Posted by wronoj on 2/2/2011 3:18:00 PM (view original):
i disagree that you cannot tell the hard cap-- maybe not the exact number, but you can tell which part of the range of 6-20 the guy will be in based on Scouting Evaluation info from your AC. I don't remember the exact email wordings, but aren't there high-average and low-average potentials? I think Iguana or someone has posted an extensive list of the email wordings and their approximate meaning in the numbers.

And there are definitely emails for low-hi, med-hi, and hi-hi potential, telling you if the guy will get 21-25, 26-30ish, and 30+. These are important.

there are 5 emails for each stat - low-low, high-low, average, low-high and high-high. That list that everyone is talking about is part of a thread in which respected coach claims that CS confirms only 5 levels of potential per stat.

For my own use I pasted that list into a google docs spreadsheet. A while ago I opened sharing on it and gave the link. Here it is again.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0ApAeCSJJDIOtdHZPUGpJWjhGRUZ5YzdnMVdCZ29iRWc&hl=en&authkey=CM6bq9cC

Posted by dacj501 on 2/2/2011 3:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wronoj on 2/2/2011 3:18:00 PM (view original):
i disagree that you cannot tell the hard cap-- maybe not the exact number, but you can tell which part of the range of 6-20 the guy will be in based on Scouting Evaluation info from your AC. I don't remember the exact email wordings, but aren't there high-average and low-average potentials? I think Iguana or someone has posted an extensive list of the email wordings and their approximate meaning in the numbers.

And there are definitely emails for low-hi, med-hi, and hi-hi potential, telling you if the guy will get 21-25, 26-30ish, and 30+. These are important.

there are 5 emails for each stat - low-low, high-low, average, low-high and high-high. That list that everyone is talking about is part of a thread in which respected coach claims that CS confirms only 5 levels of potential per stat.

For my own use I pasted that list into a google docs spreadsheet. A while ago I opened sharing on it and gave the link. Here it is again.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0ApAeCSJJDIOtdHZPUGpJWjhGRUZ5YzdnMVdCZ29iRWc&hl=en&authkey=CM6bq9cC

wronoj, even though he may be quoting me, dac is definitely right here - there are 5 eval messages on each category (and CS has confirmed that after i found it was the case). there are no sub-levels for medium. so that 6-20 does not break down at all - which is a major criticism of mine, seble knows and agrees its stupid low is 5 points split in half and medium is 14 or so not split at all... but i don't know if/when he will fix it.

also, there are not emails for low/hi, med/hi, hi/hi - there are just two. you are probably thinking of what CS originally said they would do in a dev chat, which is not what they actually did. and just FYI, the levels are 21-27, 28+ on the recruit screen, and 20-27, 28+ on the player thoughts message at the beginning of the season (to the point of getting a message from your assistant about the category being capped).

I could be wrong here, but I thought I remember getting the "low-high" eval message for guys listed as average potential in FSS.  

I thought those were the guys that would go up 19-20 points (high-average).  Those are also the guys who show up as "average" in FSS but then turn out to be "big upside" in the first coach email.

Posted by HalfAstros on 2/2/2011 10:25:00 PM (view original):
I could be wrong here, but I thought I remember getting the "low-high" eval message for guys listed as average potential in FSS.  

I thought those were the guys that would go up 19-20 points (high-average).  Those are also the guys who show up as "average" in FSS but then turn out to be "big upside" in the first coach email.

very interesting... i have never noticed that, definitely will keep an eye out for it now!

Ethan, with where recruits were headed, that speed isn't awful but won't be elite compared to some of the top DII programs.  I'd suggest checking out some other teams to see what kinds of players (and their potential) they are targeting.  You won't necessarily be able to get players at that level until your prestige improves though.

