DrGil  ...  is your statement that "speed does very little on defense" limited to big men?  
 I allways thought speed was important for generating steals,  and also perimeter defense in general.   so , yes, not terribly important for bigs,  but important for perimter D ...  yes?

related to this....im still trying to figure out the value of these defense-only gaurds that seem to be fairly available.  they seem to usually be extremely athletic,  but thier speed is often average to poor.    for the sake of this question... ignore thier poor offfensive skills.... just curious if they are really the lockdown defenders that they appear to be.  

For instance   d3 player
80 ath
50 sp
80 de

if that 50 speed really hurts him,  then at what point do you think the above player becomes a real defensive weapon?   60sp?  70sp?

i also assume that if you can play him at sf, he will be a better defender than if he was played at gaurd ?   
Is speed more important for press D and or m2m and maybe less so for zone?

Posted by oldave on 1/31/2014 3:29:00 PM (view original):
DrGil  ...  is your statement that "speed does very little on defense" limited to big men?  
 I allways thought speed was important for generating steals,  and also perimeter defense in general.   so , yes, not terribly important for bigs,  but important for perimter D ...  yes?

related to this....im still trying to figure out the value of these defense-only gaurds that seem to be fairly available.  they seem to usually be extremely athletic,  but thier speed is often average to poor.    for the sake of this question... ignore thier poor offfensive skills.... just curious if they are really the lockdown defenders that they appear to be.  

For instance   d3 player
80 ath
50 sp
80 de

if that 50 speed really hurts him,  then at what point do you think the above player becomes a real defensive weapon?   60sp?  70sp?

i also assume that if you can play him at sf, he will be a better defender than if he was played at gaurd ?   
Is speed more important for press D and or m2m and maybe less so for zone?

In your example - I would think this player will effectively lower opponent FG% - but maybe not cause many TO's maybe foul more than usual against higher speed opponents - still a solid defender just not a TO machine. Also agree with the out of position statement as well -

I know a MTM or zone will never be as effective in creating TO's like the press but if speed is directly linked to creating TO's (regardless of the def set) then a high speed lineup should in theory render more TO's for MTM or zone teams.

Posted by oldave on 1/31/2014 3:29:00 PM (view original):
DrGil  ...  is your statement that "speed does very little on defense" limited to big men?  
 I allways thought speed was important for generating steals,  and also perimeter defense in general.   so , yes, not terribly important for bigs,  but important for perimter D ...  yes?

related to this....im still trying to figure out the value of these defense-only gaurds that seem to be fairly available.  they seem to usually be extremely athletic,  but thier speed is often average to poor.    for the sake of this question... ignore thier poor offfensive skills.... just curious if they are really the lockdown defenders that they appear to be.  

For instance   d3 player
80 ath
50 sp
80 de

if that 50 speed really hurts him,  then at what point do you think the above player becomes a real defensive weapon?   60sp?  70sp?

i also assume that if you can play him at sf, he will be a better defender than if he was played at gaurd ?   
Is speed more important for press D and or m2m and maybe less so for zone?

yes, that was just on defense for big men. sorry, i tried to put qualifiers in to avoid those kinds of confusions. i often will start talking about bigs or defense and continue and have issues like this come up. but yeah, big men only :) definitely valuable for perimeter defense.

i think in d3 that guy is a really good defender in terms of fg% and fouls (meaning, not fouling much, holding to low fg%). but his steals will lag. outside of press im not sure that matters too much. i definitely agree hes better at sf, it seems clear that sfs need speed more than bigs and less than guards, when it comes to defensive prowess. definitely more important for press than man or zone. i dont know about man vs zone.

i can't remember how long ago you left... im pretty sure it was after the "new engine era" began (after seble's engine rewrite). but if not, one of the biggest changes was to curb the presses ridiculously heavy reliance on speed, and to beef up the importance of ath and def (especially def). its possible the steal equation was not changed, but the fouling and fg% defense equations definitely were changed, with the importance of def noticeably increasing in both. im talking about guards here, well, i guess sfs too.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 1/31/2014 3:16:00 PM (view original):
It's not used in the rebounding equation.  That was clearly answered in a developer chat.

