Bump

OR,

i had also noticed the really large number press teams in tark d1. i kinda assumed it was an hd-wide trend. but since i only have two teams and tark is my only d1, i dont really know.

so i was wondering what your take is...

is the widespread use of press mostly just a tark thing? or is it moreso in tark than other worlds?

also, what percent of teams do you think run press in tark? other worlds?

i think it may be as high as 70%?

i do know that 24 out of the top25 def fg% teams in tark D1 last year were press. seems odd as, in my opinion, press should be the worst fg% defense compared to the other two.

Absolute great thread

Quote: Originally posted by oldave on 8/08/2008i'm going to play devils advocate here,  even though i tend to agree that PF's (and sometimes SG's) often make better SF's in D3 than sF's do.. in discussing why a good SF is hard to find,  you guys indcate that they just have to have so many things they need to be good at,  and you just cant find that.  agreed.but when you are looking at a SG or PF to fill the role,  it suddenly becomes unnecessary to have all these talents?I think that whoever fills the SF role,  you have to realize that they are jsut no going to be as well rounded as you would like a SF to be.  I think the main problem i usually see with getting SF to play SF in D3 is the rebounding. I run a zone,  so I really need a rebounder at SF.regardless of who I put at SF,  I need RE,  so... what will I skimp on?first of all,  BH.  Its nice to have a SF with BH,  but at D3 it is a luxury, imo.next,  i usually try to develop my SF as either a PE or an LP guy.  I know that admin has stated that a double threat is a big advantage for a scorer,  but i think it is jsut a luxury at D3.  in order to make it happen,  you prolly need a kid who you plan to give zero minutes in footwork and BH.  and who doesnt need much study hall and who doesnt need alot of work on PA or STA.  then maybe you can develop a double threat player.  Lately, i have noticed more SG's that can rebound fairly well as incoming freshmen.  I have a SG in Iba that is just starrting his SR year and is at 80RE.  i think he will be the best SF I ever had in D3.

Just to add on to this "Devil's Advocate" thought, I've found success playing/recruiting SG's to play SF in the Flex and Triangle offenses. Always start with the basics when recruiting a SG then add RB into his basic skills and some height. When facing a M2M or 2-3 zone the other team will have a hard time stopping the guy. My lone NC came in DIII running the Triangle with the following line-up: PG, SG, SG, C, C. M2M defense. It worked for me. Maybe it'll work for others.

Quote: Originally Posted By brad_23 on 10/28/2008

Quote: Originally posted by oldave on 8/08/2008
i'm going to play devils advocate here, even though i tend to agree that PF's (and sometimes SG's) often make better SF's in D3 than sF's do..



in discussing why a good SF is hard to find, you guys indcate that they just have to have so many things they need to be good at, and you just cant find that. agreed.

but when you are looking at a SG or PF to fill the role, it suddenly becomes unnecessary to have all these talents?

I think that whoever fills the SF role, you have to realize that they are jsut no going to be as well rounded as you would like a SF to be.

I think the main problem i usually see with getting SF to play SF in D3 is the rebounding. I run a zone, so I really need a rebounder at SF.

regardless of who I put at SF, I need RE, so... what will I skimp on?

first of all, BH. Its nice to have a SF with BH, but at D3 it is a luxury, imo.

next, i usually try to develop my SF as either a PE or an LP guy. I know that admin has stated that a double threat is a big advantage for a scorer, but i think it is jsut a luxury at D3. in order to make it happen, you prolly need a kid who you plan to give zero minutes in footwork and BH. and who doesnt need much study hall and who doesnt need alot of work on PA or STA. then maybe you can develop a double threat player.

Lately, i have noticed more SG's that can rebound fairly well as incoming freshmen. I have a SG in Iba that is just starrting his SR year and is at 80RE. i think he will be the best SF I ever had in D3.

Just to add on to this "Devil's Advocate" thought, I've found success playing/recruiting SG's to play SF in the Flex and Triangle offenses. Always start with the basics when recruiting a SG then add RB into his basic skills and some height. When facing a M2M or 2-3 zone the other team will have a hard time stopping the guy. My lone NC came in DIII running the Triangle with the following line-up: PG, SG, SG, C, C. M2M defense. It worked for me. Maybe it'll work for others.

height?

