I like having my better players (i.e. usually starters) playing until they are 'getting tired' because I want them playing more of the minutes (with respect to their various stamina levels).

However, I have a few questions:

Is this really the best method to make sure they are playing at their best, or would fairly fresh be better overall, given they would play les minutes?

When does the sim take them out - as soon as they hit each level, or when they are about to drop to the next level?

How deep does the average team need to be based on each offensive and defensive type played? Is 10-deep a normal thing in HD right now, or do most people go with 8 or 9 man rotations?

I usually leave mine on fairly fresh during the regular season. I play fast break so that way my players are fresh in the second half. I have experimented the last two season by changing to getting tired in the post season to get my starters more time. I am not seeing any benifit in it. I run 9 to 10 deep.

A lot depends on the drop off in talent from starter to backup.  If the backup is close in talent I usually go "fairly fresh".  If the backup is much worse than the starter, I'll go "getting tired", sometimes even "tired".

I usually keep them all on [fairly fresh], but change some starters to [getting tired] for the NT.   Depending on their backup and stamina.

I tend to end up with not a huge talent difference between most of my starters and their top backups, so I favor FF. Depth is something to consider, if I have to run with only 3 bigs for instance the starters will probably end up on GT

Most of the time I use target minutes, but when I do use sub by fatigue it is nearly always fairly fresh. As for your questions:

I like having my better players (i.e. usually starters) playing until they are 'getting tired' because I want them playing more of the minutes (with respect to their various stamina levels).

However, I have a few questions:

Is this really the best method to make sure they are playing at their best, or would fairly fresh be better overall, given they would play les minutes?

No, having them play until "getting tired" is not the best method to make sure they are playing at their best. In fact, it is a sure-fire method to make sure they are not playing their best, because - once they become fatigued - they play at less than the optimal level. If they are much better than the backups, it may be what's best for the team, but "getting tired" is never the best way to get the most efficient performance from any one particular player.

When does the sim take them out - as soon as they hit each level, or when they are about to drop to the next level?

When they hit that level. From the Player's Guide (Help -> Player's Guide), which is definitely worth a read for a lot of general ideas (though it is somewhat dated) - "If your main concern is keeping fresh players in the game at all times, the fatigue setting may be your preferred choice. Using this method, you simply choose how tired a player must become before being subbed out of the game." 

How deep does the average team need to be based on each offensive and defensive type played? Is 10-deep a normal thing in HD right now, or do most people go with 8 or 9 man rotations?

This varies a ton based on the type of O/D you run and what tempo you prefer playing at. I generally try to go 11 deep, but if need be I can usually get by with 8-9 playing zone defense and slow down.

Perhaps this is being assumed, but it also depends greatly on what their stamina rating is....  I think players in the high 80s (around 87 and up) can safely be set at "getting tired" without a detrimental or significant drop off in performance, as I understand the rating.

Generally, I never set a player to "getting tired" or below that setting if their stamina is in the 70s or below.  Mid-80s is more of a question based on the match-up and depth of the opposing team.

My sense is that very, very few teams in HD play only 8-9 players.  Almost everyone seems to go 10 deep.  Granted, my experience is at D2 and D3.  I can sometimes manage 9 players with an experienced, upperclassmen based team that has high stamina.

Unfortunately, I haven't systemically studied fatigue (nor do I have the patience or know how besides counting).  IMO, to truly know the impact, one would have to do some analysis of how well a player functions at the "tired" level.  I think most are scared off by the bright red setting which makes you think - "holy crap my player is dying out there!" rather than actually trying to see how well they shot the ball or turned the ball over (plus is may take awhile to get an adequate sample size).  Evaluating defense would be hard too (granted you could count steals or blocks and fouls... but how to do you measure the defensive FG% in the press or zone?)

 I think players in the high 80s (around 87 and up) can safely be set at "getting tired" without a detrimental or significant drop off in performance, as I understand the rating.

I think you may be misunderstanding the rating. At the very least, you would seem to have a very different understanding of it than I do. As I understand it, the drop in performance (such that it is) happens for all stamina levels equally, it just varies when it happens.

For example, that 87+ stamina guy is going to suffer from playing at "getting tired" or whatever level the same way a 70 stamina guy is. At the precise moment they switch over to the "getting tired" level, both will be performing at the same x% of efficiency.

What varies is *when* that player falls into the "getting tired" level. For the 87+ stamina guy, maybe he can go 12 minutes without being subbed and stay within the "fairly fresh" zone (although, to be clear, I think there are level of fatigue within each zone). The 70 stamina guy can maybe go 7 minutes before be hits the "getting tired" level.

I think of it this way (numbers and % are for illustration purposes only) - 

Tip-off: 87+ Stamina guy (100%); 70 Stamina guy (100%) (both fairly fresh)
2:00 Minutes in: 87+ Stamina guy (96%); 70 Stamina guy (93%) (both fairly fresh)
5:00 Minutes in: 87+ Stamina guy (90%); 70 Stamina guy (85%) (both fairly fresh)
9:00 Minutes in: 87+ Stamina guy (80%); 70 Stamina guy (72%) (87 - fairly fresh, 70 - getting tired)
15:00 Minutes in: 87+ Stamina guy (62%); 70 Stamina guy (45%) (87 - getting tired, 70 - tired)
20:00 Minutes in: 87+ Stamina guy (40%); 70 Stamina guy (10%) (87 - tired, 70 - very tired)

So, at the precise moment they two players transition from any one zone to the next, they are operating at equivalent efficiency. For 87+ guy though, that would occur just after the 9:00 mark in the illustration above. For the 70 guy, that occurs earlier, perhaps around 6:30 minutes in or so.