I may be mistaken about the speed helping a big man.  If it was answered in a developer chat, then I probably AM wrong.  However, if you dig deep into the old, old developer chats with the Admin who created the game, I think that somewhere in there we'd find that he stated that speed was helpful from an offensive rebounding perspective.  Again, that may have changed with the release of the new engine (after all, I'm talking about a chat from, I don't know 7 or 8 years ago) and I may be totally off base.  However, I think common sense would say that a player (big man) with 60 Ath and 50 Spd would be more effective than a big man with 60 Ath and 10 Spd (all else being equal, since the position is that speed doesn't matter for bigs).  I mean, how could he not be?

kinda related to this....


how valuable is PE for non-perimeter shooters?

for instance, in D3,   a player with pe45 is almost certainly going to be set at minus2  
does that pe45 help him in any way as compared to an identical player with pe10?  maybe it allows him to be effective at 12-15 feet?

and not sure if the answer is any different if we are talking about a gaurd who has great ath sp bh lp and is a great slasher.
versus   a bigman who is a great lp scorer
versus a sf   who is a combination of those two.

Posted by dcy0827 on 1/31/2014 4:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 1/31/2014 3:16:00 PM (view original):
It's not used in the rebounding equation.  That was clearly answered in a developer chat.

I may be mistaken about the speed helping a big man.  If it was answered in a developer chat, then I probably AM wrong.  However, if you dig deep into the old, old developer chats with the Admin who created the game, I think that somewhere in there we'd find that he stated that speed was helpful from an offensive rebounding perspective.  Again, that may have changed with the release of the new engine (after all, I'm talking about a chat from, I don't know 7 or 8 years ago) and I may be totally off base.  However, I think common sense would say that a player (big man) with 60 Ath and 50 Spd would be more effective than a big man with 60 Ath and 10 Spd (all else being equal, since the position is that speed doesn't matter for bigs).  I mean, how could he not be?

You might be right about the old dev chats.  I was corrected on Spd mattering for Reb a few years back and I was pretty surprised.  I feel like I "learned" that at some point, but it changed and I missed the memo.

Posted by oldave on 1/31/2014 4:36:00 PM (view original):
kinda related to this....


how valuable is PE for non-perimeter shooters?

for instance, in D3,   a player with pe45 is almost certainly going to be set at minus2  
does that pe45 help him in any way as compared to an identical player with pe10?  maybe it allows him to be effective at 12-15 feet?

and not sure if the answer is any different if we are talking about a gaurd who has great ath sp bh lp and is a great slasher.
versus   a bigman who is a great lp scorer
versus a sf   who is a combination of those two.

Per does help with 2-point shots.  It makes sense to think about it as mid-range jumpers like you said.

I would say the extra Per makes a way bigger difference for a guard than a big.  SFs somewhere in the middle, depending on their skillset.

As far as *how* valuable, I probably value it similar to Passing in bigs (i.e. firmly in the secondary skills category), and just slightly below the "cores" in a slashing guard.

thanks g.   yeah,  i'm pretty sure i was here for the new engine release.
 but gone for 3 years ....sometimes newenginetheory and oldenginetheory kinda blend together in my mind.

im going to try to find a dig up a conversation about fatigue that i think you weighed in on, gil.  
i think there was some tweak to fatigue after i left.  
the consensus seemed to be that fatigue effect were greatly reduced and much talk of  7 or 8 man rotations, and players playing 35-40 min, etc.

obviously, no one is going to be able to use a short rotation with FCP,  but i thought it was suggested that the effect of fatigue was lessened for all off and def.
my first team back was FCP with pretty good talent and decent st (75-77 average i think), and so i redshirted one and took a walkon and figured that would be fine.   fatigue was abolutely KILLING me.  i switched to slowdown (motion) very quickly and  that helped and toward the end of the season we were ok.  but it really made me think 10 guys is almost definitely not enough for FCP.  I thought i recalled using 10 man lineups at Cuse with FB/FCP.  maybe not. i guess ST might be easier to come by at d1 and i do seem to recall that i liked to have 160 ST at each spot in the two deep chart.   but i had allways attributed much of that need for st and depth to the FB.... maybe the FCP is even more a factor there than the FB?