Yeah, height makes no difference whatsoever. I've played PG's at SF and had great success with them. I'm starting one now, who has a 40 RE rating. My best SF ever was a PG Charlie Maas who had extremely high RE and LP for a PG. If he had played at the point these ratings would have been largely wasted IMO.

A position assigned to a player is arbitrary, the important thing to look at is his ratings. If he has the correct combo of ratings a player could play any position in this game. Don't get hung up on what the players "position" is, look for where he can benefit your team the most. It's been said that there is an out of position penalty for players playing more than one spot out of position, but the penalty IMO is very small if it is there at all.

I often play players out of position and I would argue that my teams have been better because of this. SG's @ PG & SF. PF's @ SF & C. C's @ SF & PF... etc., etc.... I guess my main point in this post is to not be pigeon holed due to a players position. If you have played this game enough or have read the posts by coaches who have you should have an understanding of what core attributes you need a given position to be successful.

Quote: Originally Posted By bing11876 on 10/29/2008
Yeah, height makes no difference whatsoever. I've played PG's at SF and had great success with them. I'm starting one now, who has a 40 RE rating. My best SF ever was a PG Charlie Maas who had extremely high RE and LP for a PG. If he had played at the point these ratings would have been largely wasted IMO.

A position assigned to a player is arbitrary, the important thing to look at is his ratings. If he has the correct combo of ratings a player could play any position in this game. Don't get hung up on what the players "position" is, look for where he can benefit your team the most. It's been said that there is an out of position penalty for players playing more than one spot out of position, but the penalty IMO is very small if it is there at all.

I often play players out of position and I would argue that my teams have been better because of this. SG's @ PG & SF. PF's @ SF & C. C's @ SF & PF... etc., etc.... I guess my main point in this post is to not be pigeon holed due to a players position. If you have played this game enough or have read the posts by coaches who have you should have an understanding of what core attributes you need a given position to be successful.

When you've played a PG at SF, did it have a negative affect on his improvement? I've heard if you play a guy 2 positions over it hurts his development. I'm thinking about making my backup PG this season my backup SF next season but if it hurts his improvement (he'll be a junior next season) I don't think I'll do it.

i dont see how it would. thats not something you can program into the code very easily. you would have to keep track of how much they played in a position two away and so on. much more likely as bing said that there is some diminishing ability to the actual playing ability when playing two away.

Whoa, that went too far. I just threw height out as a joke which is why I mentioned it last. But hey, it gave some a topic to post about. Whatever.

Playing a PG at SF or any player out of position by 2 or more spots does not affect their development.

Quote: Originally Posted By bing11876 on 10/30/2008Playing a PG at SF or any player out of position by 2 or more spots does not affect their development

that is correct, it does not affect thier development no matter where you play them, but, admin has stated that if they are 2 positions or more away from thier "natural" spot, there will be a position penalty imposed which would have a negative effect on thier in-game performance.

admin has been very vague on how significant this penalty is, but i think the consensus is that 2 positions away is only a slight penalty. But then again, its hard to really know how big the penalty is becuase there are so many other variables at work.

Since we dont know how significant the penalty is.... even though i think it is quite small, I operate as if it may be fairly significant... just in case.

This effects my thinking during recruiting (i try to project where a player will play whne he is an upperclassman and when i do this, i avoid recruiting a kid that i think will mainly be playing 2 spots away from his natural spot). and then when it comes to actual gamplay it effects my thinking and i try to avoid it if possible.

BUT, if there are no other good options, i will play a player 2 spots away from natural. and i usually dont lose too much sleep over it.

bump

bump

it seems that there is more success with a 2-3 zone over the 3-2 zone, is this just my imagination?

Quote: Originally Posted By mtngoats on 2/11/2009it seems that there is more success with a 2-3 zone over the 3-2 zone, is this just my imagination

If you run zone, you need to adjust the 2-3/3-2 set based on your opponent.

3-2 zone is great at shutting down 3-pt shots, but gives up a higher general FG% (inside game) and more rebounds. 2-3 zone is good at shutting down the inside game, but gives up a much higher 3-pt%. So, you need to adjust each game depending on your opponent.

I run zone with both my D3 Dynasties. I typically go 3-2 if my opponent takes more than a third of his shots from 3-pt land, and if I am even or better in Rebounding. Otherwise, I go 2-3. I adjust +/- within either defense based on who takes the shots (guards vs post players).

This means I only run 3-2 a handful of games a season, but it can be extremely effective against the right opponent.