10/22/2012 4:00 PM
Joshua Graves combining for 6 ast and 3 TOs playing PG in two exhib games against halfway decent teams might be the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen in HD.
10/22/2012 4:02 PM
I would try it normal or uptempo.
10/22/2012 4:04 PM
Posted by killbatman on 10/22/2012 4:00:00 PM (view original):
Joshua Graves combining for 6 ast and 3 TOs playing PG in two exhib games against halfway decent teams might be the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen in HD.
That's indefensible, excuse the pun.
10/22/2012 4:04 PM
I will also note that your opponents didn't have killer guards. Pick someone with killer guards and see if that changes things.
10/22/2012 5:17 PM (edited)
Posted by jack_duck on 10/22/2012 3:53:00 PM (view original):
Oops, I did it again.

With my Rose Hulman team in Wooden.  This time against D2 simmys instead of D3.  At least I lost this time, but only 12 TO's each game.  Where it actually seems to be hurting me is in shooting percentage.  And maybe a little in rebounding...but my team's rebounding ratings are uninspiring anyway.

I really don't like this.  I don't know what it means.  It has made me notice, that other than on certain plays (assists or TO's), the PBP really doesn't tell you who's handling the ball.  Maybe there's a reason for that.
there is a reason the PBP doesnt tell you who's handling the ball. simple: nobody handles the ball. if someone could link the sim engine description i think it would be helpful for this discussion. effectively, outside some miscellaneous bullshit, the engine starts the possession by deciding who has the ball. then, there is the infamous TSF decision - turnover, shot, foul. the player has one of these 3 outcomes. note, pass and dribble are NOT options. if shot, theres some logic if he makes it, and it sort of goes like that for the rest of it.

thats pretty much it. the sim engine broken down to 3 sentences. is it possible to realistically capture the mechanics of basketball like this? no. that is why (IMO) the WIS guys published an article back in which the miami heat WITHOUT chris bosh actually had an INCREASED chance of winning a potential series. in what reality can LOSING CHRIS BOSH HELP YOUR WINNING CHANCES?? i mean its not the 1992 dream team we are talking about. its the miami heat. lebron and wade are already starting. WHO CAN YOU POSSIBLY REPLACE CHRIS BOSH WITH WHO DOESNT START ON THE HEAT THAT MAKES THEM BETTER??? PLEASE. TELL ME NOW AND I WILL NEVER SPEAK ANOTHER ILL WORD AGAINST THE HD SIM AGAIN.

this is why the game just doesnt make that much sense, and why ive started, stopped, and started again making my own sim engine about 15 different times. i mean, come on. the first real decision is who has the ball? it just doesnt pass the ol' litmus test. assists are PURELY cosmetic in this game - window dressing - so totally ignore them in your study about the bigs playing guards - it has nothing to do with anything (how can a good sim engine have assists be TOTALLY FAKED??). i mean, you can back-door some of this **** through creative equation creation after that TSF decision. but only in an artificial manner.

ive studied game results extensively, ridiculously extensively you could say. and as a extremely proficient software developer, i can often see beyond the results, to guess the code working behind the scenes - and it leaves me appalled. that is actually the #1 reason i have been retired in place the last 3 years - sure, i can spend the time, and win titles - but at what benefit? i see the sim engine for what it is, and it repulses me on a deep level. if i was still winning left and right, i would be doing it in a way that has little to do with real basketball and now that the thrill of reverse engineering a simulation game has passed (having largely completed that), i just want to play a bastketball game - and this aint it. the way i ran my unstoppable teams does not follow conventional basketball wisdom at all. in the new engine, im *just* finally at the point of getting back into it, to figure out what makes it tick with sebles changes - and once again, it has pretty little to do with conventional basketball wisdom (Admittedly, i am not an expert of that, but i know enough. and i am an expert about the HD sim itself - i can honestly say i was not a top 50 d1 recruiter in HD when i won 5 d1 titles in 9 years in the "coin flip dynasty" days when nobody was dominating -  one of the greatest accomplish in all of HD history. and by the way, i had 6 d1 seasons IN MY LIFE at the point i pulled that off, so to say i was not a top 50 recruiter is the understatement of the century. my success was PURELY a result of knowing that sim engine inside and out better than anyone. and i can tell you, having looked at it at that depth, its just not pretty. its a hacked up piece of **** by my standards, and its a god damn miracle it passes for a basketball sim. i think its because most people dont have the math and theoretical computing backgrounds to break it down for what it is. good basketball tactics just dont work enough, and i think people all suspect it, they feel it, and people complain about it all the time. but they also have too much uncertainty about the sim's inner workings to be confident what they are doing SHOULD work and that it just isnt because the SIM just isnt good enough, and what about the sim makes it that way).

