alright.  played a number of seasons now and, many years despite what i thought were good rosters, i have had disappointing results.  i just want to get some input so i can understand if its somehow my game-planning. . or my recruiting.

i know that my schedule is weak this year, that is my fault - i just fell asleep on it last season and didn't schedule.
could i get some input on what some other coaches think i did right and wrong in my recruiting here?  i'm getting tired of always thinking my roster is going to produce better results than it does, so obviously i am doing or seeing something wrong and i want to figure out how to fix it.

http://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=3121

everyone here is going to tell you to focus on athleticism and defense.

a guy with high ATH/Speed can score a ton in DIII... just set them at -2 and let them draw fouls all day long.

guys like bullock (if he had defense) and cornwell are guys you should focus on - especially when you're trying to poach DII guys.

Your team is close.  My thought would be about system.  My experience with the triangle is that it works much better with a low post presence.  You need to have a C and/or PF with big LP & ATH.  You'll notice that Wilkinson substantially outperforms Dunn.  I would keep increasing Wilkinson's distro until his FG% drops to 55%, but even his LP isn't really high enough.

On the defensive side, you wont be able to be consistently competitive until the players on the floor have a higher average defensive rating.  A zone allows you to hide one bad defender, but doesn't allow you to play with a full team of mediocre defenders.  You're also giving up a ton of O-REB.  Other than recruiting more REB for your big men,  I'm not sure how you would gameplan to lower that; even switching to 2-3 might not affect it.

In general, the benefit of triangle/zone combo is that you only need 9 or 10 players to make it work.  If I were recruiting to that system I would be willing to risk more money on pulling down more skilled DII players; knowing that I didn't mind taking a walk-on or two.

The low def jumped out at me as well. 

I have run triangle for 100+ seasons and I can tell you that the players guide is helpful. You need a low post presence. Also, you are running a 3 man offense but only two guys have distro. Gideon is shooting 58% and is second behind Bullock who's shooting 47%. You need to even out the distro to where they are more even. Otherwise Bullock is missing shots Gideon could be making. Bullock is also turning the ball over almost 4 times a game which indicates his distro is too high. Also, Wilkinson is shooting 70% and obviously isn't getting the ball enough. He's 60+ LP which enough to keep him effective. He's the lp threat you need. Or heck plug Eller in instead and set him to-2. With his per and decent bh/pass ability I'd watch his stats and see how he does.

He's shooting too many 3s. Take out those 3s and he's 9/16 from the field. Set him to -2 and up his distro a bit. 70 is the bare minimum I would have in per before I let a guy shoot 3s, and he would only shoot 3s if I have no other 3 point shooters on my team. 

tian is correct. Some math pros may correct me, but I don't have guys shoot 3's who are below 40% at it. I don't use any perimeter rating as a guide, mainly because I've had guys go off who shot much better than their ratings would indicate they should. I just respond to the stats the engine generates from playing games. Even if it doesn't make sense, a 50 PER guy shooting 45% from three needs to shoot 3's at a clip until he's not doing it well any more. But any way you look at it, that guy shouldn't be shooting 3's at all.

Posted by tianyi7886 on 11/16/2011 7:31:00 PM (view original):
He's shooting too many 3s. Take out those 3s and he's 9/16 from the field. Set him to -2 and up his distro a bit. 70 is the bare minimum I would have in per before I let a guy shoot 3s, and he would only shoot 3s if I have no other 3 point shooters on my team. 

I disagree with the 70 being the bare minimum for 3 point shooting especially for DIII. AT DII for PG, SG, SF I tend to set guys at -1 if they are around 50-55 and once they get up to around 75-80 I will put them at 0. Ive found that even guys as low as 50 per can shoot over .500 from 3 if they are set at -1 and it helps to keep defenses a little more honest.

Posted by blackdog3377 on 11/17/2011 12:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tianyi7886 on 11/16/2011 7:31:00 PM (view original):
He's shooting too many 3s. Take out those 3s and he's 9/16 from the field. Set him to -2 and up his distro a bit. 70 is the bare minimum I would have in per before I let a guy shoot 3s, and he would only shoot 3s if I have no other 3 point shooters on my team. 

I disagree with the 70 being the bare minimum for 3 point shooting especially for DIII. AT DII for PG, SG, SF I tend to set guys at -1 if they are around 50-55 and once they get up to around 75-80 I will put them at 0. Ive found that even guys as low as 50 per can shoot over .500 from 3 if they are set at -1 and it helps to keep defenses a little more honest.

