https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=14347. Who should start a PF in a 3-2 zone? Engleman or Strum? I like Strum Def and BLK, but I like Engleman Ath and Def.? I started Engleman first 10 games and Strum last 2, mixed results.

I would start Engleman at PF in a 3-2, no question for me. He’s an elite defender and makes your whole zone defense better.

If he were an elite rebounder and/or shot blocker (or had senior IQ), Strum would have value as a starting 5 in a 2-3. But right now he looks like an ok backup to me.

Posted by shoe3 on 9/24/2018 7:03:00 PM (view original):
I would start Engleman at PF in a 3-2, no question for me. He’s an elite defender and makes your whole zone defense better.

If he were an elite rebounder and/or shot blocker (or had senior IQ), Strum would have value as a starting 5 in a 2-3. But right now he looks like an ok backup to me.

OK, cool. I just didn't know if that low Reb and BLK would hurt. But I remember now that they avg. the PF and C in 3-2.

I wouldn't start either one in a 3-2 because your roster strength leans heavily (IMHO) towards a 2-3. With that said, Engleman is the much better player.

Posted by terps21234 on 9/24/2018 7:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 9/24/2018 7:03:00 PM (view original):
I would start Engleman at PF in a 3-2, no question for me. He’s an elite defender and makes your whole zone defense better.

If he were an elite rebounder and/or shot blocker (or had senior IQ), Strum would have value as a starting 5 in a 2-3. But right now he looks like an ok backup to me.

OK, cool. I just didn't know if that low Reb and BLK would hurt. But I remember now that they avg. the PF and C in 3-2.

It’s not really that it averages the PF and C. It’s that the PF and C have the same formula that determines their defensive goodness; as the pg, sg, and sf have their own. What he lacks in rebounding and block, he more than makes up for in being an elite athletic defender, so I wouldn’t worry about it too much. They’ll give you solid frontcourt D in a 3-2. You may want to default to -2 or so, to help with boards.

I sort of agree with gomiami that ideally, you would have a C with elite (85+ for D2) rebounding and block, and you use Buono and Engleman at the 4 and 3. I don’t love your potential 2-3 C situation, though.

"It’s not really that it averages the PF and C. It’s that the PF and C have the same formula that determines their defensive goodness;" and then there values are averaged with the rest of the team. It's the commutative property, doens't matter what order.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 10/1/2018 11:01:00 AM (view original):
"It’s not really that it averages the PF and C. It’s that the PF and C have the same formula that determines their defensive goodness;" and then there values are averaged with the rest of the team. It's the commutative property, doens't matter what order.

Right. An elite defender *playing in the proper position that maximizes his goodness* “makes the whole zone defense better.”

Posted by shoe3 on 10/1/2018 12:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 10/1/2018 11:01:00 AM (view original):
"It’s not really that it averages the PF and C. It’s that the PF and C have the same formula that determines their defensive goodness;" and then there values are averaged with the rest of the team. It's the commutative property, doens't matter what order.

Right. An elite defender *playing in the proper position that maximizes his goodness* “makes the whole zone defense better.”

Right. I like the idea of the 100 BLOCK center in the 2-3 actually helps agaisnt the 3FGA.