All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > How to win at D2 and D3
5/2/2012 5:10 PM

I think the tempo issue is being analyzed incorrectly.  I'm assuming the same scenario posed above: better starters and equal or worse bench.  I'm not smart enough to figure out the answer to the following question, but I think what people should be asking is which tempo will give your starters the most possessions.  It's not necessarily true that starters will get more possessions simply because they are in the game longer.  Running slowdown obviously decreases possessions.  Additionally, stamina needs to be considered, as indicated by previous posters. 

There is a balance to tempo, but I don't think one strategy is always correct or another is always wrong.

5/2/2012 5:33 PM
Hmmm. The way I'd look at it in that situation is to have your starters in for the highest percentage of the game as possible.
5/2/2012 5:46 PM
Posted by girt25 on 5/2/2012 5:33:00 PM (view original):
Hmmm. The way I'd look at it in that situation is to have your starters in for the highest percentage of the game as possible.

Actually, now that I run some basic numbers, I agree.

My "numbers" are contingent on possession per game being ~ NCAA-level (i.e low 60s for slowdown and high 70s for uptempo).  Anyone know if that is what you get in HD?

If so, I think slowdown is probably the way to go unless you're rocking 85+ stam with everyone in your lineup. 
 

5/2/2012 5:58 PM (edited)
To me, tempo choice should be a conscious tradeoff between:

1. the law of large numbers and the underlying standard deviation in statistics produced by low sample size (i.e. going slowdown and generating relatively low # of possessions) vs. high sample size (uptempo, high # of possessions)

and

2. maximizing the % of possessions in the game where your 5 players on the court exceed the talent and skill level of the opponents' 5 players.  When I say talent and skill level, I'm including any underlying stamina effects, playing with just 10 scholarship players or the like, underlying FT rates and FT%, etc., everything that determines performance, even those factors we can't quantify or really understand the mechanics of like why teams foul way more in the 2H of games than the 1H.  If you have a better starting 5 but a worse bench than your opponent, then go slowdown.  If your bench is relatively better than theirs but your starters are relatively worse than theirs, then uptempo is probably better.  


If you have the better all around team (better relative starters and bench) but go slowdown, then you're more susceptible to random statistical behavior, i.e. being upset more.  If you have the worst team (worst relative starters and bench) but go uptempo, then you're less likely to win a track meet. 

Edit:  HCA can also be a significant underlying factor, most notably and esp. in D1, that would sway things to a slower or normal tempo in close cases or when you're playing on an opponent floor where they have an A-/A/A+HCA.

5/3/2012 2:18 AM
I agree with pretty much everything said. I ran uptempo when I had a deep bench and recruited for stamina. I rarely have more than 5 or 6 upperclassmen, so I might be at a disadvantage when I'm playing someone who has 7 or 8 upperclassmen and is running a high variance program to only be good 1 or 2 out of every 4 years. I also don't want to run uptempo against a press team. My 5 starters are often just ridiculously good.

Also, I've personally just had very poor success with uptempo. I don't know if it doesn't work well with motion (probably my offense of choice) or if my players rush their shots or what-- I just feel like I win more with slowdown or normal. 

With work ethic, I don't remember saying I didn't take people under 50, I value 30+ about the same (obviously there is a sliding scale, and I'd prefer not to get someone with 31 WE who will won't get the PT necessary to up his WE). In fact, I just signed someone with 21 WE in phelan because he doesn't have a lot of places to improve and his cores are already quite good. This is an exception of course, and I actually valued him higher than a 32 WE PF who had more categories to improve and a worse GPA. 
5/3/2012 3:37 AM
Does anyone feel that team speed has any correlation with the effectiveness of uptempo?

Makes sense from a real life basketball perspective, of course that doesn't necessarily make it true in HD...
5/3/2012 8:34 AM
Posted by aejones on 5/3/2012 2:19:00 AM (view original):
I agree with pretty much everything said. I ran uptempo when I had a deep bench and recruited for stamina. I rarely have more than 5 or 6 upperclassmen, so I might be at a disadvantage when I'm playing someone who has 7 or 8 upperclassmen and is running a high variance program to only be good 1 or 2 out of every 4 years. I also don't want to run uptempo against a press team. My 5 starters are often just ridiculously good.

Also, I've personally just had very poor success with uptempo. I don't know if it doesn't work well with motion (probably my offense of choice) or if my players rush their shots or what-- I just feel like I win more with slowdown or normal. 

With work ethic, I don't remember saying I didn't take people under 50, I value 30+ about the same (obviously there is a sliding scale, and I'd prefer not to get someone with 31 WE who will won't get the PT necessary to up his WE). In fact, I just signed someone with 21 WE in phelan because he doesn't have a lot of places to improve and his cores are already quite good. This is an exception of course, and I actually valued him higher than a 32 WE PF who had more categories to improve and a worse GPA. 
OK, my bad on work ethic - I went back and looked, here is what you said: "If someone has a 50+ work ethic, you will never have to worry about his development. He will frequently be nearing his caps around his junior season, and will almost always cap out in everything by his senior year."

