Posted by cbriese on 8/10/2012 9:39:00 PM (view original):
I like the fact that those most strongly supporting the theory that the press is unrealistic have a combined total of 34 seasons under their belt.

That'd be an interesting comment if you weren't off by triple-digit%, at least.

Posted by llamanunts on 8/10/2012 8:32:00 PM (view original):

this game is all messed up now, analysis wise, because seble built feedback into a bunch of things - fouls, shots, rebounds, etc... what does that mean? it means if you have something unexpectedly occur on one side of the coin, its significantly more likely that you will see the same unexpected thing happen on the other side of the coin. so if you shoot 0-30 in the first half, its a hell of a lot more likely (although still really unlikely, obviously), that you will shoot 30-30 in the second half - compared to if you had shot your normal 14-30 or whatever in that first half. i had more fouls than i should have early, so that decreased my chance of fouling later.

Wait, WHAT?!

Is that for real?

Is that for really real?

If so, that damn near invalidates this damn game.

yes, yes, and yes it does. 

First: I don't claim to be better at this game than you are, or to know more about it than you do.

Second:

I know plenty about sample size, thank you very much.  Among the things I know is that you seem not to know when it's an issue.  You imply that an opinion is not valid unless those backing it rack up 1000 or so seasons?  That's silly, and that's not how sample size works.  I'm pretty sure you know that and were just out to annoy.

This isn't a statistical issue (though I proposed a study a page or two back to look at it statistically), so what's this sample size you're talking about?  At what point would you permit a person to ask questions and have an opinion about a perception without ******** saying stuff like:

I like the fact that those most strongly supporting the theory that the press is unrealistic have a combined total of 34 seasons under their belt.

(under the usernames that are posting, and declining to count the more experienced coaches who have that opinion) and:

I would suggest that you learn a little about statistical analysis, accept that any sample size less than say, 1000, is flawed, and get a good number of seasons under your belt playing with all defenses. Then maybe you'll be able to comment intelligently. Until then, what you say is simply amusing, but nothing that anyone should take seriously.

about it?

By the way, I never said it was unrealistic.  You can't read *or* count, apparently.

gillispie - Wow.

I'd never actually used the "Block this user" forum feature, but it seems to make the forums much more palatable.

Then you won't see me posting as you troll my thread.

my thread?  I thought this a public forum

cbriese blocked.  Don't need to read the unfounded criticisms of arrogant douchebags who don't actually contribute anything substantive to the conversation.  Much prefer to read logical and/or substantiated input from newbs than bs from a vet...

Gillespie, as the other poster, I'd like to say: "attitude"...yeah, a pretty hefty portion of that; "insult"...definitely not intended, but, looking back, I can see how I probably gave it.  My apologies.

Although I agree with almost all of your analysis, I don't think it changes my mind.  My thought on tempo for pressing teams boils down to this, let's suppose that we could play 300 games of SIU, Edwardsville at Drury.  You coach SIU and I'll take Drury.  One other condition, for the first 100 games SIU must play slowdown, the second 100 normal, and the third 100 uptempo (and I know it).  I would expect to win only 33 of the first 100, win 51 of the second, and win 67 of the third.  A variety of factors (e.g. bench IQ, stamina, etc.) factor in to making me believe that, if I guess your tempo correctly, then that would have a big impact on the game.  Further, if Drury ran press with the same IQs, then my expectations at slowdown jump right up to 50/50.

However, I was unaware of the "feedback" that you discussed above.  I hope that dahsdebater is right that it didn't play a huge role in the game, but I am troubled by that notion that it could.   I won't pretend that I know enough about programming such a feedback to know whether that has been causing the problem that I, and many others, have noticed about trying to get FCP teams tired and into foul trouble.  I suppose that one would have to look at a vast array of iterations of games to know whether that function has an effect one way or the other or, like amplifier distortion, simply clips off the outliers of the curve.  Obviously, WIS itself is best situated to be able to test the function to see whether some unintended consequence has slipped in.

In the end, I am searching for a reason why the gameplanning strategies that used to work for me, no longer do.  Perhaps it isn't that stamina has been "nerfed" sufficiently in favor of the press.  It could be that I just need to adjust my own team setup to the new normal and have failed to do so and need to just have a stiff drink and relax....wait, that's a damn fine idea...

I would be curious as to what the almighty seble has to say ... 

Posted by metsmax on 8/11/2012 4:08:00 PM (view original):
my thread?  I thought this a public forum

Nope.  Mine mine all mine.  I have revoked your posting privileges and alerted the authorities.

Naw, of course I didn't mean I owned it.  Poorly worded.  I started and attempted to direct it for a bit is all.

Posted by rogelio on 8/11/2012 5:44:00 PM (view original):
Gillespie, as the other poster, I'd like to say: "attitude"...yeah, a pretty hefty portion of that; "insult"...definitely not intended, but, looking back, I can see how I probably gave it.  My apologies.

