Posted by the0nlyis on 3/13/2015 7:19:00 PM (view original):

Keith Gilliam	Sr.	PF	73	26	85	80	51	90	6	7	13	47	72	44	B-	594
Arthur Burner	Sr.	SG	86	72	20	80	28	29	82	55	52	73	77	56	B-	710
William Renteria	Sr.	C	73	17	87	74	67	83	2	1	9	69	70	47	B-	599
Jacob Brown	Jr.	C	75	30	97	82	84	69	11	7	4	53	75	23	C	610
Jon Little	Jr.	PG	38	82	1	44	4	1	88	52	65	42	88	47	B	552
Terrence Crocker	So.	PF	56	31	51	54	42	56	7	24	37	34	69	41	C-	502
Donald Thomas	So.	PG	45	70	2	37	3	30	62	55	36	52	81	85	C+	558
Michael Lawson	Fr.	SG	31	65	5	28	10	49	54	60	34	46	72	53	B-	507
Robert Scott	Fr.	C	65	5	59	51	31	28	9	9	13	53	73	74	D+	470
Parker Shear	Fr.	PG	43	61	1	17	1	11	67	49	46	25	75	48	B-	444
Joseph Howell	Fr.	PG	42	71	1	45	1	11	26	69	56	14	82	38	C-	456
Jerry Bell	Fr.	SF	14	23	14	6	6	20	17	1	6	100	65	36	B-	308

Besides the walk-on and some freshmen who are development projects this looks on par with a big 6 school.


Personally because of the lack of coaches I think the inequalities have seperated schools into somewhat "new" divisions:

D1 is now:

• Every top level team looks like Kentucky
• Every non high baseline prestige/sim coached teams look like D2 at best

D2 has:

• Teams that look more like mid-majors
• and then teams that don't even look like D3 teams

D3 has:

• Teams that look like D2 teams
• and than teams full of some 8th grade rec league players

Sorry for such a long post. But I think thats what I'm saying is those strong D2 teams would be wiped out in recruiting by good human coached mid majors, sure some top level D2 teams will still be better than those teams that suck year in and year out with questionable moves to D1.  And some D3 perennial powers should be able to be some bottom talent D2 schools


Then in recruit rankings you have these #78 or #135 players who don't even look like starting players on D3 tourney teams...

 

Look, I don't want to start a forum fight because I'm just not up for that.  You are detailing the "inequalities" between sim and human coached teams which makes very little sense to me, as that's not really the issue at hand here.  Are humans going to be better coaches than sims?  You bet they are.  Will humans be able to build teams that can beat sim teams from the next division up?  Absolutely.  The issue that flexpete raised was that the top D3 teams looked similar to top level D2 teams and that shouldn't happen.  In reality (and by reality, I mean what is really happening in WiS), top level D3 teams do not look like top level D2 teams as flexpete claimed- that was the point of my post.  I'm not exactly sure what the point you're trying to make is, but I think you got sidetracked somewhere.  

Also, your breakdown of the "new" divisions shows a lack of understanding of the game.  I don't fault you too much for this, as you're fairly new to the game and clearly pretty passionate, which I respect a great deal.  You just simply haven't been around long enough to fully grasp the different levels in the game and how they compare.  I want to be clear- I don't have a real problem with this theory, I just think yours is overly simplified.  Here is a rough model of a more detailed breakdown of talent:

A+ D1 Programs
A/A-/B+ D1 Programs, Powerhouse Mid-Majors (these are very rare)
B and B- Big 6, Top Mid-Majors
Bad/Recovering Big 6, Good Mid-Majors	Absolutely Elite D2 Teams
Building Mid-Majors	Perennially A+, Excellently coached D2 teams
D1 Sims	Top D2 Teams	Absolutely Elite D3 Teams
D1 Sims with 12 freshmen	Good D2 Teams	Perennially A+, Excellently Coached D3 Teams
	Building D2 Teams	Top D3 Teams
	D2 Sims	Good D3 Teams
	D2 Sims with 12 freshmen	Building D3 teams
		D3 Sims
		D3 Sims with 12 freshmen

Now, I actually have some problems with my own model, but at least it's a better breakdown of the talent disparity.  Plus, I'd love some of the more experienced coaches/coaches who are playing at all 3 levels, to weigh in on this.  