Going 4 for 8 from behind the arc in 20 games doesn't count. Can you find any player that actually shoot a decent # of 3s at over .400 with 50 per? I'm having a hard time finding one. 

i'll occasionally set a player to -1 if they are at 50 per, especially if they suck at the free throw line.  if they are in the mid 60s or better ill set them to -1 or 0 and just see how it goes.  sometimes they hit nothing and i'll ease them back, but if it goes well sometimes i'll let them shoot a few more...again especially if they are poor free throw shooters.

i've definitely had guys under 70 who were effective, even at D1 if they have some athleticism, speed, or other good skills to compliment.  Just had a D1 guard finish 60/143 from out deep for his career as a 68per.  but in general i tend to agree that guys under 70 really shouldn't be jacking up too many 3's as a rule, though there are situations where maybe it's worth the risk depending on the makeup of your team, what kind of defense youre facing, and what the history of the individual player is

Posted by tianyi7886 on 11/17/2011 2:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by blackdog3377 on 11/17/2011 12:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tianyi7886 on 11/16/2011 7:31:00 PM (view original):
He's shooting too many 3s. Take out those 3s and he's 9/16 from the field. Set him to -2 and up his distro a bit. 70 is the bare minimum I would have in per before I let a guy shoot 3s, and he would only shoot 3s if I have no other 3 point shooters on my team. 

I disagree with the 70 being the bare minimum for 3 point shooting especially for DIII. AT DII for PG, SG, SF I tend to set guys at -1 if they are around 50-55 and once they get up to around 75-80 I will put them at 0. Ive found that even guys as low as 50 per can shoot over .500 from 3 if they are set at -1 and it helps to keep defenses a little more honest.

Going 4 for 8 from behind the arc in 20 games doesn't count. Can you find any player that actually shoot a decent # of 3s at over .400 with 50 per? I'm having a hard time finding one. 

Thats exactly it though. What Ive found is that most guys with per that low still wont shoot many 3s at -1 and only if they are wide open, which is exactly what you want. Whats the point in completely forbidding a perimeter player from shooting wide opens 3s? Thats what a -1 is, if theyre open for a 3 they take the shot.

I cant give you any examples from my teams because none of my starting guards were starting last year but on my all time 3 point shooting list is a SF who was low potential for per at 57 as a freshman. He never improved a point his entire career but ended up shooting 72-165 (.436) for his career out of 602 total FGA. I have had other players with similar or better %s but they didnt take enough 3s in their career to qualify.

Posted by tianyi7886 on 11/17/2011 2:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by blackdog3377 on 11/17/2011 12:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tianyi7886 on 11/16/2011 7:31:00 PM (view original):
He's shooting too many 3s. Take out those 3s and he's 9/16 from the field. Set him to -2 and up his distro a bit. 70 is the bare minimum I would have in per before I let a guy shoot 3s, and he would only shoot 3s if I have no other 3 point shooters on my team. 

I disagree with the 70 being the bare minimum for 3 point shooting especially for DIII. AT DII for PG, SG, SF I tend to set guys at -1 if they are around 50-55 and once they get up to around 75-80 I will put them at 0. Ive found that even guys as low as 50 per can shoot over .500 from 3 if they are set at -1 and it helps to keep defenses a little more honest.

Going 4 for 8 from behind the arc in 20 games doesn't count. Can you find any player that actually shoot a decent # of 3s at over .400 with 50 per? I'm having a hard time finding one. 

Why would over 40% be the standard?  Shouldn't it be over 33%?  One out of three three pointers equals a point per shot, which is the same as 50% from two pointers.  As long as they are making at least a third of them, they shouldn't be hurting the team.
 

Posted by ryandaniel on 11/17/2011 3:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tianyi7886 on 11/17/2011 2:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by blackdog3377 on 11/17/2011 12:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tianyi7886 on 11/16/2011 7:31:00 PM (view original):
He's shooting too many 3s. Take out those 3s and he's 9/16 from the field. Set him to -2 and up his distro a bit. 70 is the bare minimum I would have in per before I let a guy shoot 3s, and he would only shoot 3s if I have no other 3 point shooters on my team. 

I disagree with the 70 being the bare minimum for 3 point shooting especially for DIII. AT DII for PG, SG, SF I tend to set guys at -1 if they are around 50-55 and once they get up to around 75-80 I will put them at 0. Ive found that even guys as low as 50 per can shoot over .500 from 3 if they are set at -1 and it helps to keep defenses a little more honest.

Going 4 for 8 from behind the arc in 20 games doesn't count. Can you find any player that actually shoot a decent # of 3s at over .400 with 50 per? I'm having a hard time finding one. 

Why would over 40% be the standard?  Shouldn't it be over 33%?  One out of three three pointers equals a point per shot, which is the same as 50% from two pointers.  As long as they are making at least a third of them, they shouldn't be hurting the team.
 

It would be, except fg% in D3 in this game is higher than real life, and 2pt shots have the benefit of drawing fouls (3 point play, foul out opponents starters, etc.). 

THey have compiled stats across the league for the sim?  I'd love to see that.