BuzzerBeater Forums

Yeah I've seen that attempted before, doesn't work a all, just leaves the guard with a pathetic game rating.

Even in a run and gun or motion your centre still takes most of his shots from inside and the difference between the IS of the guard and ID of the opposing centre (not to mention blocking) will just make your undersized centre useless. Not to mention the almost complete lack of offensive rebounds you'd produce. It's not like your SG/C will be taking the opposing big man off the dribble every possession, instead he'll try to post up a lot. (Just like when you play a big man at guard and he doesn't just post up every possession).

Powerforwards take more midrange jump shots in outside offenses so you might have some success scoring/improving flow but playing a guard or SF with high inside scoring at PF, but I don't think it will generate a ton of fouls.


I am planning on crossing training my PG at C a few weeks this season so if this topic comes up again I should be able to provide some thoughts about doing this at a high(ish) level against high salary centres.

Thanks for all the replies. I guess that, unfortunately, I have to have my players react to the game engine, rather than have the game engine react to my players. Theoretically, the shooting guard (playing at center), with a legendary jump shot should get an atrocious outside defender in foul trouble immediately, if the opponent were playing man-to-man, but if the game engine forces that shooting guard turned center to take mainly inside shots, then the advantage is nullified, and there's even a disadvantage. I still may experiment in the future, but I'd probably just be better off playing within the known confines of the game engine for now

(22542648) here's sg playing c on run and gun offense. 35 points... 4.5 rating vs opponent 8.0. of course we do not know what inside skills does sg have. but he attempted five 3pointers and 3 of them scored, so i assume he shot from distance more than from inside.

i agree. but still, judging by the 4.5 ratings i guess sg's inside skills was more or less at mediocre level. so we can assume that game engine took the advantage of sg's outside skills to score.

yes but on the other hand....the starter of this post asked if putting a SG as a C would foul the Center out . From the match you linked , even though the guard is 130k wage and the C is only 4.5k wage , the C managed to play 52mins (the match went to OT) and only then left with 6 fouls....

and knowing that this is a playoff match (the one that the poster plays) there isn't that big difference on the skills , so that suggestion would fail I think...

Last edited by krepaleon at 6/22/2010 8:25:25 AM

That's because fouls are less likely to happen on jump shots.

Just dig out a thread in 2010, which the concept sounds great but doesnt really work at all.

However, did someone try SG playing PF on offense? My SG has "awful" IS, but would driving and JS cause the opponent's PF into foul trouble?

Another idea is that I would try a scrimmage, start with a lineup like this: PG-PG-SG-SF-SF and RnG. My SF ID are proficient, but IS is pretty poor. Does someone try this before? Works or not?

Interesting thread find. I've never experimented with this, mainly because I can't find players with good enough all-around builds to make it work. I have a few issues with this idea, though.

-First, I don't ever think it's a smart strategy to create a gameplan aimed at getting one of their players to foul out. The game engine is too unpredictable, and if another team only has one player that you're worried about, odds are you can design a tactic more reliable than trying to get him fouled out.
-Second, I've considered switching SF and PF offensively (not SG & PF as you suggest, but still relevant here).
My biggest concern with this is A) the offensive flow and B) your PF is still going to be taking shots at his new position.
Problem A comes up that you have a player with significantly lower passing in a distributing position, meaning that even with a mismatch with opposing PF covering your SG, your offense may be unable to get him the bal.
Problem B is fairly self-explanatory- odds are your PF is going to take a number of shots at SG, and my expectation would be that his decrease in efficiency may well outweigh the boost in efficiency from your SG's shots.
-To your third idea- might be worth a try in a scrimmage, but even with the modifications to the LI offense, you're going to get crushed by even an average team that runs a LI offense. 2pt shots are more effective than 3pt shots, and they're going to make such a disproportionate amount of those with those players on the court. Additionally, circling back to your foul idea, they're more likely to draw fouls on inside shots versus inept defenders than your jump shooters are.