So my team in Allen just finished recruiting and I set my depth chart up and realized that my starting 5 can all shoot the 3 ball. (http://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=7061).

Has anyone ever done this before?  Let me clarify, I'm sure that someone has started 5 SG's before or 5 SF's but has anyone ever had a legitamate starting line up with 5 that can shoot the 3 ball?

Any guesses at how effective it will be?  I'm imagining that my offense is going to be incredible because of it but I could be wrong.

STARTING 5:
PG: Michael Medeiros
SG:Robert Caple
SF:Lionel Norwood
PF:James Pryce
C:Christopher Hogan

Hogan Pryce and Norwood won't be effective 3 pt shooters but the PG/SG combo can shoot the lights out. 

Posted by tianyi7886 on 6/28/2011 8:42:00 PM (view original):
Hogan Pryce and Norwood won't be effective 3 pt shooters but the PG/SG combo can shoot the lights out. 

Not effective but still good enough where I'd expect them all to have atleast 2 3's made.

I wouldn't set everyone to a + setting, but if the pf/c shoot a couple a game(maybe minus 1 setting) they can shoot 40% plus for the year, especially vs. some weak d's you will see in d2. Remember that you will see a lot of plus defenses.

Posted by metsmaniac2 on 6/28/2011 8:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tianyi7886 on 6/28/2011 8:42:00 PM (view original):
Hogan Pryce and Norwood won't be effective 3 pt shooters but the PG/SG combo can shoot the lights out. 

Not effective but still good enough where I'd expect them all to have atleast 2 3's made.

But what's the point of that.You can have the sf/pf/c shoot only 2 pointers, make 50% and go to the line, or have them chuck up 7 3s a game and make 2. It might seem cool to have all 5 guys make 3s but the sf/pf/c won't be as efficient if they are set to -1 or -2.

Posted by tianyi7886 on 6/28/2011 8:42:00 PM (view original):
Hogan Pryce and Norwood won't be effective 3 pt shooters but the PG/SG combo can shoot the lights out. 

Just curious.  Why wouldn't they be effective 3pt shooters?

Posted by kucewicz on 6/28/2011 10:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tianyi7886 on 6/28/2011 8:42:00 PM (view original):
Hogan Pryce and Norwood won't be effective 3 pt shooters but the PG/SG combo can shoot the lights out. 

Just curious.  Why wouldn't they be effective 3pt shooters?

The bare minimum per for me to shoot 3 is 70. Generally, I won't set anyone to +1 until they have 80+ per.

I wasn't suggesting setting Norwood, Pryce, and Hogan to a + setting.  But a 0 or -1 may be in order compared to the automatic -2 I usually give to PF's and C's.

If you apply that same logic to post players you're wasting an opportunity.  I'm not saying those bigs should be set to +1, but  if they are at 0 or even -1 they'll shoot 2 or 3 per game apiece and make something like 35-45%.  That's definitely useful.

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/28/2011 11:35:00 PM (view original):
If you apply that same logic to post players you're wasting an opportunity.  I'm not saying those bigs should be set to +1, but  if they are at 0 or even -1 they'll shoot 2 or 3 per game apiece and make something like 35-45%.  That's definitely useful.

Sub 70 Per definitely cannot hit 45% over the course of a season. I looked over all my teams and for players around 70 per taking 3s, they are all around 35-38%. I'm not sure that's very efficient for a big, who generally can shoot in the .500-.550 range (and this doesn't account for the ft and potential 3pt plays).

Also remember, players that takes a 3 has a reduced chance of grabbing the offensive reb. You are taking out an offensive rebounder to shoot a 3 at a 35% clip (which is 52.5% eFg). I personally don't like this scenario. 

But if you want mets, have those bigs at 0 for out of conf, see how they do. My gut tells me the end result won't be favorable. 

I was thinking about starting at -1 and adjusting from there.

Posted by tianyi7886 on 6/28/2011 11:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kucewicz on 6/28/2011 10:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tianyi7886 on 6/28/2011 8:42:00 PM (view original):
Hogan Pryce and Norwood won't be effective 3 pt shooters but the PG/SG combo can shoot the lights out. 

Just curious.  Why wouldn't they be effective 3pt shooters?

The bare minimum per for me to shoot 3 is 70. Generally, I won't set anyone to +1 until they have 80+ per.

I agree with this 100%

@ tianyi - Jim McCadams, 58 Per (and climbing), 42% 3 pt. shooter.  39% last year in the 40s all season.

I have had 2 different 50+ PER big men in D3 and each of them shot over 40% from 3.  They seem to shoot as good or better than 70 to 80 per guards. 

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/29/2011 2:41:00 AM (view original):
@ tianyi - Jim McCadams, 58 Per (and climbing), 42% 3 pt. shooter.  39% last year in the 40s all season.

Sample size is tiny. You might have the one guy that's to the right of the mean but I'm sure there are other 58 per bigs shooting 30% from behind the arc. 

Examples from Tark (highest per D3 PF):
http://whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Stats.aspx?tid=12737&pid=1833768 (68 per, 38%)
http://whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=0&pid=1859789 (63 per, 25%)
http://whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Stats.aspx?tid=12566&pid=1807104 (58 per, 32%)
http://whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Stats.aspx?tid=12478&pid=1806996 (58per, 35%)