All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > Sooooo has anyone ever won a game with 4 players?
5/1/2014 6:13 AM
Posted by dacj501 on 5/1/2014 3:12:00 AM (view original):
at red fatigue your starters are no better than walkons. Find a way to structure a depth chart that lets you get the starters minutes down to where they at least stay out of the red, preferably the orange as well. I would personally do very weird depth chart things
Yeah this is certainly an opportunity for that haha.

I don't know that there's going to be any keeping them out of orange. Red would be nice though.

I don't know how weird you mean, but I'm pretty much only playing 6 guys right now. Or are you meaning something like (not necessarily exactly) playing Crawford at C or something to see how slower players handle him?
5/1/2014 6:14 AM
Posted by mikvitu on 5/1/2014 4:28:00 AM (view original):
Not sure if you're already on slow down but you probably should be every game this season. Goodluck!
Oh most definitely already there. I'm wondering what I can do from there to slow down further haha. 

This is really just a year to goof off and try things and then decide if I want to stay around. But I still want to use the best strategy I can, and that's definitely one of them.
5/1/2014 8:47 AM (edited)
I might honestly stick at least one more walkon in the rotation occasionally, at least against teams you face that like to play uptempo. Also wouldn't be afraid to try some heavy minus or plus games. Basically anything you can do to increase volatility in the game, might make you lose by more if you lose but give you a better overall chance of winning.
5/1/2014 8:25 AM
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/1/2014 6:13:00 AM (view original):
Posted by dacj501 on 5/1/2014 3:12:00 AM (view original):
at red fatigue your starters are no better than walkons. Find a way to structure a depth chart that lets you get the starters minutes down to where they at least stay out of the red, preferably the orange as well. I would personally do very weird depth chart things
Yeah this is certainly an opportunity for that haha.

I don't know that there's going to be any keeping them out of orange. Red would be nice though.

I don't know how weird you mean, but I'm pretty much only playing 6 guys right now. Or are you meaning something like (not necessarily exactly) playing Crawford at C or something to see how slower players handle him?
In your case I'd try using minutes instead of fatigue for depth chart. Since you can only start a player at one position, but he can back up multiple positions I would start 5 walkons 

PG: Anderson (9-13) / Hutchins (34-38) / blank / Crawford(34-38)
SG: Foster (4-8) / Crawford (34-38) / blank / Hutchins (34-38)
SF: Simmons (4-8) /  Crawford (34-38) / Godina (34-38)
PF: Dawson/ (9-13) / Godina (34-38) / blank / Joyce (34-38) 
C:  McDowell/ (9-13) / Joyce (34-38) / Godina (34-38)

The engine subs by putting the lowest total depth chart rank, starting with players highest at each position, then filtered through fatigue. With minutes fatigue is still a factor, players don't just play 34 straight minutes, but fatigue is only part of it, and I think less so as the game goes on. The ultimate goal of the engine under minutes is to make sure that all the players hit their minimums. It will try extra hard for starters, then the bench. This means if you got in foul trouble and sat for a long time the engine will play you til you drop if necessary so those minutes add up. To help (but not eliminate) this problem, you should set the foul trouble setting to stay in longer, that way the engine won't sit a player for 16 minutes if they get 2 quick fouls at the start of the game...

The 4th spot is for foul trouble backup. Under normal-ish circumstances those players won't play those positions, but iff someone fouls out and there are only 2 on the chart, the other one will be red. This is a failsafe. The blanks make sure that the the user decides who will play where 1st then 2nd, etc. If you list 2 players in the same 2 slots at 2 different positions (ie your #2 and #3 PF and C are the same) and both starters sub out the engine picks which backup plays where but if you put on of them (the one who would be the worst PF say) at 4 with a blank space at 3 now the engine does the math and it subs the players where you want them., and leaves that foul out backup redundancy thing.

The 4 real players will hopefully play a few less minutes and stay out of the red. The walkons are all terrible anyway, so might as well have them all out there together (the engine LOVES to do hockey style line changes) since how much worse are you with 5 walkons vs 2 or 3 and the other guys with their hands on their hips head down sucking wind...