well that concludes my daily rant. ill try to keep it to one today, i think i was pretty drunk the other night (well, no doubt about that) and had a few rants around the board, although i think i found and deleted most of them. i think ill let this one stand though... at least for a couple hours. its just one of those subjects that gets me going because HD could be so big and they **** it up so bad in so many ways. and as my mastery being theoretical problem solving, the approach of the TSF decision kills me. i would have to literally shoot myself in the head before i could create something so poorly designed, from a theoretical standpoint. and OF COURSE, it manifests itself in the eventual quality of the sim. no, you shouldnt be able to run a 5 big lineup and make sweet 16s and **** regularly. no, you shouldn't be able to run a 5 guard lineup and do the same. but you can, because this sim engine is a poorly thought out product, plain and simple.

honestly its 100% the enjoyment i get from interacting with the community, especially my dearly, dearly beloved GLV tark conference (the strongest longest non d1 conf dynasty HD has ever seen, which has had a phenomenal group of guys over the years), that keeps me here. its not the sim. at this point, i am making a push to get back into the game. why? because i cant stand the random comments i hear from time to time doubting me as a coach. i was basically as successful in my prime as any coach has ever been and i would like to prove that was no fluke before i retire. plus, i expect by the time i finish the 1 year push, hopefully taking home a handful of titles (ill never get where i was - i just am too disgusted by parts of this game to spend a half hour a day actually playing ever again - i still spend more time talking about HD than i do playing my damn teams, by a long shot, and that will never change - but still, i can at least win a few). and then ill be able to retire, hopefully with a sterling reputation in terms of my understanding of THIS sim engine, which i hope will help me get coaches to try MY version of the sim engine - when you know what is wrong in version 1, you should always be able to make a superior version 2. its just a side project now, but i would love to make it my full time job - and i will, if i can get the damn project finished and get enough people playing to support my family as i try to take it to the next level.
10/22/2012 4:32 PM
Posted by jsajsa on 10/22/2012 4:04:00 PM (view original):
Posted by killbatman on 10/22/2012 4:00:00 PM (view original):
Joshua Graves combining for 6 ast and 3 TOs playing PG in two exhib games against halfway decent teams might be the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen in HD.
That's indefensible, excuse the pun.
knowing the sim engine, its just not that surprising. as mentioned, assists are total window dressing, the pg is always going to get assigned them but that doesnt mean he actually helped his team mates get open and score.

second, he didn't shoot much, hence the low number of turnovers. if he was your leading scorer, you would definitely see a notably higher number of turnovers than you would if he was a real pg as your leading scorer, but not by enough. i also think that 1.5 TO/game average was a little lower than it really would be if you did this experiment in the long term.
10/22/2012 5:26 PM
I don't agree with your dismissal of assists.  While they aren't directly connected, the logic that assigns assists is very closely related to the logic that adjusts shooting%s based on teammate passing.  I don't have an in-depth mathematical study on this, but I'm very confident that it's true.
10/22/2012 7:29 PM
Posted by coach_billyg on 10/22/2012 4:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jsajsa on 10/22/2012 4:04:00 PM (view original):
Posted by killbatman on 10/22/2012 4:00:00 PM (view original):
Joshua Graves combining for 6 ast and 3 TOs playing PG in two exhib games against halfway decent teams might be the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen in HD.
That's indefensible, excuse the pun.
knowing the sim engine, its just not that surprising. as mentioned, assists are total window dressing, the pg is always going to get assigned them but that doesnt mean he actually helped his team mates get open and score.