I just started up a zone team and a man team and , wow, the fatigue difference between zone to m2m to press seems at first glance to be even more than it used to be.
Im not complaining,  seems reasonable.  and the tradeoffs are there.
but just wanted to be sure i was understanding the effect of the most recent ( two-ish years ago?)  fatigue change

Very interesting thread. No expert here, and not sure how outdated this information is, but to (potentially) complicate matters, the Player's Guide indicates that speed, "can benefit big men by giving them the ability to cause turnovers and it helps with shot blocking" (my emphasis). I'm generally very unclear on the role of shot blocking in this game, but it seems to be part of the "equation" for interior defense at least (maybe even if it doesn't actually result in a blocked shot?), and forum folk wisdom seems to have it that shot blocking is especially important in the zone. So maybe these are arguments for why you might care about speed in a post player? Thoughts from the veterans?

Posted by dcy0827 on 1/31/2014 4:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 1/31/2014 3:16:00 PM (view original):
It's not used in the rebounding equation.  That was clearly answered in a developer chat.

I may be mistaken about the speed helping a big man.  If it was answered in a developer chat, then I probably AM wrong.  However, if you dig deep into the old, old developer chats with the Admin who created the game, I think that somewhere in there we'd find that he stated that speed was helpful from an offensive rebounding perspective.  Again, that may have changed with the release of the new engine (after all, I'm talking about a chat from, I don't know 7 or 8 years ago) and I may be totally off base.  However, I think common sense would say that a player (big man) with 60 Ath and 50 Spd would be more effective than a big man with 60 Ath and 10 Spd (all else being equal, since the position is that speed doesn't matter for bigs).  I mean, how could he not be?

the position was never that it was literally absolutely worthless, like lp in guards of old. TJ quoted me correctly, i used to say id put reb to spd conversion (in usefulness, not in rebounding) for bigs around 10:1. for you to say you'd clearly take speed at 4:1, there seemingly has to be something tangible to put your finger on. rebounding is pretty damn useful, i mean im not giving up 10 rebounding for 40 of some rating that maybe theoretically helps in ways i cannot see :)

since my understanding of the value of perimeter shooting in bigs has changed (and with it, how i value per, bh, and spd), my perception on the relative value has changed. i still think 4:1 is a stretch, but i could see it being in that ballpark for the right kind of player - the 90 ath/lp big that is somehow still not that effective in top tier d1, could really use some spd, per, and bh. at that point, could i trade 10 reb for 40 spd? eh, maybe. if i really needed the offense, i could maybe see doing it. but for a ath/def type big, i don't think its even close (reb way better than 4:1 on speed). in that case, i still maintain my original 10:1 ish approximation.

clearly, id take the 50 speed for nothing, but neither TJ nor myself was trying to say its really useless. in general i think 4:1 is too light, speed is just not that useful, but i don't think its a terrible way to look at speed, either. frankly its hard to know what formulas are team based and what ratings might help the team without reflecting in the performance of the individual. and actually, my original 10:1 was a hedge against that - i really put speed's value, from the best of my observations, at 0. i just struggled to believe its actually 100% useless, and that individual stats might be misleading. well, now i know its useful on offense with per and bh, so i know its not 100% useless. and, we also know there are "team abilities" from the rebounding information we got from seble, that are disconnected, at least on some level, from individual stats. based on that, i think its perfectly reasonable to say "well, i can't SEE any value from speed, but im going to hedge and value it at 5:1 or 10:1 vs rebounding anyway, in case it slips in various team ability equations"

Posted by oldave on 1/31/2014 4:58:00 PM (view original):
thanks g.   yeah,  i'm pretty sure i was here for the new engine release.
 but gone for 3 years ....sometimes newenginetheory and oldenginetheory kinda blend together in my mind.

im going to try to find a dig up a conversation about fatigue that i think you weighed in on, gil.  
i think there was some tweak to fatigue after i left.  
the consensus seemed to be that fatigue effect were greatly reduced and much talk of  7 or 8 man rotations, and players playing 35-40 min, etc.

obviously, no one is going to be able to use a short rotation with FCP,  but i thought it was suggested that the effect of fatigue was lessened for all off and def.
my first team back was FCP with pretty good talent and decent st (75-77 average i think), and so i redshirted one and took a walkon and figured that would be fine.   fatigue was abolutely KILLING me.  i switched to slowdown (motion) very quickly and  that helped and toward the end of the season we were ok.  but it really made me think 10 guys is almost definitely not enough for FCP.  I thought i recalled using 10 man lineups at Cuse with FB/FCP.  maybe not. i guess ST might be easier to come by at d1 and i do seem to recall that i liked to have 160 ST at each spot in the two deep chart.   but i had allways attributed much of that need for st and depth to the FB.... maybe the FCP is even more a factor there than the FB?

