LOL, i needed a good laugh to start my day...LOL...i used to get Really aggravated at the stupid sh!t that goes on here, i even quit playing for about a year.......but the doctors said they cured me, & i said good bye to my crazy friends...now, i'm a model citizen here at WTFS...

nurse ratchet finally got to you didnt she Randall P?

lol...yea, she's tight too!!!!

PLAYER	MIN	FGM/FGA	3PM/3PA	FTM/FTA	OREB	REB	AST	BLK	STL	TO	PF	TP
95-96 Anthony Mason*	44	6/12	0/0	2/3	5	13	7	0	1	5	4	14
90-91 David Robinson*	39	9/19	0/0	2/3	3	12	4	3	2	5	1	20
11-12 Kevin Durant*	38	8/21	3/9	6/6	1	5	5	0	2	8	3	25
82-83 Buck Williams*	36	8/9	0/0	2/2	2	8	1	1	2	4	4	18
95-96 Anfernee Hardaway*	34	7/16	2/5	2/2	2	6	8	2	1	3	3	18
90-91 Jim Les	19	2/6	2/4	0/0	1	2	5	0	2	2	2	6
07-08 Andrew Bynum	11	0/1	0/0	0/0	1	2	0	1	0	1	1	0
08-09 Marcin Gortat	10	0/0	0/0	0/0	2	3	0	0	1	0	3	0
71-72 Keith Erickson	2	0/0	0/0	0/0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
06-07 Jalen Rose	2	0/1	0/1	0/0	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	0
81-82 Armond Hill	2	0/0	0/0	0/0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0
94-95 Tracy Murray	2	0/1	0/0	0/0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
TOTALS		40/86	7/19	14/16	17	51	30	7	11	29	23	101
		46.5%	36.8%	87.5%

...and let's follow that game with 39 opp fta's the next.

I "love" those people who try to defend the totally crazy game-to-game stuff by saying that the overall season numbers usually end-up fairly close to IRL.  How the heck does 82 games of crazy equal OK in total?  All that means is that for every crazily excessive event, there needs to be an equally excessing shortage.  Just adjust the game-to-game variable already and it would once again be a decent game.

what WiS failed to realize when tinman brought in his statistical modelling approach was that the product they provide to the consumer is delivered game by game (not in what they would consider sampling sizes appropriate to normalize variation (as per seble: more than 10 games) and in as much therefore problematic from conception)

and that plus the fact that basketball is neither played like nor watched like baseball but they used the same model anyway was pretty much the bell tolling

Followed by my opponent having 25 to's and 30 pfs, 3 blocks and 5 steals.

Posted by all3 on 8/28/2012 1:56:00 PM (view original):
I "love" those people who try to defend the totally crazy game-to-game stuff by saying that the overall season numbers usually end-up fairly close to IRL.  How the heck does 82 games of crazy equal OK in total?  All that means is that for every crazily excessive event, there needs to be an equally excessing shortage.  Just adjust the game-to-game variable already and it would once again be a decent game.

I don't think it can be put any better than that!!! 

Posted by badja on 8/28/2012 4:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 8/28/2012 1:56:00 PM (view original):
I "love" those people who try to defend the totally crazy game-to-game stuff by saying that the overall season numbers usually end-up fairly close to IRL.  How the heck does 82 games of crazy equal OK in total?  All that means is that for every crazily excessive event, there needs to be an equally excessing shortage.  Just adjust the game-to-game variable already and it would once again be a decent game.

I don't think it can be put any better than that!!! 

Thank you.
I'm certainly no computer programmer, but I've got to believe this would be a very, very simple adjustment.

they already have in game adjustments regarding usage - when a player starts to exceed his usage he is penalized - when a team starts to exceed, penalized

basic mechanism = what is happening in game followed by adjustment to address

Penny goes 4/15 against Nash.  Durant goes 8/18 against Ray Allen.  combined 2/13 from 3.

That back court should have been blown up by these 2, but that would be too easy.  WIS has to play What If...stats were thrown out the window?

8/18 = 44.4%.  That is not an outlier, but it is lower than his rf fg%.  4/15 is an outlier though entirely possible, even within a 54% fg% season.  Also to keep in mind, it's not a 1v1 match up for offensive player vs defensive player, it's a team aggregate defense with the man actually doing the guarding playing a more significant role (thus a 20 defender on a team full of 90s does not necessarily cripple you).

The thing that gets me is that we've been complaining (myself included) about these things for years.  Nothing has changed.  Nothing will change.  All complaining does is get me in a bad mood.  If it makes you feel better to complain, cool, but I accept that this product is no where close to what it could be and that the people responsible for it don't care about it or about us.  Sometimes I think you (***collective you, not any one of you in particular) get a bit nit-picky, extreme or overly dramatic, but for the most part you're right.  There is too much randomness at play.  Everything can't be strict, however.

There needs to be a happy medium: randomness within range.  Outliers should still occur - just not frequently.  Here's what I mean:

The way it currently is (to my knowledge):
Player A has a fg% of exactly 50%.  Team B all are 50 defenders.

Player A attempts a FG.  There's exactly a 50% chance that it goes in.  Let's say it misses.
2nd shot - exactly 50% chance.
3rd shot - exactly 50% chance
(and so on)

This is probability/true randomness.  No matter how many times you flip a coin, it has a 50% chance of landing on heads.  Just because it's landed on tails 10 times in a row does not mean that it has an increased chance to land on heads.

I believe this is how the sim works.  I might be wrong, however.

My opinion is that the further something strays from its real %, the increased (or decreased) likelihood of an event should occur.  Say player A misses 10 in a row.  For that 11th shot, he should have a substantial increase that it goes in.  Not 100% (never 100% of anything), but an increased chance.  If Wilt has 5 personal fouls and a foul is the call, then he should have a ridiculously lower chance that he picks up that 6th foul (since he never fouled out).

The thing is, that becomes really tricky when you move it to other aspects of the game (rebounding, for example).  You can expect a guy who averaged 20 fgas a game to probably shoot it around 20 times (assuming correct usage in team construction), but how do you do rebound expectancy?  I guess you do like I do now:  add up the five on the floor of each team, get the total of the two teams, then make new percentages based on that cumulative total, then adjust that as the game goes along.

I don't know... it'd take a mind smarter than mine to tweak the system to still keep the feel of "anything can happen" while keeping the "should never happens" out.

I understand all that Ash and your last sentence sums it up, much as it always has. 

The SL defenders were 31, 45, 56, 91, 67.    So you can see perhaps why Penny's 4/15, 0/6 looks extreme to me.  That's just me and my whole "stats are not random, they are paid for" idea.

My point is that Penny has a 51% chance against a 50 defender.  I feel that his shots should get a boost (to ~55 to 60%) against a 31 defender and should be penalized (to ~40 to 45%) against a 70 defender.   I wonder if WIS thinks he should shoot 51% against a zero defender?   Very possible.

In any case, yes it feels good to vent even though I know it accomplishes nothing.

I approach this game as I think it should be.  You approach the game as it is, and that sums up your success and my much more limited success.  I'll learn someday, but what fun would that be.  I'd have nothing to b*tch about.

Yeah... I know that on any given night a player can go 4/15... but it's his skill (or lack thereof) that determines the stats.  In this game (the sim), the stats determine skill.  That was something emonk preached and he was 100% right.  If I spend an extra $2M on a player that shoots 55% instead of 50%, I don't like seeing games where he shoots 35-40% from the field.  I'm really ****** at the end of the season if he's shooting 54% or less.  Right now I have a monster efg% + low tov% squad in which everybody except for Ryan Anderson is below RL fg%. 

That makes me a sad panda.