second, he didn't shoot much, hence the low number of turnovers. if he was your leading scorer, you would definitely see a notably higher number of turnovers than you would if he was a real pg as your leading scorer, but not by enough. i also think that 1.5 TO/game average was a little lower than it really would be if you did this experiment in the long term.
So are you saying that Passing doesn't matter much at PG?
10/22/2012 8:03 PM
Donald Freeman is going to be a BEAST!!!
10/22/2012 9:01 PM
Posted by dahsdebater on 10/22/2012 5:26:00 PM (view original):
I don't agree with your dismissal of assists.  While they aren't directly connected, the logic that assigns assists is very closely related to the logic that adjusts shooting%s based on teammate passing.  I don't have an in-depth mathematical study on this, but I'm very confident that it's true.
so answer me this one - how did they determine assists before the logic that adjusted shooting %s based on teammate passing exist? its window dressing, hate to break it to you - even game admins have effectively confirmed this. and believe me - i can relate to your disbelief. you know how my rants go (you read the forums, its a simple leap). most of the ones i had with seble were on this issue, expressing my sheer disbelief that having a bad *** point guard did not create better looks for your players than a **** *** one. but as i said - its just not a realistic engine in many ways, and this is one of them. assists are assigned after the basket goes in, and good and bad teams alike have pretty small assist splits - i hope to god thats not the difference seble is using. plus, you really think a big man who doesnt score (like in this example) would contribute more than a high octane offense but also high bh/pass/spd guard on a team with lots of passing (that guard should avg under 3 per game on average). final point. assists are VERY MUCH tied to fga and fgm. the better your lp/per, the better your assists. the higher your tempo, the more assists. so, i really cannot see how possibly what you suggest is true, especially knowing exists were stated to be window dressing before the passing impact on team mates fg% effect even existed.
10/22/2012 9:06 PM
Posted by m4284850 on 10/22/2012 7:29:00 PM (view original):
Posted by coach_billyg on 10/22/2012 4:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jsajsa on 10/22/2012 4:04:00 PM (view original):
Posted by killbatman on 10/22/2012 4:00:00 PM (view original):
Joshua Graves combining for 6 ast and 3 TOs playing PG in two exhib games against halfway decent teams might be the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen in HD.
That's indefensible, excuse the pun.
knowing the sim engine, its just not that surprising. as mentioned, assists are total window dressing, the pg is always going to get assigned them but that doesnt mean he actually helped his team mates get open and score.

second, he didn't shoot much, hence the low number of turnovers. if he was your leading scorer, you would definitely see a notably higher number of turnovers than you would if he was a real pg as your leading scorer, but not by enough. i also think that 1.5 TO/game average was a little lower than it really would be if you did this experiment in the long term.
So are you saying that Passing doesn't matter much at PG?
no! it matters tremendously, passing is quite important for PGs, until ath/def became king of the world, spd/pass is where pgs made their money. what i am saying is assists are window dressing. MAYBE they are slightly more but ive watched em, and im telling you, they are way too ambiguous to read. just ignore them completely and you will almost guaranteed be better off than if you look at them. they are like individual rebounds only about 10 times worse. you want to look at assists? look at team assists, and glean VERY LITTLE. you want to look at individual assists? glean NOTHING. its just like rebounding, like i said, only 10 times worse (individual rebounding stats are meaningless when compared across teams. team rebounding - very, very meaningful. SOS much be factored in, but hey, thats something).

