Previous coach promised minutes? - Page 10 - Hoops Dynasty

Posts: 2731 (0)

Hall of Famer

828

Prospect

Posted by bistiza on 8/31/2012 1:44:00 PM (view original):
It seems many of you don't think there's a reason why you'd want to know if a kid would be okay with sitting the bench (or whatever you'd ask him to do). So here's the reason, from my earlier post:

THAT IS THE POINT - I want to be able to put my settings however *I* think is best and not have to worry about or put up with any backlash from fictional players. No WE drop, no threats of leaving, nothing.

So yeah, that would be why I'd want to know if a kid is okay doing whatever I say.

And most everyone else's point is that if you're recruiting players who will be sitting the bench during their junior and senior seasons, you're probably not recruiting good enough players anyway. If they aren't good enough to play during their last two seasons and threaten to transfer, WHY WOULD YOU EVEN CARE? Why would it bother you if a scrub junior, who isn't playing more than a couple of minutes a game anyway, complains and threatens to leave? If he's a scrub, WHO CARES, let him go. That's what everyone else is saying. Damn.

8/31/2012 1:49 PM

milwood

Posts: 514 (0)

Hall of Famer

79

Rookie

I have a junior on my Virginia Union team (Knight) that I picked up at the last minute just for depth purposes. It was a mistake. Every one of his potentials were at the low end of growth (his couple of highs were 20 or 21, averages around 8-11). He is a junior now. This season he has not played a single minute of a single game. He doesn't belong in DII. I am about half way through conference play and I still haven't gotten an email from him stating he wants more, or any, playing time. He has lost 4 WE points or 12% of his total WE. The player in question for this thread has lost 26 WE points or 28% of his total WE rating. There is depth.

The difference is the guy in question is way, way better than my player. Players will have a negative reaction to a lack of playing time. How they react will be slightly different, but I think it is tied to ability rather than personality.

8/31/2012 1:57 PM

bistiza

Posts: 3022 (0)

Hall of Famer

40 50 11 185 15

Prospect

I'm not recruiting players I expect to sit on the bench, emy. I'm recruiting players I expect to play.

What you're missing is that whether the players are good enough to start or get the minutes is completely irrelevant in this discussion.

What matters is I want to be able to make whatever coaching decisions I want, not the ones the players want - that's the main point. That's why I would care.

8/31/2012 1:57 PM

emy1013

Posts: 2731 (0)

Hall of Famer

828

Prospect

Posted by bistiza on 8/31/2012 1:57:00 PM (view original):
I'm not recruiting players I expect to sit on the bench, emy. I'm recruiting players I expect to play.

What you're missing is that whether the players are good enough to start or get the minutes is completely irrelevant in this discussion.

What matters is I want to be able to make whatever coaching decisions I want, not the ones the players want - that's the main point. That's why I would care.

You DO make the decisions that YOU want. I've played this game for a season or two and I've yet to have one of my players set my depth chart or distro. Haven't had a player adjust my team settings. So you've got a player that cries a little bit, who cares, YOU still make the lineup decisions, not him.

8/31/2012 2:08 PM

arssanguinus

Posts: 1120 (0)

Hall of Famer

245 1

Pro

But he wants to have no consequences whatsoever for his choices, see.

8/31/2012 2:12 PM

buddhagamer

Posts: 3710 (0)

Hall of Famer

466 215 98

Pro

WIS has a game that operates that way... its called NBA Sim. The scrubs don't care if you give them minutes or not but then players' actual performance doesn't vary based on WE either.

Perhaps you should petition WIS to take out WE in its entirety since it seems you don't like the downside of having that feature being incorporated into the game.

We all understand why you might want more variance in it but truthfully would it make any difference in how you actually recruit? Would it be an actual useful feature in the game and add to its overall appeal? In essence, you'd rather not have to face any consequences at all to making hard decisions which I think for most people here, is a non-issue for most of us.

8/31/2012 2:14 PM

bistiza

Posts: 3022 (0)

Hall of Famer

40 50 11 185 15

Prospect

Yes, adding the feature would give the game more appeal. I would then be able to decide to recruit players who weren't going to give me grief for the decisions I make. With those players on my teams, I would enjoy the game more as I would feel like I could do whatever I wanted as a coach.

I don't mind the work ethic attribute itself, though. I think it's a good way to show how different players improve at different rates. I just think it should stop there. Players shouldnt' lose a great deal of work ethic because of a decision not to give them what they want.

8/31/2012 2:17 PM

bistiza

Posts: 3022 (0)

Hall of Famer

40 50 11 185 15

Prospect

Also, as I'm sure you can see if you look at my profile or the little logos here in the forums, I play the NBA SimLeagues as well. If that game made you play certain guys certain minutes or give people starts or something, it would be ridiculous. It's already bad enough as it is in this game.

8/31/2012 2:18 PM

emy1013

Posts: 2731 (0)

Hall of Famer

828

Prospect

Posted by buddhagamer on 8/31/2012 2:14:00 PM (view original):
WIS has a game that operates that way... its called NBA Sim. The scrubs don't care if you give them minutes or not but then players' actual performance doesn't vary based on WE either.

Perhaps you should petition WIS to take out WE in its entirety since it seems you don't like the downside of having that feature being incorporated into the game.