Posted by tkimble on 3/13/2015 7:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by the0nlyis on 3/13/2015 7:19:00 PM (view original):

Keith Gilliam	Sr.	PF	73	26	85	80	51	90	6	7	13	47	72	44	B-	594
Arthur Burner	Sr.	SG	86	72	20	80	28	29	82	55	52	73	77	56	B-	710
William Renteria	Sr.	C	73	17	87	74	67	83	2	1	9	69	70	47	B-	599
Jacob Brown	Jr.	C	75	30	97	82	84	69	11	7	4	53	75	23	C	610
Jon Little	Jr.	PG	38	82	1	44	4	1	88	52	65	42	88	47	B	552
Terrence Crocker	So.	PF	56	31	51	54	42	56	7	24	37	34	69	41	C-	502
Donald Thomas	So.	PG	45	70	2	37	3	30	62	55	36	52	81	85	C+	558
Michael Lawson	Fr.	SG	31	65	5	28	10	49	54	60	34	46	72	53	B-	507
Robert Scott	Fr.	C	65	5	59	51	31	28	9	9	13	53	73	74	D+	470
Parker Shear	Fr.	PG	43	61	1	17	1	11	67	49	46	25	75	48	B-	444
Joseph Howell	Fr.	PG	42	71	1	45	1	11	26	69	56	14	82	38	C-	456
Jerry Bell	Fr.	SF	14	23	14	6	6	20	17	1	6	100	65	36	B-	308

Besides the walk-on and some freshmen who are development projects this looks on par with a big 6 school.


Personally because of the lack of coaches I think the inequalities have seperated schools into somewhat "new" divisions:

D1 is now:

• Every top level team looks like Kentucky
• Every non high baseline prestige/sim coached teams look like D2 at best

D2 has:

• Teams that look more like mid-majors
• and then teams that don't even look like D3 teams

D3 has:

• Teams that look like D2 teams
• and than teams full of some 8th grade rec league players

Sorry for such a long post. But I think thats what I'm saying is those strong D2 teams would be wiped out in recruiting by good human coached mid majors, sure some top level D2 teams will still be better than those teams that suck year in and year out with questionable moves to D1.  And some D3 perennial powers should be able to be some bottom talent D2 schools


Then in recruit rankings you have these #78 or #135 players who don't even look like starting players on D3 tourney teams...

 

Look, I don't want to start a forum fight because I'm just not up for that.  You are detailing the "inequalities" between sim and human coached teams which makes very little sense to me, as that's not really the issue at hand here.  Are humans going to be better coaches than sims?  You bet they are.  Will humans be able to build teams that can beat sim teams from the next division up?  Absolutely.  The issue that flexpete raised was that the top D3 teams looked similar to top level D2 teams and that shouldn't happen.  In reality (and by reality, I mean what is really happening in WiS), top level D3 teams do not look like top level D2 teams as flexpete claimed- that was the point of my post.  I'm not exactly sure what the point you're trying to make is, but I think you got sidetracked somewhere.  

Also, your breakdown of the "new" divisions shows a lack of understanding of the game.  I don't fault you too much for this, as you're fairly new to the game and clearly pretty passionate, which I respect a great deal.  You just simply haven't been around long enough to fully grasp the different levels in the game and how they compare.  I want to be clear- I don't have a real problem with this theory, I just think yours is overly simplified.  Here is a rough model of a more detailed breakdown of talent:

A+ D1 Programs
A/A-/B+ D1 Programs, Powerhouse Mid-Majors (these are very rare)
B and B- Big 6, Top Mid-Majors
Bad/Recovering Big 6, Good Mid-Majors	Absolutely Elite D2 Teams
Building Mid-Majors	Perennially A+, Excellently coached D2 teams
D1 Sims	Top D2 Teams	Absolutely Elite D2 Teams
D1 Sims with 12 freshmen	Good D2 Teams	Perennially A+, Excellently Coached D3 Teams
	Building D2 Teams	Top D3 Teams
	D2 Sims	Good D3 Teams
	D2 Sims with 12 freshmen	Building D3 teams
		D3 Sims
		D3 Sims with 12 freshmen

I really like this breakdown.