Different then saying "Don't take anyone under 50."  I just didn't remember it right, sorry about that.
5/3/2012 9:09 AM
Posted by narcotico on 5/3/2012 3:37:00 AM (view original):
Does anyone feel that team speed has any correlation with the effectiveness of uptempo?

Makes sense from a real life basketball perspective, of course that doesn't necessarily make it true in HD...
Real life -- yes.
HD - no.
5/3/2012 10:35 AM
My gut is that speed is most effective in scoring, specifically shooting, and is used in direction conjunction with ball handling. I also think guys with low speed at the perimeter positions might get hurt trying to guard guys with higher speed. I have no real anecdotal evidence on these assumptions, but that is my understanding of how speed is most effective in this game.
5/3/2012 11:52 AM
Posted by jdno on 5/2/2012 5:58:00 PM (view original):
To me, tempo choice should be a conscious tradeoff between:

1. the law of large numbers and the underlying standard deviation in statistics produced by low sample size (i.e. going slowdown and generating relatively low # of possessions) vs. high sample size (uptempo, high # of possessions)

and

2. maximizing the % of possessions in the game where your 5 players on the court exceed the talent and skill level of the opponents' 5 players.  When I say talent and skill level, I'm including any underlying stamina effects, playing with just 10 scholarship players or the like, underlying FT rates and FT%, etc., everything that determines performance, even those factors we can't quantify or really understand the mechanics of like why teams foul way more in the 2H of games than the 1H.  If you have a better starting 5 but a worse bench than your opponent, then go slowdown.  If your bench is relatively better than theirs but your starters are relatively worse than theirs, then uptempo is probably better.  


If you have the better all around team (better relative starters and bench) but go slowdown, then you're more susceptible to random statistical behavior, i.e. being upset more.  If you have the worst team (worst relative starters and bench) but go uptempo, then you're less likely to win a track meet. 

Edit:  HCA can also be a significant underlying factor, most notably and esp. in D1, that would sway things to a slower or normal tempo in close cases or when you're playing on an opponent floor where they have an A-/A/A+HCA.

you are missing some factors. in an uptempo set, you are always going to be rushing your shot, and take poorer half court shots. the benefits from #1 and #2 need to overcome that. 

in reality, IMO, the impact of the downside of uptempo on basic performance metrics usually over powers the impact of #1 and #2, making an otherwise smart uptempo decision, a signficant detriment.
5/3/2012 12:11 PM (edited)
Posted by aejones on 5/3/2012 2:19:00 AM (view original):
I agree with pretty much everything said. I ran uptempo when I had a deep bench and recruited for stamina. I rarely have more than 5 or 6 upperclassmen, so I might be at a disadvantage when I'm playing someone who has 7 or 8 upperclassmen and is running a high variance program to only be good 1 or 2 out of every 4 years. I also don't want to run uptempo against a press team. My 5 starters are often just ridiculously good.

Also, I've personally just had very poor success with uptempo. I don't know if it doesn't work well with motion (probably my offense of choice) or if my players rush their shots or what-- I just feel like I win more with slowdown or normal. 

With work ethic, I don't remember saying I didn't take people under 50, I value 30+ about the same (obviously there is a sliding scale, and I'd prefer not to get someone with 31 WE who will won't get the PT necessary to up his WE). In fact, I just signed someone with 21 WE in phelan because he doesn't have a lot of places to improve and his cores are already quite good. This is an exception of course, and I actually valued him higher than a 32 WE PF who had more categories to improve and a worse GPA. 
its not just you. i have 0 surprise you have bad uptempo experience. why? you play tough opponents, and most likely, you ONLY MEASURE SUCCESS IN TERMS OF SUCCESS AGAINST TOUGH OPPONENTS. that is key to having no success with uptempo. i was the same way, same conclusion. i would advise anyone looking at uptempo from the results of their games, to totally segregate your success against inferior teams, compared to comparable or superior teams. your results may be totally different - and also have to be careful of sample size (if you play 3 really good teams a year, and you are a really good team, you probably need to look at this over 10-20 seasons to get anything out of it).

in uptempo, you rush shots - when you rush shots, your fg% goes down, significantly. the "theory" posted by admins in past shows that this fg% roughly could stay the same. in fact, old admin repeatedly said, think of uptempo as really only affecting possessions. but its been shown statistically that is not true. it affects a LOT of things. what admin was saying is, in his simulation (of all kinds of teams playing each other, with potentially huge talent discrepencies averaged out with small ones), most of that stuff evened out. fg%, for example, evens out because the extra fast break points, which come from a very high % shot, off set a large number of half court shots that are maybe 4% less likely to go in.