so anyway, if you totally ignore assists, look at what else the OP said. first, 2 games means **** and you can't tell a god damn thing from it. no 2 games in the world can tell you anything. run it for 20 and then come talk about it, if you want a real conversation (not an insult, just the realty). anyway, he did say fg% went down. if you asked me what the impact was, i would tell you, fg% went down. the strength of your pg as a ball controller now does impact the fg% of the rest of your team. so, i would actually expect that trend to continue if he went on with poor passing at the 1 and 2.
10/22/2012 11:12 PM
Posted by gillispie1 on 10/22/2012 9:01:00 PM (view original):
Posted by dahsdebater on 10/22/2012 5:26:00 PM (view original):
I don't agree with your dismissal of assists.  While they aren't directly connected, the logic that assigns assists is very closely related to the logic that adjusts shooting%s based on teammate passing.  I don't have an in-depth mathematical study on this, but I'm very confident that it's true.
so answer me this one - how did they determine assists before the logic that adjusted shooting %s based on teammate passing exist? its window dressing, hate to break it to you - even game admins have effectively confirmed this. and believe me - i can relate to your disbelief. you know how my rants go (you read the forums, its a simple leap). most of the ones i had with seble were on this issue, expressing my sheer disbelief that having a bad *** point guard did not create better looks for your players than a **** *** one. but as i said - its just not a realistic engine in many ways, and this is one of them. assists are assigned after the basket goes in, and good and bad teams alike have pretty small assist splits - i hope to god thats not the difference seble is using. plus, you really think a big man who doesnt score (like in this example) would contribute more than a high octane offense but also high bh/pass/spd guard on a team with lots of passing (that guard should avg under 3 per game on average). final point. assists are VERY MUCH tied to fga and fgm. the better your lp/per, the better your assists. the higher your tempo, the more assists. so, i really cannot see how possibly what you suggest is true, especially knowing exists were stated to be window dressing before the passing impact on team mates fg% effect even existed.
I specifically said that they aren't directly related, so you're intentionally putting words in my mouth.  What I said is that the logic that assigns assists is very closely related to the logic that adjusts shooting%s based on teammate passing.  That's a direct quote.  It's very obvious to me that the equations that determine assist probabilities are very similar, if not identical, to the ones that adjust shooting percentage.  That doesn't mean you get one from the other; I'm sure they don't.  But it's not only possible but likely that when seble went in to generate the FG% adjustment that he utilized the ratings and positional weights that already existed for assist probabilities and simply changed the scale.  Within one game assist totals are entirely meaningless, but over a season I think assist numbers are a reasonable barometer of how much a player is contributing to his teammates' FG%.  Not necessarily something that I would advise a new coach to look at or track, but all the same I think assists are overly dismissed by veteran coaches because they used to compare to nothing of value.
10/23/2012 1:03 AM
Posted by coach_billyg on 10/22/2012 5:17:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jack_duck on 10/22/2012 3:53:00 PM (view original):
Oops, I did it again.

With my Rose Hulman team in Wooden.  This time against D2 simmys instead of D3.  At least I lost this time, but only 12 TO's each game.  Where it actually seems to be hurting me is in shooting percentage.  And maybe a little in rebounding...but my team's rebounding ratings are uninspiring anyway.

I really don't like this.  I don't know what it means.  It has made me notice, that other than on certain plays (assists or TO's), the PBP really doesn't tell you who's handling the ball.  Maybe there's a reason for that.
there is a reason the PBP doesnt tell you who's handling the ball. simple: nobody handles the ball. if someone could link the sim engine description i think it would be helpful for this discussion. effectively, outside some miscellaneous bullshit, the engine starts the possession by deciding who has the ball. then, there is the infamous TSF decision - turnover, shot, foul. the player has one of these 3 outcomes. note, pass and dribble are NOT options. if shot, theres some logic if he makes it, and it sort of goes like that for the rest of it.

thats pretty much it. the sim engine broken down to 3 sentences. is it possible to realistically capture the mechanics of basketball like this? no. that is why (IMO) the WIS guys published an article back in which the miami heat WITHOUT chris bosh actually had an INCREASED chance of winning a potential series. in what reality can LOSING CHRIS BOSH HELP YOUR WINNING CHANCES?? i mean its not the 1992 dream team we are talking about. its the miami heat. lebron and wade are already starting. WHO CAN YOU POSSIBLY REPLACE CHRIS BOSH WITH WHO DOESNT START ON THE HEAT THAT MAKES THEM BETTER??? PLEASE. TELL ME NOW AND I WILL NEVER SPEAK ANOTHER ILL WORD AGAINST THE HD SIM AGAIN.

this is why the game just doesnt make that much sense, and why ive started, stopped, and started again making my own sim engine about 15 different times. i mean, come on. the first real decision is who has the ball? it just doesnt pass the ol' litmus test. assists are PURELY cosmetic in this game - window dressing - so totally ignore them in your study about the bigs playing guards - it has nothing to do with anything (how can a good sim engine have assists be TOTALLY FAKED??). i mean, you can back-door some of this **** through creative equation creation after that TSF decision. but only in an artificial manner.

