Assuming all other projected ratings are equal, which player would you take as a D3 SG running Triangle/FCP?

Player A:
80 ATH
65 DEF
40 PASS

Player B:
50 ATH
40 DEF
95 PASS

I'd obviously lean towards the first player...but in triangle passing is pretty key, especially for guards. How much would you value that 55 point difference in PASS vs the 20+ point difference in ATH & DEF?

Player A.

depends on what your team needs.

I would take player B if I needed a backup guard.

I would take a if I needed to improve my defense.

I honestly cant think of a player with other ratings I'd take player B over A.

You said backup guard:

80 ATH
70 SP
65 DEF
70 BH
40 P

Or

50 ATH
70 SP
40 DEF
70 BH
95 P

I'll easily take Player A.

Or with PER, still player A.

Posted by sol_phenom3 on 5/25/2020 11:08:00 PM (view original):
Assuming all other projected ratings are equal, which player would you take as a D3 SG running Triangle/FCP?

Player A:
80 ATH
65 DEF
40 PASS

Player B:
50 ATH
40 DEF
95 PASS

I'd obviously lean towards the first player...but in triangle passing is pretty key, especially for guards. How much would you value that 55 point difference in PASS vs the 20+ point difference in ATH & DEF?

To me, this actually depends on what the PER rating number is. Myself, in a triangle, I like my players to be scorers OR passers (sure I'll take both, but you can't always have a roster full of 12 of these)

If PER is 100, I'll take player A for the higher ATH/DEF and he can't pass at an elite level for a guard. So I'll Jack up the distro.

If PER is 0, I'll take player B, run him at PG with 0 distro, and hope there are other scoring options to feed the ball to.

Maybe the best idea is to share the rest of the numbers of both players and see what stands out to us

Posted by Sportsbulls on 5/26/2020 3:51:00 AM (view original):
I honestly cant think of a player with other ratings I'd take player B over A.

You said backup guard:

80 ATH
70 SP
65 DEF
70 BH
40 P

Or

50 ATH
70 SP
40 DEF
70 BH
95 P

I'll easily take Player A.

Or with PER, still player A.

If neither player can really score, and they have a high speed, I take the 90 pass guy. If all player a can do is play defense , then that’s all he can do. If all player B is , is a backup pg, and that’s what you need , you take him.

If it helps, assume SPD/PER/BH are all 70+. Sounds to me like in this scenario you would all lean player A possibly even regardless of team needs?

I agree with TJ, if I have a need at pg, I’d consider B. If that’s not a need, I’d go with the generic defense.

Yes, I can see that point TJ and shoe, but he said he needs a backup SG rather than PG.

Posted by Sportsbulls on 5/26/2020 12:22:00 PM (view original):
Yes, I can see that point TJ and shoe, but he said he needs a backup SG rather than PG.

I’m just explaining my thought process. I don’t recruit guys with the idea that they will play *one position* for four years. I move guys around a lot from season to season, game to game, within their grouping (the flexibility playing zone affords in this way is very valuable to me). So I’m not looking at it like - “ I need a SG, there are these 2 SGs available, who do I like better?” I’m thinking in terms of where my team is weak and strong, short term and long term. Do I have 2 solid PGs for this year? How about next year? Is my perimeter pressing defense strong enough to carry another distributor?

Player A has a bit more generic value, in a vacuum. I’m probably leaning strongly toward him, of these two, three seasons out of four. But it really depends on what else I have. Strong defense is always valuable, but having an elite distributor at pg is pretty valuable too, especially if you are not set there already.

A has way more value in a vacuum. But the game isn't played in a vacuum. If you have no one else with over 55 passing you just have to take player B.

Posted by shoe3 on 5/26/2020 5:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Sportsbulls on 5/26/2020 12:22:00 PM (view original):
Yes, I can see that point TJ and shoe, but he said he needs a backup SG rather than PG.

I’m just explaining my thought process. I don’t recruit guys with the idea that they will play *one position* for four years. I move guys around a lot from season to season, game to game, within their grouping (the flexibility playing zone affords in this way is very valuable to me). So I’m not looking at it like - “ I need a SG, there are these 2 SGs available, who do I like better?” I’m thinking in terms of where my team is weak and strong, short term and long term. Do I have 2 solid PGs for this year? How about next year? Is my perimeter pressing defense strong enough to carry another distributor?

Player A has a bit more generic value, in a vacuum. I’m probably leaning strongly toward him, of these two, three seasons out of four. But it really depends on what else I have. Strong defense is always valuable, but having an elite distributor at pg is pretty valuable too, especially if you are not set there already.

That's fair. I'll agree with that. I think the best way to do this is to map out future depth charts.

A