Has anyone had any success playing your best 2 players as 6th and 7th men on the depth chart. Like a PG with good speed, ath, and def playing #2 in the depth chart at PG, SG, and SF. A PF with good ath, speed, and def playing #2 in the deth chart at PF, C and #3 at SF. Everytime I have ever tried this, my best 2 players get more overall minutes but they shoot terrible, and my team does much worse. They are playing backup in positions they should start at. My worse players tend to get fewer minutes.

It seems like this should be a good strategy utilizing versatile players, but it almost seems like there is some program in the game to keep this from being a successful strategy.

 

Not really.  I've actually noticed the opposite, where my decent players thrive coming off the bench but struggle as starters.

Do you mean that when your top 2 players play backup on depth chart, they get more min but shoot substantially worse than when they are starting? If so, maybe their supporting cast is weaker when they are on the court.

Personally, I would just like to have my best 5 guys start and let the dice roll. 

I've had some success with very strong tweener players in roles like the first sub at the 1,2 and 3 - especially guys who can shoot but have a defensive or other weakness.  I tell myself that it makes it harder for opponents to match up on such a guy.  Dont know whether it really works that way, but have had some success

I would not however do anything that reduces the minutes played by your best guys.  You want your best players on the floor the most

i doubt there is anything in the game to prevent what you described, it is usually detrimental to move a stronger player to backup, and a weaker one to starter, so that is probably what you were seeing.

i fairly often will not start my best 5 players though, if i have more than enough offense on the starting lineup, and a backup line that could really benefit from one of my top offensive players. then i will move a strong offensive player (preferably weaker on defense) to the backup spot and he will usually shine in that role, facing inferior competition. it costs you some minutes, even if you play him as backup at 2 spots (which also seems to put him against the stronger players more often), but i think its worth it. especially in an offense like triangle where going from say 3 dominant offensive starters to 4 has small benefit, but adding one to the backup line is a huge bonus.

the other way to play it is to intentionally sign a guy to be a career backup, who is fantastic on offense, but i generally don't go that route. not sure why, it can be extremely beneficial if the guy is really good on offense. one of my most productive players ever, who lead the team to a couple titles, was a d2 guard with like 92 spd and 99 per who never started a game - which i expected when i signed him. but he was the leading scorer for at least 2 years and was 1st or 2nd as a soph (redshirted). his poor def and pass made him a poor choice at starter but i never regretted him once (i think he was also in a big class, which helps, i probably started a junior ahead of him as a senior but other than that he was never the natural choice, just based on age alone).

My 6th man on my Arcadia team is averaging 14 ppg and 7.5 reb/game.  He's been 'player of the game' eight times this season

Posted by mykids_31206 on 10/25/2010 10:24:00 AM (view original):

Has anyone had any success playing your best 2 players as 6th and 7th men on the depth chart. Like a PG with good speed, ath, and def playing #2 in the depth chart at PG, SG, and SF. A PF with good ath, speed, and def playing #2 in the deth chart at PF, C and #3 at SF. Everytime I have ever tried this, my best 2 players get more overall minutes but they shoot terrible, and my team does much worse. They are playing backup in positions they should start at. My worse players tend to get fewer minutes.

It seems like this should be a good strategy utilizing versatile players, but it almost seems like there is some program in the game to keep this from being a successful strategy.

 

kids - are you asking if anyone has divided up the 200 minutes in such a manner that 7 players gobble up near all 200, and won consistently?  I have never seen someone win a national title of lets say average elite 8 for 8-10 consecutive seasons using this strategy.  Maybe you can be first? 

Posted by oldresorter on 10/25/2010 1:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mykids_31206 on 10/25/2010 10:24:00 AM (view original):

Has anyone had any success playing your best 2 players as 6th and 7th men on the depth chart. Like a PG with good speed, ath, and def playing #2 in the depth chart at PG, SG, and SF. A PF with good ath, speed, and def playing #2 in the deth chart at PF, C and #3 at SF. Everytime I have ever tried this, my best 2 players get more overall minutes but they shoot terrible, and my team does much worse. They are playing backup in positions they should start at. My worse players tend to get fewer minutes.

It seems like this should be a good strategy utilizing versatile players, but it almost seems like there is some program in the game to keep this from being a successful strategy.