I appreciate the help. I'm going to tinker with some of the settings soon and maybe I'll post the results.

Posted by zbrent716 on 8/29/2012 12:21:00 PM (view original):
 I think players in the high 80s (around 87 and up) can safely be set at "getting tired" without a detrimental or significant drop off in performance, as I understand the rating.

I think you may be misunderstanding the rating. At the very least, you would seem to have a very different understanding of it than I do. As I understand it, the drop in performance (such that it is) happens for all stamina levels equally, it just varies when it happens.

For example, that 87+ stamina guy is going to suffer from playing at "getting tired" or whatever level the same way a 70 stamina guy is. At the precise moment they switch over to the "getting tired" level, both will be performing at the same x% of efficiency.

What varies is *when* that player falls into the "getting tired" level. For the 87+ stamina guy, maybe he can go 12 minutes without being subbed and stay within the "fairly fresh" zone (although, to be clear, I think there are level of fatigue within each zone). The 70 stamina guy can maybe go 7 minutes before be hits the "getting tired" level.

I think of it this way (numbers and % are for illustration purposes only) - 

Tip-off: 87+ Stamina guy (100%); 70 Stamina guy (100%) (both fairly fresh)
2:00 Minutes in: 87+ Stamina guy (96%); 70 Stamina guy (93%) (both fairly fresh)
5:00 Minutes in: 87+ Stamina guy (90%); 70 Stamina guy (85%) (both fairly fresh)
9:00 Minutes in: 87+ Stamina guy (80%); 70 Stamina guy (72%) (87 - fairly fresh, 70 - getting tired)
15:00 Minutes in: 87+ Stamina guy (62%); 70 Stamina guy (45%) (87 - getting tired, 70 - tired)
20:00 Minutes in: 87+ Stamina guy (40%); 70 Stamina guy (10%) (87 - tired, 70 - very tired)

So, at the precise moment they two players transition from any one zone to the next, they are operating at equivalent efficiency. For 87+ guy though, that would occur just after the 9:00 mark in the illustration above. For the 70 guy, that occurs earlier, perhaps around 6:30 minutes in or so.

You have explained this much better than I did.  In theory that is the way I view things too.  I know your numbers are for illustration... and that's the real question that would help make this decision (exactly HOW much of a drop off is there for the players?).  

I also hope that it's not based on thresholds, but linear and each minute or 2 makes a difference.  

I took it to be the same as those who have said they perform the same at the same level, they just get there at different times based on stamina rating.

Still, all of this helps me a great deal, and I hope it's helping others.

In general I think it's a good thing to have your best player or several players on getting tired.  The reality is that until you get to "tired" there doesn't seem to be much of a dropoff in performance.  I'm not saying there's none, but it's marginal.  The one thing I will say is that, for me, there is significant set dependence.  Obviously the reality is that it's possible to go several minutes without the opportunity to make subs.  I have never seen anything to suggest that the sim coach is smart enough to call a timeout solely because his players are tired and need the rest/substitution, so if the game keeps flowing and nobody shoots free throws your guys may get stuck on the court.  If you're playing FB, Press, or both, I'd be a little more cautious about playing guys with lower stamina on getting tired because they could wind up tired or worse before the opportunity to get them off the court arises.  Playing zone I frequently have as many as 6 or 7 of my best players on getting tired if there are significant talent differentials on the team.

Posted by dahsdebater on 8/29/2012 2:43:00 PM (view original):
In general I think it's a good thing to have your best player or several players on getting tired.  The reality is that until you get to "tired" there doesn't seem to be much of a dropoff in performance.  I'm not saying there's none, but it's marginal.  The one thing I will say is that, for me, there is significant set dependence.  Obviously the reality is that it's possible to go several minutes without the opportunity to make subs.  I have never seen anything to suggest that the sim coach is smart enough to call a timeout solely because his players are tired and need the rest/substitution, so if the game keeps flowing and nobody shoots free throws your guys may get stuck on the court.  If you're playing FB, Press, or both, I'd be a little more cautious about playing guys with lower stamina on getting tired because they could wind up tired or worse before the opportunity to get them off the court arises.  Playing zone I frequently have as many as 6 or 7 of my best players on getting tired if there are significant talent differentials on the team.

i agree, and i will say i essentially never use anything but fairly fresh in the press. players just get too tired too fast. maybe i should, and i would definitely consider it in star player with a freshman backup type situation, but in general, it seems too detrimental. you have to be at the point where all your players get subbed back in fully refreshed before it makes sense to put them in longer, generally speaking, and many press teams never get there.

We really could be the same person but for 2 simple facts:

1) we have radically different views on the importance of BLK
2) you're actually good at this game in practice

Posted by dahsdebater on 8/29/2012 3:46:00 PM (view original):
We really could be the same person but for 2 simple facts:

1) we have radically different views on the importance of BLK
2) you're actually good at this game in practice

let me ask you this - does your view on the importance of BLK result from a regression you ran/saw, or does it come from your analytical abilities applied to studying actual results... or both?