guys, that's what my gut was saying but with some ratings approaching the 90's I had to poll the HD field just to see what other thoughts were.

Ummmm - if guy #1 has 16 ath with low potential, he's never getting to 24.  Those expected final values need an update.

Posted by dahsdebater on 1/18/2012 3:06:00 AM (view original):
Ummmm - if guy #1 has 16 ath with low potential, he's never getting to 24.  Those expected final values need an update.

same for #2's speed. Low is 0-7 (6.99 I guess)

He's a junior, started at average

also, I've been using 0-8 for low, 9-19 for avg, 20-28 for high and 29+ for high-high - am I off by a point here or there?

Posted by deer454 on 1/18/2012 9:07:00 AM (view original):
also, I've been using 0-8 for low, 9-19 for avg, 20-28 for high and 29+ for high-high - am I off by a point here or there?

L = 0-6 (2)    LL = 0-3 (1)    HL = 4-6 (5)    A = 7-19 (13)    LH = 20-27 (24)    HH = 28+ (28)    H = 20+ (24)

That is the range to the best of my knowledge. L is Low, which is divided into low-low (LL) and high-low (HL). The numbers in parenthesis are what I use to put into my prediction spreadsheet for how my players will develop. A is average of course. H is high, HH high-high, LH low-high. There is a "bug" at the top of average where one indicator shows 20 as high, the other shows it as normal, so if you see that (eval indicates low high but player reports to campus with average color) then you know that max improvement is 20. CS seems to claim this is practice related, but happens even before practice occurs, but it doesn't really matter. I'd rather the kid be labelled high potential at 20 sine average can mean as little as 7. At least labelled high I can count on 20 points improvement.

right on, so I was a little off on my low/avg and my high/h-h but not by a whole lot. This is helpful. Time to adjust the spreadsheets. Ugh...

On a related question, is there anything in the scout reports that indicate if a player is low-low (0-3) or high-low (4-6)? Not like it matters a whole lot, but it's nice to know.

I'm also assuming there is no kind of indicator in the scout reports that indicate the levels of average. That 7-19 range is quite vast! I've been burned on the AVG a couple times on key ratings. Not cool!

Posted by deer454 on 1/18/2012 12:46:00 PM (view original):
right on, so I was a little off on my low/avg and my high/h-h but not by a whole lot. This is helpful. Time to adjust the spreadsheets. Ugh...

On a related question, is there anything in the scout reports that indicate if a player is low-low (0-3) or high-low (4-6)? Not like it matters a whole lot, but it's nice to know.

I'm also assuming there is no kind of indicator in the scout reports that indicate the levels of average. That 7-19 range is quite vast! I've been burned on the AVG a couple times on key ratings. Not cool!

yes, average being such a big range without any indicators is stupid. The low low and high low messages are different, but I don't have a list like the one for highs. It is usually easy enough to figure out, and if you guess wrong it isn't much of a difference...

gotcha - I have your high-high chart and it's awesome, thanks for that and for the feedback on this thread.