Should you wind up in a close game this is less than great, since it will still favor starters in end game logic, unless your starting scrubs have hit their minimum targets and your backup players haven't yet, but either way you aren't going to win a lot of close games. 

You aren't going to win a lot of games period and I guess you know that, and this might not really do much for you either, but it might be worth trying (or taking some of the philosophy and modifying) for a few games to see what happens. 

A couple other tips. Pump conditioning if they have blue or black in at least 2 of ath, spd, sta. conditioning does a lot o work, covering more attributes than any other practice category. I think it is probably subject to the same diminishing returns curve (which some speculate begins immediately, but marginally, while others speculate begins around 20 minutes, with 30 generally being the point where most coaches don't go higher). I'd put 25 or more in there if you have guys that qualify, even if you have to tread water on some other blues initially. Its pushing 2 or 3 cores instead of just one.

Shot selection (with the outcomes believed to be 3 pointer - midrange perimeter - interior I think, unless I just made that up, in which case someone will correct me) where the first two rely on per (and spd, bh, etc) and the 3rd lp. lp may even have 2 choices, but it doesn't matter for this... the +1, +2, etc setting on the player profile is applied to the ratio of lp::per. ie, the engine takes a players ratio of low post to perimeter and if set at a 0 adjustment setting users this ratio in this step and then goes onto the other factors to determine if its a 2 or 3 pt shot selection. I think this is right, because when the new engine was released there were no minimum values (well I suppose 1 was the minimum value) for either side of the ratio, so you had guys with 1 lp and 90 per jacking up 100% of their shots as 3 point attempts. they added in minimum ratios to simulate distribution to fix it. 

I tell you that because I believe your settings are jacked up to high, probably to +2, and probably (maybe) based on sometihng I posted somewhere about jacking up a ton of threes and hope for the best. That still might be true, but only to the degree that the kid has a realistic shot at making them. Based on the ratio stuff and the recommended depth chart, I would put Crawford at +1 and Houchins at 0. Since positon is also one of the factors it considers I believe and Godina will play mostly the 4 and his ratio is high due to his good lp, I would put him at 0. He'll take a good amount of threes and from the 4 spot mostly, and he'll still shoot some 2s. Everyone else at -2. 

For distro I would go
Crawford 7, Godina 5, Houchins 4, Joyce 4, MacDowell 1, Rowe 1 (he isnt on depth chart and should be set to mop up and will never play anyway unless something irregular like less than 5 depth chart listed players available due to injury or disqualification for instance) everyone else 0. Should giev Crawford ~ 1/3 of the shots. Much more than that and the engine starts artificially deflating his performance. 

*I want to put this disclaimer in, not to try to pick on you but to clarify - A lot of this is speculation, and some of my depth chart philosophies are not universally accepted. Some of the other details stuff I may have mis-remembered. If so, it is likely someone will correct me. If they do, they are probably right and I was probably wrong, but not intentionally, and I am not saying anything I wouldn't/don't do on my own teams, so if the info I put out there is mistaken, I'm suffering from it too.
5/1/2014 8:48 AM
In all, its a great opportunity to play with whacky depth chart hijinks and see what happens.
5/1/2014 11:14 AM
i don't see why, with this team, you wouldnt start 4 and just play them on getting tired or tired, with the best walkons behind. you would start 5 walkons and play minutes? what? i was waiting for you to throw out something crazy following your previous post, but that is way more out there than i expected! i think you are over thinking things. given a # of minutes played, fatigue always beats minutes, for a starter. given you only have 4 players to care about, with the rotation of walkons being somewhat irrelevant, i just can't see minutes here. and the not starting the best players thing... i don't know. if you came out with some scheme to always play a real player at pg or something, that would be different, but starting 5 walkons is just insane!

