All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > WIS User Interview - girt25
1/29/2013 4:00 PM
Our interview with girt25 is now available: http://whatifsports.com/beyondtheboxscore/default.asp?article=interview_20130128

A hardy thank you to girt25 for participating and to the HD community for your nominations and questions.

1/29/2013 5:17 PM
great job girt! i have to run, probably will sitemail you on a couple of your comments - but i thought you gave some good advice (and found the non-advicey parts interesting). with my end game settings, i actually used to do stuff like that - i wasnt into the game when they came out, and never really thought it through. i was afraid to hurt myself, so i played conservative - only changed in extreme cases, if losing by 10+ in 6 minutes, type stuff. but over the last 6 months, ive totally changed my stance - and for the last several season, you'd see much, much lower thresholds in my settings. thats why i was curious about your take - sounds like we are very much in agreement, at this point. those settings have won me some big games too, now i even review my end game settings for any game i game plan for.
1/29/2013 5:46 PM
cool Q&A girt. Even for a badger... 
1/29/2013 8:57 PM
good job
1/29/2013 9:50 PM

WIS: In the Allen World, you coached Michigan State to a national championship in Season 25, then disappeared from the college ranks for several years (perhaps coaching in the NBA?), before resurfacing at North Carolina in Season 42. What prompted the return to coaching in the Allen world?

girt25: Honestly, that was due to frustration with the game. Well, not so much with the game itself, but the person running it. I hated how he treated people (myself in particular) who were legitimately pushing to make HD better. It was treated as a personal attack, and I simply tired of not only the constant uphill battle, but the nasty treatment I'd receive behind the scenes because at the time I was extremely vocal about the game and trying to improve it.


I'd think anything is better than the ghost ship we have now.

1/30/2013 12:06 AM
old admin definitely took stuff way more personally than seble. you can say what you want about seble, but irrespective of any of that - hes WAY better in that regard, thankfully. 
1/30/2013 4:46 AM
Posted by gillispie2 on 1/30/2013 12:06:00 AM (view original):
old admin definitely took stuff way more personally than seble. you can say what you want about seble, but irrespective of any of that - hes WAY better in that regard, thankfully. 
Amen!

The fomer administrator invented the game and was very defensive about any criticism.  Worse, he had the annoying personality trait of being unable, in any situation, to admit fault or to apologize.  There was one instance where my team was on the 'lock' list for the NT but ended up in the PIT.  Rather than admit a mistake and correct it, he told me that Collegiate Insider was independent of his game and he had no control over the list. 

My team should've been on the bubble list, not the lock list. I took a lot of criticism in the Forum over this issue. When treble finally corrected the list, I asked him to post an explanation in the Forum. I even wrote a tongue-in-cheek apology to the "Transylvania Nation and their great coach alblack56" and asked him to post it. No response.   Even in jest, he was incapable of apologizing

The interview is great, girt!
1/30/2013 10:06 AM
Good read.  I like the bit about the similarities between poker and recruiting.  That's a statement I've made many times myself, and that's probably why I enjoy recruiting so much.
1/30/2013 10:16 AM
Posted by killbatman on 1/30/2013 10:06:00 AM (view original):
Good read.  I like the bit about the similarities between poker and recruiting.  That's a statement I've made many times myself, and that's probably why I enjoy recruiting so much.
i liked that, too.
1/30/2013 10:34 AM
I was really looking forward to this interview and was not disapointed. Some interesting views and ideas from someone that obviously knows what they are doing. I think I learned a few things...thanks girt
1/30/2013 4:31 PM
Posted by alblack56 on 1/30/2013 4:46:00 AM (view original):
Posted by gillispie2 on 1/30/2013 12:06:00 AM (view original):
old admin definitely took stuff way more personally than seble. you can say what you want about seble, but irrespective of any of that - hes WAY better in that regard, thankfully. 
Amen!

The fomer administrator invented the game and was very defensive about any criticism.  Worse, he had the annoying personality trait of being unable, in any situation, to admit fault or to apologize.  There was one instance where my team was on the 'lock' list for the NT but ended up in the PIT.  Rather than admit a mistake and correct it, he told me that Collegiate Insider was independent of his game and he had no control over the list. 

My team should've been on the bubble list, not the lock list. I took a lot of criticism in the Forum over this issue. When treble finally corrected the list, I asked him to post an explanation in the Forum. I even wrote a tongue-in-cheek apology to the "Transylvania Nation and their great coach alblack56" and asked him to post it. No response.   Even in jest, he was incapable of apologizing

The interview is great, girt!
Yeah, it was absolutely brutal to deal with.