Now back to the point of the thread... I'd say on offense I initially looked at per and LP thinking those were ultra-important and had success my first season against inferior/sim talent.  I later discovered a few things.  Ath and speed are vital, passing really helps at all positions, and having too much distro into one or two players at one time was crippling.  That was back in the day when double teaming a guard and playing -4 effectively shut down both the perimeter player and the post game.  That got me to where I still seem to be today.  A very balanced attack that is hard to defend.  I've always felt like you have to shoot some threes to keep opponents honest, but you best shooting percentages come in the post.  It helped early in my career to have post players that shot free throws well (the theory being that if I'm up late in the game and get a rebound, that player will be fouled and it usually would be a post player).  I have changed slightly since then after seeing other teams have success more recently by putting in more uneven distro with 2-3 players getting the bulk of the shots.

Defensively I can get frustrated.  I can't decide if positioning matters or not.  I tend to see how many threes are shot, % of threes hit, who the main shooters are, and where my weaknesses are and adjust accordingly.  Pretty vague answer I know, but there are quite a few factors that truthfully make small changes to my strategy.  Tempo for me has been harder to figure out.  Generally I go with uptempo if I feel that I have a decided advantage (or it has been successful against a particular coach in the past).  That has changed somewhat since figuring out that stamina plays are pretty important role in how well your team performs in a given tempo.  

I don't know if others have changed their strategies based on engine changes or not.  I definitely switched to combo defenses when it seemed like more than half the recruits ran either press alone or in combo with man or zone.  When all of your players start at C- or better in press, it seems like a waste not to run it. 

This is the very abridged version of how I gameplan.

I always look at individual matchups when playing against a man to man defense, and adjust distro accordingly. For instance, if i have a stud SF with 70 ATH and 90 LP, and he will be guarded by a guy with 40 ATH and 30 DEF, that stud SF is getting more distro. Distro is a huge part of gameplanning.

Against zones, I look at whether I expect the opponent to play a 2-3 or a 3-2, and adjust accordingly. Against FCP, I make sure i've got some decent ballhandlers and passers playing minutes in the backcourt, and then I will do more penetrating and pounding the ball inside, hoping to draw more fouls (Press teams commit more fouls, so I'm always trying to find a way to get some of their key players into foul trouble)

Positioning on defense is important as well, but don't rely too heavily on it. My positioning decisions are usually based on the opposing team's ability to rebound, as well as their desire to shoot 3 Pointers vs. 2 pointers. A lot more goes into it than that, but it's a start.

It's important to look at the opponent's previous games played for any tendencies. Maybe the opponent played every game at a 3-2 zone with a +3......if that was the case, I would pound the ball inside a little more.

Regarding uptempo/slowdown,  I like to run uptempo with my team if my team has more depth, or if my team has more ATH/SPD and will get to the FT line more often.  I like to run slowdown when I have less talent, or a deliberate, skilled passing team in which the starters are much stronger players than the reserves. I run normal if I just can't make up my mind.

Glad to see you are interested in getting better. It's an addicting game! Take everyone's advice, but develop your own style......you'll also get better with lots of trial and error.

Posted by gillispie on 2/2/2011 11:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by HalfAstros on 2/2/2011 10:25:00 PM (view original):
I could be wrong here, but I thought I remember getting the "low-high" eval message for guys listed as average potential in FSS.  

I thought those were the guys that would go up 19-20 points (high-average).  Those are also the guys who show up as "average" in FSS but then turn out to be "big upside" in the first coach email.

very interesting... i have never noticed that, definitely will keep an eye out for it now!

i completely agree with this, and think it's where i've gotten my idea that you might know when an average guy is at the top end.      

Posted by wronoj on 2/2/2011 11:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by gillispie on 2/2/2011 11:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by HalfAstros on 2/2/2011 10:25:00 PM (view original):
I could be wrong here, but I thought I remember getting the "low-high" eval message for guys listed as average potential in FSS.  

I thought those were the guys that would go up 19-20 points (high-average).  Those are also the guys who show up as "average" in FSS but then turn out to be "big upside" in the first coach email.

very interesting... i have never noticed that, definitely will keep an eye out for it now!

i completely agree with this, and think it's where i've gotten my idea that you might know when an average guy is at the top end.      

I wonder if this is the effect as when you get differing answers from FSS and the practice thoughts email.  I.e. the guy right on the borderline and one of the checks is < and one is <=.