I just started up a zone team and a man team and , wow, the fatigue difference between zone to m2m to press seems at first glance to be even more than it used to be.
Im not complaining,  seems reasonable.  and the tradeoffs are there.
but just wanted to be sure i was understanding the effect of the most recent ( two-ish years ago?)  fatigue change

oldave, let me re-characterize the fatigue change for you. for starters, the role of fatigue was re-tweaked by several several times, in his regular overshooting fashion. kind of like how he responded to bigs shooting too little by boosting big man fg% by 10%. i think sometimes he thinks we are retarded... like people wouldnt care/notice that its just 5% or 3% too low. oh well. ill stop this digression here and leave the ranting to you, now that you are back :)

the way fatigue stands now, compared to the old days, low levels of being fatigued (fairly fresh) have less impact, but high levels of fatigue (tired/very tired) are substantially more damaging. also, as a relevant piece of information, the foul rate of players in the press was significantly increased. this combination makes running a short press team virtually impossible - i switched my kansas team 2 seasons ago from press to zone (just for the season) even with F zone IQ because the fatigue death spiral that can happen in press is so severe (even more so in fb/press). you almost always have some foul trouble and then if you are 3 deep, those players just get crushed under the weight of heavy fatigue. so its really not easy.

however, with things like, 3 men rotation in man or especially zone, the penalty for getting a bit tired before subbing people around, its really lessened. it opens up options for us in terms of unusual (not 2 man per position) rotations, especially in man/zone. this is why you heard of things like 8-9 men man teams being champ or runner up in d1. those 10th, 11th, and 12th men, who very slightly reduce the level of fatigue of your core players, simply are no longer adding the value to man/zone teams, that they did in the old days. of course, this all presumes your 8 man team is perfectly balanced, if you have 5 bigs, its game over... also, the availability of high stamina players has lessened, seble definitely put downward pressure on stamina ratings. im not sure if it was just max ratings or both starting and max ratings, but i think its both (and absolutely max stamina is less now).

Just a note for those who try to relate these ratings to real basketball - keep in mind that these ratings are given one word labels which may mislead.  If SPD were actually called "quickness of the sort that matters a lot for guys on the perimeter but not much for guys who play a lot in the lane and down low" then we would all understand it.  Maybe.

Posted by fd343ny on 1/31/2014 5:27:00 PM (view original):
Just a note for those who try to relate these ratings to real basketball - keep in mind that these ratings are given one word labels which may mislead.  If SPD were actually called "quickness of the sort that matters a lot for guys on the perimeter but not much for guys who play a lot in the lane and down low" then we would all understand it.  Maybe.

lol...

Posted by npscook on 1/31/2014 5:08:00 PM (view original):
Very interesting thread. No expert here, and not sure how outdated this information is, but to (potentially) complicate matters, the Player's Guide indicates that speed, "can benefit big men by giving them the ability to cause turnovers and it helps with shot blocking" (my emphasis). I'm generally very unclear on the role of shot blocking in this game, but it seems to be part of the "equation" for interior defense at least (maybe even if it doesn't actually result in a blocked shot?), and forum folk wisdom seems to have it that shot blocking is especially important in the zone. So maybe these are arguments for why you might care about speed in a post player? Thoughts from the veterans?

i like this tidbit, stuff like this gets lost all the time. i have little experience in zone, so im not really sure. it sure doesn't seem like SB stats are really that much different for high and low speed players, and same goes with TOs - but i definitely could buy its a small factor in both - meriting some consideration in recruiting. however my gut feeling is the impact of speed is low enough on those kinds of things, for bigs, that ignoring it in recruiting won't hurt you until you play at the very highest level of competition (sort of how i ignored SB in bigs playing press until i had already won a half dozen titles - sb matters more in press bigs than speed for bigs in general, im fairly confident of that now, but, you also generally get high SB by accident if you also have good rebounding, as the two are very tightly linked to height. at least they were before potential. so that sort of cancels out?)