Long Live the Transylvania Nation!
1/30/2013 5:30 PM
Is this quote a typo, am I misreading it, or am I wrong on 3pt value:  "When it comes to distro, again I think it's often a mistake in how coaches are evaluating success. Three examples: Looking at only fg% to determine a player's effectiveness; thinking that 3pt% is equal to 50% 2pt% percentage (i.e. that shooting 40% from 3pt is equivalent to 60% from 2pt); making changes based on results in a small sample size, rather than staying faithful to the ratings. "

The quote seems to indicate that it is a mistake to think that 40% from 3pt is equal to 60% from from 2pt.   Why is it a mistake?  It is equal to 60%. 
If Player A takes 10 shots from 2pt and makes 6, he shoots 60% and scores 12 points.
If Player B takes 10 shots from 3pts and makes 4, he shoots 40% and scores 12 points. 
This is the essence, as far as I understand, of True Shooting percentage and Effective shooting percentage calculations. 
Is there something about HD that makes it not translate well to the SIM?

Thanks.  Really enjoyed the interview, this just jumped out at me.
1/30/2013 6:33 PM (edited)
Posted by dukenilnil on 1/30/2013 5:30:00 PM (view original):
Is this quote a typo, am I misreading it, or am I wrong on 3pt value:  "When it comes to distro, again I think it's often a mistake in how coaches are evaluating success. Three examples: Looking at only fg% to determine a player's effectiveness; thinking that 3pt% is equal to 50% 2pt% percentage (i.e. that shooting 40% from 3pt is equivalent to 60% from 2pt); making changes based on results in a small sample size, rather than staying faithful to the ratings. "

The quote seems to indicate that it is a mistake to think that 40% from 3pt is equal to 60% from from 2pt.   Why is it a mistake?  It is equal to 60%. 
If Player A takes 10 shots from 2pt and makes 6, he shoots 60% and scores 12 points.
If Player B takes 10 shots from 3pts and makes 4, he shoots 40% and scores 12 points. 
This is the essence, as far as I understand, of True Shooting percentage and Effective shooting percentage calculations. 
Is there something about HD that makes it not translate well to the SIM?

Thanks.  Really enjoyed the interview, this just jumped out at me.
2 pt shots can draw fouls, leading to a 3 point play or 2 free throws. With the 2 free throws, the value of the 2 pt shot goes from his fg% to his ft%, which is much higher. 

This is why TS% is a better gauge of Efg% and why ts% has a .44*fta value in the denominator. 

P.S this is my take, but it's entirely possible Girt may have other reasons for saying that. 

1/30/2013 6:45 PM
Nice job dirt25
1/30/2013 9:58 PM
Posted by tianyi7886 on 1/30/2013 6:33:00 PM (view original):
Posted by dukenilnil on 1/30/2013 5:30:00 PM (view original):
Is this quote a typo, am I misreading it, or am I wrong on 3pt value:  "When it comes to distro, again I think it's often a mistake in how coaches are evaluating success. Three examples: Looking at only fg% to determine a player's effectiveness; thinking that 3pt% is equal to 50% 2pt% percentage (i.e. that shooting 40% from 3pt is equivalent to 60% from 2pt); making changes based on results in a small sample size, rather than staying faithful to the ratings. "

The quote seems to indicate that it is a mistake to think that 40% from 3pt is equal to 60% from from 2pt.   Why is it a mistake?  It is equal to 60%. 
If Player A takes 10 shots from 2pt and makes 6, he shoots 60% and scores 12 points.
If Player B takes 10 shots from 3pts and makes 4, he shoots 40% and scores 12 points. 
This is the essence, as far as I understand, of True Shooting percentage and Effective shooting percentage calculations. 
Is there something about HD that makes it not translate well to the SIM?

Thanks.  Really enjoyed the interview, this just jumped out at me.
2 pt shots can draw fouls, leading to a 3 point play or 2 free throws. With the 2 free throws, the value of the 2 pt shot goes from his fg% to his ft%, which is much higher. 

This is why TS% is a better gauge of Efg% and why ts% has a .44*fta value in the denominator. 

P.S this is my take, but it's entirely possible Girt may have other reasons for saying that. 

i agree, both with tianyi's explanation, and with girt's claim that is a MAJOR common mistake.

tianyi - what is ts%? how is it calculated?
of 2
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > WIS User Interview - girt25

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.