Quote: Originally posted by dalter on 6/02/2010Yes, especially at the lower levels, you really have to decide what's important for you. Again, I'll say that if it's a choice between a player that you think might be better for triangle and a guy who's just a better player, I would go with B every single time.

Agree 100%. I think the biggest mistake D3 coaches make is trying to get jack-of-all-trades prospects. Every recruit in D is flawed in some way; the key, imo, is to recruit guys who have the biggest projectable strengths, whatever those strengths may be, and then match your team settings to those strengths.

Example: My D3 team was top-5 nationally in rebounding a few years ago, because I happened to find 3 recruits who were big-time rebounders. Now, I'm an average rebounding team, but I'm going to have great perimeter defenders for the next 3 seasons. That frees me up to play more "-" defense to help my SF's and big men. Recruit the best overall talent you can, and the rest takes care of itself.

Quote: Originally Posted By reinsel on 6/02/2010
Yeah, my plan for when I had a triangle team was the Kobe/shaq lakers. Get 1 great big man who has LP, ATH, Passing, 1 rebounding PF that is not a great scorer, a Robert Horry type spot up 3 point shooting SF, a good scoring SG, and a PG that has good passing and BH, but not too much shooting ability.

So in a sense, not get "jack of all trades" type players but some what follow rensil's suggestion and get players that excel in these areas with decent speed and athlec and with them playing as a unit, they will blance themselves out defensivley.