ive studied game results extensively, ridiculously extensively you could say. and as a extremely proficient software developer, i can often see beyond the results, to guess the code working behind the scenes - and it leaves me appalled. that is actually the #1 reason i have been retired in place the last 3 years - sure, i can spend the time, and win titles - but at what benefit? i see the sim engine for what it is, and it repulses me on a deep level. if i was still winning left and right, i would be doing it in a way that has little to do with real basketball and now that the thrill of reverse engineering a simulation game has passed (having largely completed that), i just want to play a bastketball game - and this aint it. the way i ran my unstoppable teams does not follow conventional basketball wisdom at all. in the new engine, im *just* finally at the point of getting back into it, to figure out what makes it tick with sebles changes - and once again, it has pretty little to do with conventional basketball wisdom (Admittedly, i am not an expert of that, but i know enough. and i am an expert about the HD sim itself - i can honestly say i was not a top 50 d1 recruiter in HD when i won 5 d1 titles in 9 years in the "coin flip dynasty" days when nobody was dominating -  one of the greatest accomplish in all of HD history. and by the way, i had 6 d1 seasons IN MY LIFE at the point i pulled that off, so to say i was not a top 50 recruiter is the understatement of the century. my success was PURELY a result of knowing that sim engine inside and out better than anyone. and i can tell you, having looked at it at that depth, its just not pretty. its a hacked up piece of **** by my standards, and its a god damn miracle it passes for a basketball sim. i think its because most people dont have the math and theoretical computing backgrounds to break it down for what it is. good basketball tactics just dont work enough, and i think people all suspect it, they feel it, and people complain about it all the time. but they also have too much uncertainty about the sim's inner workings to be confident what they are doing SHOULD work and that it just isnt because the SIM just isnt good enough, and what about the sim makes it that way).

well that concludes my daily rant. ill try to keep it to one today, i think i was pretty drunk the other night (well, no doubt about that) and had a few rants around the board, although i think i found and deleted most of them. i think ill let this one stand though... at least for a couple hours. its just one of those subjects that gets me going because HD could be so big and they **** it up so bad in so many ways. and as my mastery being theoretical problem solving, the approach of the TSF decision kills me. i would have to literally shoot myself in the head before i could create something so poorly designed, from a theoretical standpoint. and OF COURSE, it manifests itself in the eventual quality of the sim. no, you shouldnt be able to run a 5 big lineup and make sweet 16s and **** regularly. no, you shouldn't be able to run a 5 guard lineup and do the same. but you can, because this sim engine is a poorly thought out product, plain and simple.

honestly its 100% the enjoyment i get from interacting with the community, especially my dearly, dearly beloved GLV tark conference (the strongest longest non d1 conf dynasty HD has ever seen, which has had a phenomenal group of guys over the years), that keeps me here. its not the sim. at this point, i am making a push to get back into the game. why? because i cant stand the random comments i hear from time to time doubting me as a coach. i was basically as successful in my prime as any coach has ever been and i would like to prove that was no fluke before i retire. plus, i expect by the time i finish the 1 year push, hopefully taking home a handful of titles (ill never get where i was - i just am too disgusted by parts of this game to spend a half hour a day actually playing ever again - i still spend more time talking about HD than i do playing my damn teams, by a long shot, and that will never change - but still, i can at least win a few). and then ill be able to retire, hopefully with a sterling reputation in terms of my understanding of THIS sim engine, which i hope will help me get coaches to try MY version of the sim engine - when you know what is wrong in version 1, you should always be able to make a superior version 2. its just a side project now, but i would love to make it my full time job - and i will, if i can get the damn project finished and get enough people playing to support my family as i try to take it to the next level.
I'll buy a 5 pack...
10/23/2012 1:20 AM
+1
10/23/2012 11:59 AM (edited)
Posted by dahsdebater on 10/22/2012 11:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 10/22/2012 9:01:00 PM (view original):
Posted by dahsdebater on 10/22/2012 5:26:00 PM (view original):
I don't agree with your dismissal of assists.  While they aren't directly connected, the logic that assigns assists is very closely related to the logic that adjusts shooting%s based on teammate passing.  I don't have an in-depth mathematical study on this, but I'm very confident that it's true.
so answer me this one - how did they determine assists before the logic that adjusted shooting %s based on teammate passing exist? its window dressing, hate to break it to you - even game admins have effectively confirmed this. and believe me - i can relate to your disbelief. you know how my rants go (you read the forums, its a simple leap). most of the ones i had with seble were on this issue, expressing my sheer disbelief that having a bad *** point guard did not create better looks for your players than a **** *** one. but as i said - its just not a realistic engine in many ways, and this is one of them. assists are assigned after the basket goes in, and good and bad teams alike have pretty small assist splits - i hope to god thats not the difference seble is using. plus, you really think a big man who doesnt score (like in this example) would contribute more than a high octane offense but also high bh/pass/spd guard on a team with lots of passing (that guard should avg under 3 per game on average). final point. assists are VERY MUCH tied to fga and fgm. the better your lp/per, the better your assists. the higher your tempo, the more assists. so, i really cannot see how possibly what you suggest is true, especially knowing exists were stated to be window dressing before the passing impact on team mates fg% effect even existed.
I specifically said that they aren't directly related, so you're intentionally putting words in my mouth.  What I said is that the logic that assigns assists is very closely related to the logic that adjusts shooting%s based on teammate passing.  That's a direct quote.  It's very obvious to me that the equations that determine assist probabilities are very similar, if not identical, to the ones that adjust shooting percentage.  That doesn't mean you get one from the other; I'm sure they don't.  But it's not only possible but likely that when seble went in to generate the FG% adjustment that he utilized the ratings and positional weights that already existed for assist probabilities and simply changed the scale.  Within one game assist totals are entirely meaningless, but over a season I think assist numbers are a reasonable barometer of how much a player is contributing to his teammates' FG%.  Not necessarily something that I would advise a new coach to look at or track, but all the same I think assists are overly dismissed by veteran coaches because they used to compare to nothing of value.
OK, so that takes out the first question - how do they determine assists before the logic to adjust shooting % based on team mates even exist? ill give you that - but i went on to refute basically exactly what you are saying now (effectively expecting the response, seble could have lined them up later). but they don't line up, and id like to hear your response to the reasons i explained. assists on an INDIVIDUAL basis are total **** and there is no doubt in my mind about that. its like with rebounding, how you can't accurately compare individual stats - an awesome big on a strong rebounding team will pull lower numbers than a good big on a **** rebounding team, and probably by a solid margin.