Posted by llamanunts on 3/13/2015 8:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tkimble on 3/13/2015 7:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by the0nlyis on 3/13/2015 7:19:00 PM (view original):

Keith Gilliam	Sr.	PF	73	26	85	80	51	90	6	7	13	47	72	44	B-	594
Arthur Burner	Sr.	SG	86	72	20	80	28	29	82	55	52	73	77	56	B-	710
William Renteria	Sr.	C	73	17	87	74	67	83	2	1	9	69	70	47	B-	599
Jacob Brown	Jr.	C	75	30	97	82	84	69	11	7	4	53	75	23	C	610
Jon Little	Jr.	PG	38	82	1	44	4	1	88	52	65	42	88	47	B	552
Terrence Crocker	So.	PF	56	31	51	54	42	56	7	24	37	34	69	41	C-	502
Donald Thomas	So.	PG	45	70	2	37	3	30	62	55	36	52	81	85	C+	558
Michael Lawson	Fr.	SG	31	65	5	28	10	49	54	60	34	46	72	53	B-	507
Robert Scott	Fr.	C	65	5	59	51	31	28	9	9	13	53	73	74	D+	470
Parker Shear	Fr.	PG	43	61	1	17	1	11	67	49	46	25	75	48	B-	444
Joseph Howell	Fr.	PG	42	71	1	45	1	11	26	69	56	14	82	38	C-	456
Jerry Bell	Fr.	SF	14	23	14	6	6	20	17	1	6	100	65	36	B-	308

Besides the walk-on and some freshmen who are development projects this looks on par with a big 6 school.


Personally because of the lack of coaches I think the inequalities have seperated schools into somewhat "new" divisions:

D1 is now:

• Every top level team looks like Kentucky
• Every non high baseline prestige/sim coached teams look like D2 at best

D2 has:

• Teams that look more like mid-majors
• and then teams that don't even look like D3 teams

D3 has:

• Teams that look like D2 teams
• and than teams full of some 8th grade rec league players

Sorry for such a long post. But I think thats what I'm saying is those strong D2 teams would be wiped out in recruiting by good human coached mid majors, sure some top level D2 teams will still be better than those teams that suck year in and year out with questionable moves to D1.  And some D3 perennial powers should be able to be some bottom talent D2 schools


Then in recruit rankings you have these #78 or #135 players who don't even look like starting players on D3 tourney teams...

 

Look, I don't want to start a forum fight because I'm just not up for that.  You are detailing the "inequalities" between sim and human coached teams which makes very little sense to me, as that's not really the issue at hand here.  Are humans going to be better coaches than sims?  You bet they are.  Will humans be able to build teams that can beat sim teams from the next division up?  Absolutely.  The issue that flexpete raised was that the top D3 teams looked similar to top level D2 teams and that shouldn't happen.  In reality (and by reality, I mean what is really happening in WiS), top level D3 teams do not look like top level D2 teams as flexpete claimed- that was the point of my post.  I'm not exactly sure what the point you're trying to make is, but I think you got sidetracked somewhere.  

Also, your breakdown of the "new" divisions shows a lack of understanding of the game.  I don't fault you too much for this, as you're fairly new to the game and clearly pretty passionate, which I respect a great deal.  You just simply haven't been around long enough to fully grasp the different levels in the game and how they compare.  I want to be clear- I don't have a real problem with this theory, I just think yours is overly simplified.  Here is a rough model of a more detailed breakdown of talent:

A+ D1 Programs
A/A-/B+ D1 Programs, Powerhouse Mid-Majors (these are very rare)
B and B- Big 6, Top Mid-Majors
Bad/Recovering Big 6, Good Mid-Majors	Absolutely Elite D2 Teams
Building Mid-Majors	Perennially A+, Excellently coached D2 teams
D1 Sims	Top D2 Teams	Absolutely Elite D2 Teams
D1 Sims with 12 freshmen	Good D2 Teams	Perennially A+, Excellently Coached D3 Teams
	Building D2 Teams	Top D3 Teams
	D2 Sims	Good D3 Teams
	D2 Sims with 12 freshmen	Building D3 teams
		D3 Sims
		D3 Sims with 12 freshmen

I really like this breakdown.  I think in the D1 Sims line you mean to say Absolutely Elite D3 teams instead of D2.*

*Will happily edit if that's true and you change it.

You're right, I'll change that.