OK old pros who would you sign @ DII? 

H is for high potential and L is for low potential.  Just a number means Average.

1 or 2

Probably #1, but if I really needed rebounding maybe I'd look at #2.  Why do you have their HS FG% included on there?  It's meaningless.

Posted by dahsdebater on 3/17/2011 4:54:00 PM (view original):
Probably #1, but if I really needed rebounding maybe I'd look at #2.  Why do you have their HS FG% included on there?  It's meaningless.

I just posted everything  but name.

Why what?  Why #1?  He's by far the best offensive option and is also a solid defender.  #2 could be a stud defender in a zone defense but if you run M2M or press his speed will hurt him a bit defensively.  He also lacks the impressive offensive tools that #1 has.  #3 isn't even in their league - he'll score, but his athleticism makes him a mediocre D2 center.  He'd be fine, but if you can get either of the other 2 you take them over him every time.  If his DEF is high/high and you really need that offense I could see going in that direction I guess.  Even after the FG%-lowering update decent post players are going off at 55%+ on almost as many shots as coaches want to give them.  If you have a chance to bring in a top-tier interior defender in this engine you have to jump on it.

I like 2 better just because of the rebounding. Every deep playoff D2 team seem to have at least 1 (and most have 2) with 95+ reb. 

i like 1 every time

1, not close

Don't go with 2, he just can't score and isn't that much better than the other two in other cats.  I think I take #3 over #1 because while he has a disadvantage in ATH, he'll have significant advantages in REB and LP and I think that having a guy who can score in the post in d2 is very valuable and that's exactly what he gives you.

1

I think all three could be useful with a zone defense so it really comes down to what your team needs. If you need another scorer I would definitely go with 3. Yes his athleticism may be on the low side but he should be an effective offensive player. If however you need a guy to clog up the middle, block shots and grab rebounds I'd say #2 would be your best bet.

how can we assume #3 is going to be a better scorer than #1? 

They both have high potential in LP, so it's quite conceivable that despite the current discrepancy that #1 could catch or even surpass #3 in LP scoring as he has more room to grow.  #1 also has the ability to develop a little bit of a shot outside the lane and is a significantly better free throw shooter.  That with the higher ATH rating makes the offensive difficiency of #1 negligible in the first year and completely non existant after that, IMO