and like i said - assists are VERY MUCH ties to fga and fgm. the better yours team is at scoring (lp/per/ath/spd), the more assists you generate. of scoring, team impact is definitely not more than 10%, and probably significantly less. KNOWING (do you doubt this?) that the amount your team scores has a huge impact in overall, and thus individual, assists being doled out, how the heck can you attribute the amount of assists to that teeny tiny component which is the impact on fg%?

for example, take a team. say your pg pulls 3.5 assists. now, give your pretty decent scoring bigs +20 ath/lp. now, with higher scoring going on, your pg pulls 4 assists. does that indicate his overall contribution to the team fg% is now higher? isn't the fg% higher because your big is now much beastlier? it just doesn't make sense to say hes causing that. if you hold fga the same in that case - which is not really true, they would go down slightly - your assist/fga ratio went up and your pg did nothing to get better. if you claim you dont need to look at assists with relation to fga, explain how the hell this all makes sense when comparing a 40 fga/game slowdown team to a 60fga uptempo one.

another example, you have a beast pg with low per, he makes 5 ppg. he pulls 4 assists. now, give him +60 per and now hes a 20 ppg guy. suddenly, the team is scoring 5 ppg higher, at a 4% higher fgm rate. but your PG is now pulling in 2.4 assists. that is a quite realistic scenario, by the numbers, particularly the apg loss due to ppg increase. so tell me. the team is now much more effective on offense. is that pg now doing so much less to help his team mates be successful, EVEN THOUGH WE KNOW BEYOND SHADOW OF A DOUBT HIS PRESENCE AS A BEAST SCORER IS RESULTING IN AN INCREASE FG% OF TEAM MATES ACROSS THE BOARD? so team mates fg% goes up... and his contribution... dramatically down? it doesn't add it up, i simply don't see it. sure, his team mates are taking fewer fga now, so he might get less assists from that, but its not even close to proportional. ive had stud pgs who without per would be those 3-4 assist guys (on a strong team, which is high end), wind up under 2 apg, and that is in the new engine. and then your SG, even without lowering his fga, has his assists skyrocket. even harder to take a crack at that one, but i welcome you to try.

i could go on. but i absolutely, completely, and without a doubt refute your notion that you can judge a players' effectiveness in terms of impact on other players' efficiency by their individual assists. individual assists are THE most useless of all stats recorded in this game and really, its not close. i dont care if you are a season 1 rookie or a 30 time national champion, if you are making judgements about the effectiveness of your players in terms of impact on team mates by their assists, you are hurting yourself (or just randomly getting lucky). its much like individual rebounds, except 10 times worse, and i can't give a better summation than that. somewhere, deep down, there MIGHT be some small little factor from which you could glean something, *if you could correctly calibrate the other 90% of the equation*, which i can safely say, is damn near impossible.
of 4

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.