the other advice sounds good. for the hell of it, it would be interesting to see if dac's crazy scheme is as crazy as it sounds, or if it might actually half work out. my experience with dac's crazy schemes is they generally work better than i expect, but not enough to change my position.
5/1/2014 12:38 PM
Why are you playing and practicing M2M instead of Zone?
5/1/2014 12:44 PM
Posted by killbatman on 5/1/2014 12:38:00 PM (view original):
Why are you playing and practicing M2M instead of Zone?
More real players that know what they're doing in it, and I think it's better going forward. I'm still trying to maximize what I can do with this year, but not going to play a scheme specifically because it might work better this year because obviously this year isn't going to be good. I wish I could have played exhibition with Grow just to see what the difference would be. 
5/1/2014 12:58 PM
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/1/2014 12:44:00 PM (view original):
Posted by killbatman on 5/1/2014 12:38:00 PM (view original):
Why are you playing and practicing M2M instead of Zone?
More real players that know what they're doing in it, and I think it's better going forward. I'm still trying to maximize what I can do with this year, but not going to play a scheme specifically because it might work better this year because obviously this year isn't going to be good. I wish I could have played exhibition with Grow just to see what the difference would be. 
I'd recommend you try using Zone for at least 1 game, just to compare.  I really think you'd see a noticeable difference in the fatigue situation.  Honestly I think even playing Zone while practicing M2M for the future would be better than playing M2M this season.
5/1/2014 1:13 PM
And unless you plan on valuing athleticism more highly in recruiting than you did this last cycle, man-to-man likely won't be as effective as a zone will be moving forward.
5/1/2014 1:39 PM
Zone doesn't "cover" for low defensive components.

A 40 ATH player is bad in any defensive scheme.   In a zone, his metrics will be averaged with other players .    A  "40" player and an "80" player become two "60" players.   It stops individual bad defender from being exploited quite as bad.
5/1/2014 2:51 PM
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/1/2014 11:15:00 AM (view original):
i don't see why, with this team, you wouldnt start 4 and just play them on getting tired or tired, with the best walkons behind. you would start 5 walkons and play minutes? what? i was waiting for you to throw out something crazy following your previous post, but that is way more out there than i expected! i think you are over thinking things. given a # of minutes played, fatigue always beats minutes, for a starter. given you only have 4 players to care about, with the rotation of walkons being somewhat irrelevant, i just can't see minutes here. and the not starting the best players thing... i don't know. if you came out with some scheme to always play a real player at pg or something, that would be different, but starting 5 walkons is just insane!

the other advice sounds good. for the hell of it, it would be interesting to see if dac's crazy scheme is as crazy as it sounds, or if it might actually half work out. my experience with dac's crazy schemes is they generally work better than i expect, but not enough to change my position.
part of why is that I saw his backcourt playing 40 minutes - wanted to give options that would let the 4 real players maximize time covering 5 positions. Not sure if there's any value to it really, first time I've ever stretched my crazy lineups to include 5 walkons...
5/1/2014 2:54 PM
The two big downsides of your idea dac, IMO, is one the end of the game (which you addressed) and the fact that players you want  to get the WE increase are not going to get it.   If you start the 5 walk ons  your jipping yourself about 4 points of WE per player.
5/1/2014 3:02 PM
Posted by Trentonjoe on 5/1/2014 2:54:00 PM (view original):
The two big downsides of your idea dac, IMO, is one the end of the game (which you addressed) and the fact that players you want  to get the WE increase are not going to get it.   If you start the 5 walk ons  your jipping yourself about 4 points of WE per player.
that's a fair point 

(hell, they're all fair points - it is a crazy idea after all )
5/1/2014 3:41 PM
Posted by killbatman on 5/1/2014 12:58:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/1/2014 12:44:00 PM (view original):
Posted by killbatman on 5/1/2014 12:38:00 PM (view original):
Why are you playing and practicing M2M instead of Zone?
More real players that know what they're doing in it, and I think it's better going forward. I'm still trying to maximize what I can do with this year, but not going to play a scheme specifically because it might work better this year because obviously this year isn't going to be good. I wish I could have played exhibition with Grow just to see what the difference would be. 
I'd recommend you try using Zone for at least 1 game, just to compare.  I really think you'd see a noticeable difference in the fatigue situation.  Honestly I think even playing Zone while practicing M2M for the future would be better than playing M2M this season.
this is almost definitely true
of 19
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > Sooooo has anyone ever won a game with 4 players?

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.