We all understand why you might want more variance in it but truthfully would it make any difference in how you actually recruit? Would it be an actual useful feature in the game and add to its overall appeal? In essence, you'd rather not have to face any consequences at all to making hard decisions which I think for most people here, is a non-issue for most of us.

"How you actually recruit" is a very important phrase here. The way this game is set up, right or wrong, is that if you recruit correctly, your freshmen should very, VERY rarely be better than your upperclassmen anyway. The game favors juniors and seniors, so if you're playing freshmen at the expense of your upperclassmen, you've either recruited badly or you're punting the season to give your younger players extended minutes. If THAT'S the case, then you wouldn't care if your upperclassmen were complaining anyway.

8/31/2012 2:19 PM

emy1013

Posts: 2731 (0)

Hall of Famer

828

Prospect

Posted by bistiza on 8/31/2012 2:17:00 PM (view original):
Yes, adding the feature would give the game more appeal. I would then be able to decide to recruit players who weren't going to give me grief for the decisions I make. With those players on my teams, I would enjoy the game more as I would feel like I could do whatever I wanted as a coach.

I don't mind the work ethic attribute itself, though. I think it's a good way to show how different players improve at different rates. I just think it should stop there. Players shouldnt' lose a great deal of work ethic because of a decision not to give them what they want.

Another important phrase you just used, "not to give them what they want". The normal player/person, if they don't "get what they want" is going to be upset, disappointed, ******, use whatever word fits. That being the case, why wouldn't their work ethic drop?

8/31/2012 2:21 PM

emy1013

Posts: 2731 (0)

Hall of Famer

828

Prospect

Plus, if you'd actually bothered to read some of the other posts, waaaaaaay back on page 6, I told you that I actually AGREED with you that not 100% of people would act in a way that would cause a work ethic drop. Yes, there ARE people who would take that as an incentive to work harder. But that's just not how the game works and I would sincerely hope that if Seble were to make more changes to the game that the work ethic issue wouldn't be very high up on his list of things to fix.

8/31/2012 2:26 PM

emy1013

Posts: 2731 (0)

Hall of Famer

828

Prospect

Posted by arssanguinus on 8/31/2012 2:12:00 PM (view original):
But he wants to have no consequences whatsoever for his choices, see.

This pretty well sums it up.

8/31/2012 2:28 PM

point_piper

Posts: 236 (0)

Hall of Famer

163 129

Prospect

Honestly I don't think it's a bad idea to have a range of reactions among players, though as examples above have shown, that already exists. But you shouldn't expect zero reaction / change in work ethic, unless we are playing Robot Hoops Dynasty, which one assumes would then require other player attributes (battery life, sensitivity to light and sound, control systems, unicorn attacking, etc.).

8/31/2012 2:29 PM

bistiza

Posts: 3022 (0)

Hall of Famer

40 50 11 185 15

Prospect

?The way this game is set up, right or wrong, is that if you recruit correctly, your freshmen should very, VERY rarely be better than your upperclassmen anyway.

That may be true, but it ignores two things:

1. You may inherit a team which wasn't "correctly" recruited (as is the case here with my team).

2. Recruiting doesn't always go perfectly, and you may not end up with a perfectly "correct" team.

Either way, you shouldn't have to adjust how you coach because of a prima donna player making demands.

The game favors juniors and seniors, so if you're playing freshmen at the expense of your upperclassmen, you've either recruited badly or you're punting the season to give your younger players extended minutes.

As I said, there are at least two exceptions to what you're saying, which I gave above. My team is a case in this point: I neither recruited badly nor am I "punting the season".

?But that's just not how the game works and I would sincerely hope that if Seble were to make more changes to the game that the work ethic issue wouldn't be very high up on his list of things to fix.

It's been the most annoying feature I've encountered so far this year (and I didn't play for a few years, but this feature was not always present, or if it was, I never knew about it). That being the case, it's the one I'd MOST like to see changed. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that.

But he wants to have no consequences whatsoever for his choices, see.
This pretty well sums it up.

If my game plan doesn't work out, I can deal with that. But as far as consequences from players making demands - you're d*** right I don't want any consequences from those crybabies.

?But you shouldn't expect zero reaction / change in work ethic

There are plenty of people like that in real life. They might not be happy about a situation, but they work through it and don't whine or cry and give up or make demands and ultimatums. None of them are robots.

Why is it too much to ask for it in a simulated game which is (again, however loosely) based upon real life college basketball?

I think it's fair to expect a RANGE of reactions, including some players who would not react by losing a single point of WE.

8/31/2012 3:15 PM

fd343ny

Posts: 2251 (0)

Hall of Famer

7 605 36

Veteran

a separate question is whether you should be able to tell in advance who will have what reactions - I think it would be fine to have some, vague and incoherent clues - which may allow you to guess who will be "prima donnas" - But for me a part of the texture should be that it is not fully knowable

bis - you seem to want the ability to select only guys who wont care - which seems DEEPLY unrealistic - since one cannot tell for sure how people will react....and it would - for me - make the rather ridiculous and boring

8/31/2012 3:21 PM

Forums

Previous coach promised minutes? Topic

Search Criteria