Posted by gillispie1 on 1/31/2014 5:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dcy0827 on 1/31/2014 4:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Trentonjoe on 1/31/2014 3:16:00 PM (view original):
It's not used in the rebounding equation.  That was clearly answered in a developer chat.

I may be mistaken about the speed helping a big man.  If it was answered in a developer chat, then I probably AM wrong.  However, if you dig deep into the old, old developer chats with the Admin who created the game, I think that somewhere in there we'd find that he stated that speed was helpful from an offensive rebounding perspective.  Again, that may have changed with the release of the new engine (after all, I'm talking about a chat from, I don't know 7 or 8 years ago) and I may be totally off base.  However, I think common sense would say that a player (big man) with 60 Ath and 50 Spd would be more effective than a big man with 60 Ath and 10 Spd (all else being equal, since the position is that speed doesn't matter for bigs).  I mean, how could he not be?

the position was never that it was literally absolutely worthless, like lp in guards of old. TJ quoted me correctly, i used to say id put reb to spd conversion (in usefulness, not in rebounding) for bigs around 10:1. for you to say you'd clearly take speed at 4:1, there seemingly has to be something tangible to put your finger on. rebounding is pretty damn useful, i mean im not giving up 10 rebounding for 40 of some rating that maybe theoretically helps in ways i cannot see :)

since my understanding of the value of perimeter shooting in bigs has changed (and with it, how i value per, bh, and spd), my perception on the relative value has changed. i still think 4:1 is a stretch, but i could see it being in that ballpark for the right kind of player - the 90 ath/lp big that is somehow still not that effective in top tier d1, could really use some spd, per, and bh. at that point, could i trade 10 reb for 40 spd? eh, maybe. if i really needed the offense, i could maybe see doing it. but for a ath/def type big, i don't think its even close (reb way better than 4:1 on speed). in that case, i still maintain my original 10:1 ish approximation.

clearly, id take the 50 speed for nothing, but neither TJ nor myself was trying to say its really useless. in general i think 4:1 is too light, speed is just not that useful, but i don't think its a terrible way to look at speed, either. frankly its hard to know what formulas are team based and what ratings might help the team without reflecting in the performance of the individual. and actually, my original 10:1 was a hedge against that - i really put speed's value, from the best of my observations, at 0. i just struggled to believe its actually 100% useless, and that individual stats might be misleading. well, now i know its useful on offense with per and bh, so i know its not 100% useless. and, we also know there are "team abilities" from the rebounding information we got from seble, that are disconnected, at least on some level, from individual stats. based on that, i think its perfectly reasonable to say "well, i can't SEE any value from speed, but im going to hedge and value it at 5:1 or 10:1 vs rebounding anyway, in case it slips in various team ability equations"

I guess that's one of the things that makes this game interesting, that coaches value different attributes and can win in different ways.  Wouldn' t be any fun if everyone had to use the same cookie cutter format.  I think it's safe to say that we've both had a fair bit of success at this game, although you've probably had "just a bit" more than I have though, ha ha!

***And FWIW, I'd still take the 60/50/70 guy over the 60/10/80 every time.  I've never crunched the numbers, hell I've never bothered using a spreadsheet.  Use the eyeball method on everything, even projecting recruits.  But to me, I value that 40+ advantage in speed more than I do that 10+ advantage in rebounding.  Maybe I'm wrong, maybe not, maybe it's not optimal, but it works for me so I go with it.  Please don't take this in a snippy, ****** tone, it's certainly not meant to be taken that way at all.  Out of curiosity, how many NT's do you have total Jeff under all your ID's?  I've been raking them in over the last two years (10 in the last 22 months) and have got myself up to 19.  Thinking about calling it quits at number 20 but I'm still not sure yet.  May try to make a run at OR the way I've been going lately, damn!***