Posted by jetwildcat on 9/15/2010 12:26:00 PM (view original):
the more i think about it, the more i think the FG% trend could change a lot when the old recruits graduate, even if they are only seniors. the top shooting % teams could just be relying on seniors more.

its also a possibility that, since hd teams routinely run 10 and 11 deep, the 10th and 11th players are the ones that have shooting percentages too high. if they were lower, the team % would drop and teams would start using more realistic 9-man rotations.

Just out of curiosity, how many shots do you think those 10th and 11th players are getting a game?  And, do you think that those shots are enough to alter the percentages that much?  Not trying to be a smartass, just wondering about your estimates.  I'd like to see if others feel the same way.....

If the recruiting change is as drastic as some claim then the actual #s would have to be skewed one way or the other as long as the old recruits are still playing. That said I'm sure thy would still provide some insight.

I'd be curious to see what effect increased fatigue would have on the HD numbers.
If HD players went that extra 5-6 minutes a game would the individual offensive numbers actually drop closer to those in RL?  
I'd guess it's fairly rare in RL to see 10 players average between 15-25 minutes a game.  In HD it's commonplace. 

Posted by dcy0827 on 9/16/2010 1:20:00 AM (view original):

Posted by girt25 on 9/15/2010 9:41:00 PM (view original):
I'm not sure why having some old recruits around would skew the shooting percentages high. Aren't the old recruits also better defensively as well? 

Careful Daalt, you're making sense here and torpedoing the theory of the  "We have wait until we get all new recruits in the engine for it to make sense" crowd.....

yes but the new engine doesn't necessarily have the same correlation between PE and DE in terms of shooting percentage. in the old engine, maybe 99 PE shoots 45% against 99 DE, 50% against 90 DE, etc...but now the same guy shoots 50% and 55%

Posted by Iguana1 on 9/16/2010 10:53:00 AM (view original):
I'd be curious to see what effect increased fatigue would have on the HD numbers.
If HD players went that extra 5-6 minutes a game would the individual offensive numbers actually drop closer to those in RL?  
I'd guess it's fairly rare in RL to see 10 players average between 15-25 minutes a game.  In HD it's commonplace. 

that's a more logical spin on the observation i made, actually

Posted by jetwildcat on 9/16/2010 2:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dcy0827 on 9/16/2010 1:20:00 AM (view original):

Posted by girt25 on 9/15/2010 9:41:00 PM (view original):
I'm not sure why having some old recruits around would skew the shooting percentages high. Aren't the old recruits also better defensively as well? 

Careful Daalt, you're making sense here and torpedoing the theory of the  "We have wait until we get all new recruits in the engine for it to make sense" crowd.....

yes but the new engine doesn't necessarily have the same correlation between PE and DE in terms of shooting percentage. in the old engine, maybe 99 PE shoots 45% against 99 DE, 50% against 90 DE, etc...but now the same guy shoots 50% and 55%

The question is, why?

Posted by jetwildcat on 9/16/2010 2:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dcy0827 on 9/16/2010 1:20:00 AM (view original):

Posted by girt25 on 9/15/2010 9:41:00 PM (view original):
I'm not sure why having some old recruits around would skew the shooting percentages high. Aren't the old recruits also better defensively as well? 

Careful Daalt, you're making sense here and torpedoing the theory of the  "We have wait until we get all new recruits in the engine for it to make sense" crowd.....

yes but the new engine doesn't necessarily have the same correlation between PE and DE in terms of shooting percentage. in the old engine, maybe 99 PE shoots 45% against 99 DE, 50% against 90 DE, etc...but now the same guy shoots 50% and 55%

The question is, why?  Shouldn't ratings/results remain constant? 

Posted by dcy0827 on 9/16/2010 4:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jetwildcat on 9/16/2010 2:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dcy0827 on 9/16/2010 1:20:00 AM (view original):

Posted by girt25 on 9/15/2010 9:41:00 PM (view original):
I'm not sure why having some old recruits around would skew the shooting percentages high. Aren't the old recruits also better defensively as well? 

Careful Daalt, you're making sense here and torpedoing the theory of the  "We have wait until we get all new recruits in the engine for it to make sense" crowd.....

yes but the new engine doesn't necessarily have the same correlation between PE and DE in terms of shooting percentage. in the old engine, maybe 99 PE shoots 45% against 99 DE, 50% against 90 DE, etc...but now the same guy shoots 50% and 55%

The question is, why?  Shouldn't ratings/results remain constant? 

well a new simulation engine is a new simulation engine. why keep them constant if it needs improving?

Posted by jetwildcat on 9/16/2010 9:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dcy0827 on 9/16/2010 4:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jetwildcat on 9/16/2010 2:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dcy0827 on 9/16/2010 1:20:00 AM (view original):

Posted by girt25 on 9/15/2010 9:41:00 PM (view original):
I'm not sure why having some old recruits around would skew the shooting percentages high. Aren't the old recruits also better defensively as well? 

Careful Daalt, you're making sense here and torpedoing the theory of the  "We have wait until we get all new recruits in the engine for it to make sense" crowd.....

yes but the new engine doesn't necessarily have the same correlation between PE and DE in terms of shooting percentage. in the old engine, maybe 99 PE shoots 45% against 99 DE, 50% against 90 DE, etc...but now the same guy shoots 50% and 55%

The question is, why?  Shouldn't ratings/results remain constant? 

well a new simulation engine is a new simulation engine. why keep them constant if it needs improving?

Maybe I didn't come across as clear as I had hoped.  What I was trying to get discussed was, why would/should the percentages be different in the "new" engine if the ratings were the same in both?  Wouldn't it all be relative?  For example, using the numbers above, why would shooting percentages be higher with the new engine (if they even are)?  Again, not trying to be a smartass or the least bit sarcastic, just trying to get a feel for where some of the logic is coming from, on both sides.

Also, I was under the impression that Seble didn't necessarily "change" the engine per say, just re-wrote it in a code that was easier for him to understand and make minor adjustments if needed, or am I off base with my thinking?

i have no idea the extent of the motives behind the rewriting of the code...but i do think it was a COMPLETE rewrite, hence the lack of congruity. he just changed the shooting %'s in relation to ratings, as they may seem more realistic in the context of the new recruits' ratings.

Ahh, maybe I misunderstood something along the way.

Posted by mullycj on 9/12/2010 8:48:00 AM (view original):
There used to be a pinned thread from Tarek that showed shooting %, 3pt%, and FT% for the three divisions vs NCAA.

I think the community would be interested in seeing those results for the current season accross worlds.  The general consesus is the current engine is out of whack and teams are shooting too high.     You obviously have a different view.

Please share with us the stats you see to support your view. 

I 2nd this thread, especially with regard to big men with crappy PER ratings shooting like 30% for the season from 3.

This is a perfect example of our views on how broken this engine is with regards to shooting % and 3PT %s.

LSSU may not be a defensive dynamo but we should certainly be able to stop a team like this from shooting 9-20 from the arc.

The starters went 6-12 and their PER ratings are 38,28.49,27,13.

It's a complete joke and it's bee the same joke since day one of this release.

http://www.whatifsports.com/hd/GameResults/BoxScore.aspx?gid=6190477