I've been playing HD for a little while now and recently came to the realization that I don't have any strategy behind who I put at PF vs C. I just kind of pick the two guys I think are the best post players and arbitrarily plug them into one spot or the other. I'm sure there is more to the equation than just saying 'He's a post put him wherever'. So my question is:

What should be the key determining factors in slotting a player at PF or C?

Higher Reb at C?
Higher spd at PF?
Flip them as needed to try to get your better defender on the other team's better scorer?
better BH at PF?
...and the list goes on.

I can come up with a lot of theories, but figured it is best to just ask the community who probably already has reached a consensus on this.

I think it really depends on your offense and defense.

I focus on zone so I'll chip in that in 3-2, you're PF and C are averaged together defensively so it makes no difference defensively where you put them, but I would put better rebounding ability (Reb and Ath) at the C for the rebounding component of the game. In 2-3, you want as much Block as you can get at the C so that would be the priority there. Since in 2-3 the PF and SF are averaged, if Block is equal (and to a certain extent Ath and D which should otherwise be prioritized at the C, assuming a decent to strong SF in those categories) you really just want a PF that complements your SF so that somewhat dictates that decision.

More generally, I think rebounding tends to go a little farther at the C and, on offense, speed and PE go a little farther at the PF. If there's not a clear distinction on those, I am not sure what takes priority.

It doesn’t make much difference. There are some considerations, but they are little things in the big picture.

In general, rebounding and block are slightly more valuable at the 5. Speed and the BH/P skills are slightly more valuable at the 4, as is some semblance of a perimeter game. The different sets also affect the extent to which these difference matter, too, and which ones are accentuated. Block matters most for the 5 in a 2-3, for example; a post player with speed and perimeter ability can be deadly at the 4 in flex.

I don’t play man defense, but when I play against man defense, I will consider who is the better scoring option, and who they are likely to be lined up against. In my zone/press combos, if I’m playing a 3-2 base, those spots are truly interchangeable. If it’s a 2-3 base, then that block consideration plays a role. In straight press, I tend to want to go on a rebounding-speed differential scale; the bigger differential will tend to go at the 5, unless there is a stamina balance issue that overrides.

i agree with a lot of this, there is not a huge difference between the 4 and 5

- definitely, reb in general (reb and ath) and blk for 2-3 zone are the top thing to look at for pf vs c. reb is usually the driver in most sets, but its not like reb is greatly more valuable at the 5 than 4, its probably 10%, 20% tops. this is in terms of base team setup. game planning wise, moving the defenders around particularly in m2m is often the biggest factor, and for many pairs of bigs (where the reb difference is muted but the defensive difference is significant), the game planning consideration routinely trumps the base team setup approach (which is generally speaking, not the case in most things).

- i do think bh/pass goes a bit further at the 4 but its minimal. i will break ties via this.

- if you are pressing, probably attribute a bit of value to speed at the 4. however, with a high quality trapping 1-3 (speed and iq mostly), extra speed at the 4 provides approximately 0 marginal value, defensively, even in the press. except perhaps against the very rare high end per scoring 4 (and the spd would be more valuable at the 5 facing a per scoring 5 in m2m or press)

- from a purely scoring standpoint, i attribute zero extra value to spd/per at the 4. they are just as valuable at the 5. i slightly prefer my lead scoring big at the 5, so if anything, i might even value spd/per more for scoring at the 5 - but it would be marginal, negligible from a most folks' perspective. from a high d1 perspective, per is a pretty important rating for scoring bigs. speed is moderately important. in general, outside high d1, you can do quite well with nothing in either of these, at either big man slot, so its sort of moot to start with. i think its normal for folks to view things from the 1 to 5 as a sliding scale, and this is the appropriate framework for generally thinking about such things (bh/pass matters most at the 1, least at the 5, etc). but there are exceptions. i attribute 0 extra value to reb at the 2 over the 1, and i attribute 0 extra value to spd/per scoring at the 4 versus the 5.

I’ve found that the 4 is more likely to take 3 point shots than the 5. Given the same settings a player will attempt mor 3 pointers at the 4 than the 5.

Agreed. I've had PF shoot 100+ 3's in a season. And tough to get my C anywhere near that.

I also have preferences about player positions based on the opponents defensive set.

So who would you all put at PF and C for next season between these two? The Knight world is about to turn over so their ratings may be different to start the season. I mostly run 3-2 but occasionally run 2-3.

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=0&pid=4922255
https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=0&pid=4970617

Posted by Trentonjoe on 12/10/2021 4:50:00 PM (view original):
I’ve found that the 4 is more likely to take 3 point shots than the 5. Given the same settings a player will attempt mor 3 pointers at the 4 than the 5.

i agree with these guys, they are correct. i feel like this sort of contradicts what i said earlier, so just want to clarify. if i had a 3pt scoring big, i would put him at the 4, too (and if i wanted a 3pt scoring big at the 4 on a team, that would make me value per/spd much more highly than i would on the center, for that team). for a 2pt scoring big, i don't weigh the per/spd at the 4 and 5 any differently (i think having 50, 60 per and to a lesser extent, spd, helps 2pt% a good amount for 4s and 5s in high d1 or against really good defense).

it just so happens that i don't build for per scoring 4s, it just doesn't fit with my general approach. i've enjoyed those players at times, especially on teams short on per from the 1-3, and it can be really helpful in those situations. but i just don't go that route myself, and it didn't come to mind when i was responding.

probably jewell the 2nd guy, based on current ratings. but the freshman appears to be growing quickly, i could see that changing perhaps? not really for any particular reason. if i have a better player from the pair of bigs i tend to put them at the 5 i guess, in general if i had a better scorer, or a better rebounder, or a better defender - all else equal - i'm probably putting the better guy at the 5.

I could have sworn that at some point, years ago now, they set the rebounding weights for the PF and C to be equal. Which would suggest that REB should not be a significant consideration. I usually focus on putting the better SPD/BH/Pass at the 4, but that's secondary to optimizing matchups offensively and defensively.

I am not sure if I am disagreeing with Gil but I do value speed at the 4/5 in a sense for scoring.

I believe that most people (including me) just kinda play the faster better ball handling option at the 4 and the lower speed guy at the 5. I think it is advantageous to play your better scorer (if he has a speed advantage) against the slower 5 vs man.

I suspect that speed has “ some” value in determining who takes the shot so if one of my primary scorers is a faster big, I will slide him to the 5 if the opposing teams 5 in a situation where the two defenders are similar in overall defense but there is a speed difference.

That may be what dahs and Billie said though.

Please forgive that awful third sentence. I can’t edit it on my phone….