 

kids - are you asking if anyone has divided up the 200 minutes in such a manner that 7 players gobble up near all 200, and won consistently?  I have never seen someone win a national title of lets say average elite 8 for 8-10 consecutive seasons using this strategy.  Maybe you can be first? 

i don't think so... i think he is saying if you have a 10 man rotation, is it good to take your best 2 and make them backups instead of starters

This guy only started one season for me, and was conference player of the year twice...neither in the season he started.

http://whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerHistory/Default.aspx?pid=1316371

I think the limiting factor is that you can't specify when players come in and out of the game.   Under mykid's strategy, you would rotate when starters go in and out of the game and keep your super subs shifting from position to position.   However, you often see starters enter and exit games as a unit, which would negate this strategy.  

FWIW, I usually keep my best five players as starters, but I've also used complementary starting lineups to take advantage of certain strengths or hide certain weaknesses.   For example last year, I started an SF that wasn't as good as his backup with the exception that he was a better defender and had higher IQs.    I was able to do that because I had other scorers in the lineup and what I needed was a good defender against a number of good SFs in our conference.   In contrast, I had a PF that was a great LP player but a fairly mediocre rebounder.   So, I made him my #1 option on my second unit and gave him the second highest distro on the team.   He ended up scoring almost 12 per game in just under 17 minutes per game, shooting just about 58%. 

Posted by pdanao on 10/25/2010 3:22:00 PM (view original):
I think the limiting factor is that you can't specify when players come in and out of the game.   Under this strategy, you would rotate when starters go in and out of the game and keep your super subs shifting from position to position.   However, you often see starters enter and exit games as a unit, which would negate this strategy.   FWIW, I usually keep my best five players as starters, but if I have a lot of offense among the starters, I may sacrifice scoring to get a better defender or rebounder in the game.   This helps balance the strengths of the starters while providing a scoring option for the second unit.      I've also placed a player as a starter at one position and #1 backup at another position.   This can sometimes get them more minutes than they would have gotten if they were just starting.

That's what I generally do. I would have my #1SF be #2 on the SG depth chart, and #1 SG on #2 SF/PG depth chart depending on what his skill set is. Gets more minutes into your top players. 

I've found, particularly at point guard that my "best" PG (ratings-wise)  often fares better when run with the "second unit" -- specifically, it has improved said PG's scoring line. The assists, steals, rebounds all seem relatively unchanged aggregate-wise (against weaker Sim teams, the steals can actually go up) from when they play with the starting lineup, but I'm consistently getting more point production from the higher-rated PG as a second-stringer vs. if I start him and play my backup PG in the second slot. The difference isn't overwhelming, about 3-4 ppg with my normally uptempo motion offense, but, hey, 3-4 points is still 3-4 points!

Obviously, your backup needs good enough BH and P ratings and an offensive IQ high enough that he doesn't spike your turnover count against better defenders, But I have seen enough of a pattern over six seasons to at least make me think its a strategy worth consideration.

I tried this with a player who I should have been starting at SG about 2 seasons ago in D2. I had a great SG and SF as well as this guy who was better than both. I tried to play him at backup SG, PG and SF. He got minutes but I think the biggest problem was that he was never in during a clutch situation. During a close game they always bring the starters back in and I lost a lot of close games to good teams.

The next year I made him the starter and he was CPOY and my team was much better.

Posted by coach_billyg on 10/25/2010 2:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by oldresorter on 10/25/2010 1:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mykids_31206 on 10/25/2010 10:24:00 AM (view original):

Has anyone had any success playing your best 2 players as 6th and 7th men on the depth chart. Like a PG with good speed, ath, and def playing #2 in the depth chart at PG, SG, and SF. A PF with good ath, speed, and def playing #2 in the deth chart at PF, C and #3 at SF. Everytime I have ever tried this, my best 2 players get more overall minutes but they shoot terrible, and my team does much worse. They are playing backup in positions they should start at. My worse players tend to get fewer minutes.

It seems like this should be a good strategy utilizing versatile players, but it almost seems like there is some program in the game to keep this from being a successful strategy.

 

kids - are you asking if anyone has divided up the 200 minutes in such a manner that 7 players gobble up near all 200, and won consistently?  I have never seen someone win a national title of lets say average elite 8 for 8-10 consecutive seasons using this strategy.  Maybe you can be first? 

i don't think so... i think he is saying if you have a 10 man rotation, is it good to take your best 2 and make them backups instead of starters

OR is right. But it never works out for me. I have tried it many times over the past few seasons. It is never successful for me. It puts me in a position so that my best 2 get the most minutes even though they are the backups. They dont come out unless they are tired. If you dont set them to come out tired, they usually get fewer minutes. It seems that my team plays the worst defense when I do this.