BuzzerBeater Forums

Help - English > With his skills and height do you think he is a better sf or a pf in the long run?

With his skills and height do you think he is a better sf or a pf in the long run?

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
244920.1
Date: 6/27/2013 4:56:38 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
33
DMI: 6600
Age: 18
Height: 6'7" / 201 cm
Potential: perennial allstar
Game Shape: mediocre
Jump Shot: inept Jump Range: respectable
Outside Def.: average Handling: respectable
Driving: respectable Passing: pitiful
Inside Shot: mediocre Inside Def.: average
Rebounding: average Shot Blocking: average
Stamina: inept Free Throw: respectable
Poll:  SF OR PF
SF
PF

This Post:
00
244920.2 in reply to 244920.1
Date: 6/27/2013 1:20:05 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
7979
Power forward. He can't pass for **** and his shooting will be a pain to alleviate as well. 6'7 is not too short for a skilled PF. Germany used to(I'm not sure if the played retired) have a 6'6 skilled PF on their NT. You can definitely develop this guy into a dangerous well rounded NBBA caliber PF.

From: E.B.W.

This Post:
00
244920.3 in reply to 244920.2
Date: 6/27/2013 6:37:06 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
26152615
A NBBA caliber PF? With P. Allstar potential and 6'7" height? I don't think that is possible. He will be a very good SF (or inside oriented SF/outside oriented PF). I believe the 6'6" PF on the NT that you are talking about was probably an SF, who's suggested position was at the PF spot. a 6'7" P. Allstar PF doesn't have enough potential or height to do well in the NBBA, unless he is only a backup. I think it is more beneficial to have him as an SF though because as an SF the potential won't be as much of a problem and 6'6-6'7 is about ideal for an SF.

Murray/Harris/MPJ/Grant/Jokic - 2020 NBA Champs
This Post:
00
244920.4 in reply to 244920.1
Date: 6/27/2013 8:40:05 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
129129
He will make a great SF. I would train one on one guards to work up his jump shot while getting him an extremely high driving/handling skill. He will be a great scorer if you choose this route. A great scorer does not really need to concentrate too much on passing.

You could also train one on one forwards to work up his inside shot. Personally I would work on one on one guards. He's a great player for that. He will be awesome point guard that is classified as a SF.

He's all around got great skills. He will be a starter pretty early in his career.

Looking at your team I highly suggest doing one on one guards or forwards pretty much all season. This will result in a lot of pops overall.

Personally I'm training one on one forwards all season just to generate more overall pops. I also value handling/driving pretty high as well. But the big benefit of one on one is the higher amount of "random" pops created by cross-training. Thus increasing the overall skill points generated per season.

This Post:
00
244920.5 in reply to 244920.3
Date: 6/27/2013 10:05:29 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
A NBBA caliber PF? With P. Allstar potential and 6'7" height? I don't think that is possible. He will be a very good SF (or inside oriented SF/outside oriented PF). I believe the 6'6" PF on the NT that you are talking about was probably an SF, who's suggested position was at the PF spot. a 6'7" P. Allstar PF doesn't have enough potential or height to do well in the NBBA, unless he is only a backup. I think it is more beneficial to have him as an SF though because as an SF the potential won't be as much of a problem and 6'6-6'7 is about ideal for an SF.


The height's not that much of a problem - over the course of three seasons of training IS, ID and RB, you'd basically end up with one fewer pop each in IS, ID and RB vs a 6'10" guy, which is far from a major difference. The PAS potential, though, is going to be tough to make an NBBA guy - even with just about perfect secondaries. I've got a 6'10" guy I'm training with PAS potential in fact and his secondaries are extremely high, but he's not likely to ever be NBBA starting material.

From: Coolbobj

This Post:
00
244920.6 in reply to 244920.3
Date: 6/27/2013 10:07:36 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
7979
As a backup, why not? If hes well rounded then he wont cap as soon. I just think he has glaring holes that will make it troublesome to be a SF

From: E.B.W.

This Post:
00
244920.7 in reply to 244920.6
Date: 6/27/2013 11:07:59 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
26152615
He doesn't have any holes except for passing which is pretty easy to fix I think.

Murray/Harris/MPJ/Grant/Jokic - 2020 NBA Champs
From: Coolbobj

This Post:
00
244920.8 in reply to 244920.7
Date: 6/28/2013 12:29:54 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
7979
For me 2 passing is a very big hole, especially for a small forward. You'll have to dedicate a ton of time for passing if hes a SF. At PF, you can get away with a little less passing.

From: E.B.W.

This Post:
00
244920.9 in reply to 244920.8
Date: 6/28/2013 2:25:14 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
26152615
Maybe if you don't want a quality PF. Good PF's should have at least least decent passing, so he has to train it either way.

Murray/Harris/MPJ/Grant/Jokic - 2020 NBA Champs
From: Coolbobj

This Post:
00
244920.10 in reply to 244920.9
Date: 6/28/2013 8:46:15 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
7979
I understand that good PFs should have decent passing but its not hard to get to decent passing(5 -7). Good SFs need good passing(9+), which is very troublesome when starting at 2.

From: E.B.W.

This Post:
00
244920.11 in reply to 244920.10
Date: 6/28/2013 3:30:39 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
26152615
Except for the fact that this guys rebounding and jum range and all his secondaries area all very good. He doesn't even need to train jump range and rebounding if he doesn't want to because they are at respectable and average. This allows him plenty of extra time to get passing up a ton. He has no other holes what-so-ever.

Murray/Harris/MPJ/Grant/Jokic - 2020 NBA Champs