Although I agree with almost all of your analysis, I don't think it changes my mind.  My thought on tempo for pressing teams boils down to this, let's suppose that we could play 300 games of SIU, Edwardsville at Drury.  You coach SIU and I'll take Drury.  One other condition, for the first 100 games SIU must play slowdown, the second 100 normal, and the third 100 uptempo (and I know it).  I would expect to win only 33 of the first 100, win 51 of the second, and win 67 of the third.  A variety of factors (e.g. bench IQ, stamina, etc.) factor in to making me believe that, if I guess your tempo correctly, then that would have a big impact on the game.  Further, if Drury ran press with the same IQs, then my expectations at slowdown jump right up to 50/50.

However, I was unaware of the "feedback" that you discussed above.  I hope that dahsdebater is right that it didn't play a huge role in the game, but I am troubled by that notion that it could.   I won't pretend that I know enough about programming such a feedback to know whether that has been causing the problem that I, and many others, have noticed about trying to get FCP teams tired and into foul trouble.  I suppose that one would have to look at a vast array of iterations of games to know whether that function has an effect one way or the other or, like amplifier distortion, simply clips off the outliers of the curve.  Obviously, WIS itself is best situated to be able to test the function to see whether some unintended consequence has slipped in.

In the end, I am searching for a reason why the gameplanning strategies that used to work for me, no longer do.  Perhaps it isn't that stamina has been "nerfed" sufficiently in favor of the press.  It could be that I just need to adjust my own team setup to the new normal and have failed to do so and need to just have a stiff drink and relax....wait, that's a damn fine idea...

here is my question... in which universe do you expect to  be a 51% favorite, at normal tempo? the universe of HD, or the universe of how you think HD should work?

if your answer is in HD... then i would like to understand what makes you think that. i outlined specific advantages, and outlined no disadvantages, for my team. particularly, do you refute those advantages? and what disadvantages do you perceive balance them out? my guess is simply answering the question will change your opinion, probably not to the 90% figure i estimate, but not 51%, either. at a glance, the teams look about the same, but when you really look at it, its not even close, IMO. so i would be interested to see SPECIFICALLY what you are thinking. the fact that it boils down to you expect to win 33% against slowdown, 51% normal, 67% uptempo gives me no idea what gives you that opinion. so while i really disagree with your opinion - and suspect 95% or more of coaches would as well - i cant give you any hints as to where you might be going wrong. nor can i possibly discover where i might be going wrong. 

The answer is in HD.

Alright, for the middle 100, I know that SIU will playing normal tempo.  I also know that SIU only plays 10 and has worse overall team stamina than my team which can play 11.  Since Drury has the homecourt advantage and I know SIU won't play slowdown, that means that I can get into those post freshmen on the bench by playing uptempo against the normal.

As you mentioned, SIU gets the lion's share of its scoring from its perimeter players; shooting about 19+ 3 point shots per game.  Although it will hurt on rebounding, Drury should play +1 3-2 zone which should control the scoring by your guard, somewhat negate SIU's speed advantage on the perimeter and, hopefully, give Drury the foul margin that it will need to win.  Knowing that stratagem opens up the interior, Cook will always be double teamed and Schram will be set to "leading scorer".  The doubleteaming should not prove to be a disaster too often as it is only Cook and Schram that can do any damage on the interior, Drury has more post depth*, and Cook is a terrible passer and should turn it over a few extra times per game.  *Holder is Drury's 5th post, a RS freshman, versus the 4th & 5th for SIU playing post that are true freshman on which I am placing the bullseye.  

Byron Jones is starting at SF with poor IQs and a step slow.  I can't quite target him in a press, but, all the same, Yates is going to get a bunch of distro set at zero (25-28).  Drury needs a perimeter threat and that has to be Smith with a high teens distro at +1 (he'll only be effective if that -3 or -4 defense shows up, but has to do that).  The bullseye is on the bench.  So, most of the rest of the distro goes evenly to Miles, Duque and Holder at -2.  Once Orr is fatigued, then I've got into Spilski, Malone & Schram and the fouls should start to tick down.  Olivares and Naccarato cannot compete with your guards on the offensive end, their job is only to distribute the rock (zero distro).

To be sure, it is possible that, when SIU wins, it may be by a big number and would actually score significantly more, in aggregate, than Drury.  However, I do believe that the press played with only 10 at inferior stamina, should break down about half the time and I'll pick up that 51st game by random luck (read: injury).   My big picture suggestion is that just the threat of SIU playing slowdown, makes the proposition impossible.  With SIU at slowdown and fairly fresh, Drury cannot get into SIU's bench consistently enough to be effective with this strategy.  My feeling, however, is that, to properly simulate the amount of effort it would take to effectively run a FCP defense well, running slowdown should not have as steep a curve on fatigue "savings" as I have noticed over many games in the past few months or more.

This tactic once worked very effectively for me, but doesn't any more as other players more frequently run that slowdown press and, to my dismay, it seems to work very, very well.  That forces most of my teams (all either man or zone) to play slowdown and work from the other direction.

Posted by girt25 on 8/11/2012 6:26:00 PM (view original):
I would be curious as to what the almighty seble has to say ... 

You have packed a lot of quality into very few words in this thread.  Excellent efficiency - perhaps too efficient.