I haven't bothered recruiting a small forward for several seasons, actually more like years. A while back, I did have a very good D-3 SF who could shoot the lights out. He ended up with 55Ath-55Spd-75PE-80LP.

Player#1 SG 70PE/1LP
Player#2 SF 70PE/70LP

My question is does the 70 rating for the small forward carry more weight, will he become a better shooter due to his threat for being able to take the ball inside.

Just me personally, I could never find a valid reason to recruit a SF.

I think that because he is a more balanced scorer he will shoot a better percentage from the floor. But are you saying that you want to play the SG at SF or which one of those is a better player? Well it would probably depend on ATH SPD STAM BH PASSand REB for the SF and SPD ATH STAM BH PASS for the SG as well. It's hard to say who is the better player without the whole picture.

I'm just trying to justify some type of reasoning on whether or not to recruit a SF in the future. Wouldn't it require the 70/70 guy to have adequate ballhandling skills. Does the defender that's guarding him back off because he's a threat to score both inside and outside? In real life sure, but does it have that feature for this game?

At division two St Mary's, my best player in allot of areas was an actual small forward with a high perimeter and Low post. Percy Nuss - 44 percent or so in threes and 57% in twos. Only thing that held him back was a substandard Ball handling, but he could shoot the lights out and score in bundles.
.

In D3 I would make a pure guess that a 70 PE SG is equal to a 45PER/45LP SF (as far as scoring ability) having only those numbers to go by.

Maybe at D3 you're better off just recruiting a SG or PF like oldresorter suggested in his one thread, but at D2 you can get some pretty good small forwards that help you out a lot. For example, billyg said in one thread that with his A+ prestige he could get only about 170 ranked SGs or above to talk to him, while he could get a 120 ranked to talk to him. A lot of times at the higher levels I feel like a really good small forward will help the scoring balance of your team, and I have found that I can usually keep SFs at a high distribution and they play very efficiently because of their balance. Just an opinion obviously, I don't necessarily have anything concrete, although I had a SF at Lawrence that littlegiant recruited that was the backbone of my 68 game win streak.

80% of the time, I will recruit good rebounding PF to play the SF position. However, more recently since I've switched to a fastbreak offense, I'm finding that the guard at SF works better in a FB offense than in a flex offense.

My issue is that if you get a good offensive SF, it's usually at the cost of lacking passing and ball handling skills. At D-3, I find that SF just too balanced in skill and would rather have a player that can dominate in a few categories.

Sure you can find a gem here and there, but at D-3 most of the SF's aren't very good.

I just took over a D2 program and there is a sophomore SF with 70 LP 58 PE 35 BH 46 P.
We are 18-2 and rank #18 and he has been our best offensive player. 14.2 ppg, 51% FG, 50% 3pt.

By comparison my SG has 20 LP 77 PE 62 BH 68 P. He was the better shooter early in the season but lately has tailed off. He still our second leading scorer at 12.4 but his % has dropped. Right now he's at 45% FG 40%, which are good numbers but not nearly as good as the SFs.

playing a sf at the sf position gives one the ability to withstand a variety of defenses 3-2/2-3 especially and defense strategies (+5 to -5), that playing a G or PF there does not. In d3, the problem is the sf's are lacking something, same as a SG/PG or PF/C would be, in d2, not so much, and in d1, I want sf's on my roster.

In d3, if a SF gets to 600, 200 of those points will be dur/st/we more or less by the time the kid graduates, which leaves 400 for the other 9 categories, which means an avg of 44 per skill. even if SB is 20, the player still is less than 50 per skill. Still, I would guess a near 50 at everything SF is going to be a pretty good d3 player, especially if the right skills are in the 60's/70's and in the 30's/40's, netting out to the ideal 600 sf.

funny thing is, I don't think you will find any 2 HD coaches to agree what the right things are, which makes SF the most interesting position in the game

I'd say what the SF should be strong in varies by what the rest of your roster is strong in.

I also think that the SF position is the only position where you actually need to put much thought into the type of offense you run. Good posts are good posts and good guards are just as obvious; there are few categories to give weight to. But if I'm running a flex I want speed, shooting and passing from my sf.

It is arguable that it even matters what offense you run, but it might be more important than everyone thinks.

I didn't recruit this guy, inherited him . . . but is he better off as a SF than as a PF? Note that I am not asking for how good or bad he is, just what position makes the best use of his abilities, such as they are. I'm going to try him at SF next exhibition game just to take a look. . .

Athleticism 42
Speed 79
Rebounding 89
Defense 65
Shot Blocking 89
Low-post 88
Perimeter 20
Ball Handling 13
Passing 29
Stamina 75

Gay Ray is the better option at SF IMO, a_in

I don't like the 13 Bh/ 29 Pa combo for a D1 Sf, so I'd play him more as a PF. Then looking over your roster, I'd definitely play him at the 4 more to help with your rebounding.

Ah well> Part of what Exhibition games are for, I suppose. Experimenting.