however, play a great team - especially a great defensive team - and you have 0 chance, none, of on average, making up for your half court rushes with your extra fast break points. even against a press, you simply don't get past that D in the open court very much more, if at all. so, when good teams play, uptempo is generally quite bad. are there circumstances its worth using? maybe, but 98% of the time, no - just my opinion on that one though.

the reason so many coaches struggle with uptempo, IMO, is because they play all season, as high end teams (maybe say, 10th in the nation), playing on average, much less than 10th best teams. then id get to the elite 8, play one of these teams, and they don't figure you need a totally different strategy against tough or tougher than you teams, than you do against bad teams. they would go ahead and run uptempo into an extremely tough defense and just get killed. that uptempo, IMO, in elite 8 and later games, when i was the #1 team, cost my opponents at least a quarter, and often half, of their chance of winning (i.e. if they had 20%, now they have less than 15%, and often 10%) - even though it worked for them, generally speaking, all season. however, in their normal schedule, playing only maybe 3-4 teams who were in that same top tier group, and very often fewer teams - they get no indication of just how badly uptempo is going to hurt them in tough games.
5/3/2012 12:14 PM
Posted by gillispie on 5/3/2012 11:52:00 AM (view original):
Posted by jdno on 5/2/2012 5:58:00 PM (view original):
To me, tempo choice should be a conscious tradeoff between:

1. the law of large numbers and the underlying standard deviation in statistics produced by low sample size (i.e. going slowdown and generating relatively low # of possessions) vs. high sample size (uptempo, high # of possessions)

and

2. maximizing the % of possessions in the game where your 5 players on the court exceed the talent and skill level of the opponents' 5 players.  When I say talent and skill level, I'm including any underlying stamina effects, playing with just 10 scholarship players or the like, underlying FT rates and FT%, etc., everything that determines performance, even those factors we can't quantify or really understand the mechanics of like why teams foul way more in the 2H of games than the 1H.  If you have a better starting 5 but a worse bench than your opponent, then go slowdown.  If your bench is relatively better than theirs but your starters are relatively worse than theirs, then uptempo is probably better.  


If you have the better all around team (better relative starters and bench) but go slowdown, then you're more susceptible to random statistical behavior, i.e. being upset more.  If you have the worst team (worst relative starters and bench) but go uptempo, then you're less likely to win a track meet. 

Edit:  HCA can also be a significant underlying factor, most notably and esp. in D1, that would sway things to a slower or normal tempo in close cases or when you're playing on an opponent floor where they have an A-/A/A+HCA.

you are missing some factors. in an uptempo set, you are always going to be rushing your shot, and take poorer half court shots. the benefits from #1 and #2 need to overcome that. 

in reality, IMO, the impact of the downside of uptempo on basic performance metrics usually over powers the impact of #1 and #2, making an otherwise smart uptempo decision, a signficant detriment.

Yeah, but the flipside of that is presumably less TO/possession. (less time with the ball on offense means less chance of turning it over) 

If you want to factor in everything, you have to factor in everything.

5/3/2012 12:38 PM
billy,

1. I haven't seen any effects that going uptempo forces rushed shots here in HD.  In RL, I can see that and it seems somewhat intuitive, but I just haven't really seen that here in HD.  You said it has been shown statistically that going uptempo affects a lot of things besides just number of possessions.  I don't recall seeing these statistics.  Do you have a link or a previous posting that refers to this?

2. Against equal or superior foes, going uptempo may not be the right strategy for sure.  I still think tempo choice is  a balance b/w the 2 factors I mentioned.  You say to segregate the inferior opponents from the superior opponents.  That's essentially what I'm saying to do as well when deciding to go uptempo vs. slowdown.  Against a great team I'm not going to go uptempo. 

3. You said:  "in reality, IMO, the impact of the downside of uptempo on basic performance metrics usually over powers the impact of #1 and #2, making an otherwise smart uptempo decision, a signficant detriment."  Did you mean this as a blanket statement or against a "superior" team?  In your original response to my post, you didn't mention anything about superior teams...so if you meant it as a blanket statement, I think that's an erroneous line of thinking.  




5/6/2012 7:29 AM
It is nice to see that aaron's ego is not just limited to poker.
5/6/2012 8:53 AM
At DIII what number makes someone "good" at a stat., 60?

I know events require multiple variables and are opposed by defenders stats but in general what makes someone "good"?

Would a 60 ATH, 60 LP make someone a decent scoring option for a PF or C?

That would require something like a 60 ATH, 60 DEF defender to guard him right?    Anything worse would give the offensive guy the advantage right?
of 22
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > How to win at D2 and D3

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.