i think we all agree that the lower fatigue settings are pretty useless... right?

but im a bit suprised at the number of folks who feel that GT is a viable option, and, in fact, it seems that alot of them actually feel that GT is the preferred option in most cases.

I have felt from day one that FF is the only option to use. im not really sure why other than i guess i have felt the effects of tired players (injuries, poor freethrowing, reduced effectiveness) are too much of a risk compared to the reward of getting a couple of extra minutes out of my best players. (maybe this explains my relative lack of success in the postseason?)

id be curious to see other thoughts on this subject to get an idea of whether i am in a small minority who usees FF exclusively or whether my FF brothers have just tended not to speak up in the forums as much?

and, while were at it, id like to hear the arguments for the GT option, as i am still wavering and must admit the grass does , at times, look kinda green over on your side of the fence.

the higher the IQ, the more likely I am to want a player in the game more...the drop off to their backup also matters when I'm selecting GT or FF

FF or GT for me depends on the depth of my roster ... or maybe more accurately the talent differential between the starter and the backup. I've won at least a couple NTs using GT for my very best players ..... think 900 SR starting SF with a 650 frosh backup. I've found GT is also useful if you are playing M2M and you have a starter with a 90+ def and a backup who is in the 60s ....

pretty much always FF unless I have a HUGE disparity in talent level or am dealing with injuries or grades causing a shortage at a position

GT works for me pretty frequently....especially when the player's backup is a significant dropoff in talent. Often, my top 2 or 3 players are set at GT, and my 2 or 3 weaker starters are backed up by my best reserves. Often, my teams go pretty much 8 deep. I don't feel like that's the norm, but it has worked for me pretty well.

In the pre-potential HD, minutes played seemed to have a lot more to do with a player's development, so it made sense to give developing players a lot more minutes. Now, not so much (in my opinion)

i might need to mess around with this a bit.

Im guessing that some folks may tend more toward GT in the postseason when they need to pull every little advantage they can.

i might have to really think about this.

how many minutes do you figure it gives you?

do you see any extra injuries or poorer freethrow percentage due to the extra minutes?

It depends on stamina, but I would guess that GT gets you an extra 4 min a game.

you can also get pretty even minutes (stamina being somewhat equal) if you set starter to FF and backup to GT.

If you have a senior starter with a 90 stamina and a sophomore backup why wouldn't you want to set him to getting tired? A somewhat tired senior will still be more productive than a fresh sophomore.

Quote: Originally Posted By kmasonbx on 10/30/2009If you have a senior starter with a 90 stamina and a sophomore backup why wouldn't you want to set him to getting tired? A somewhat tired senior will still be more productive than a fresh sophomore.

i dont know.

you guys seem to have a point.

i think my attitude was shaped before fatigue settings were around.

and, in those early days, as i recall, the idea was to set each player at the number of minutes that they could "handle" without getting tired. that setting needed to be adjusted game to game to account for your and your opponents O and D and tempo settings.

I think i may have tried extending players into the getting tired range, but there were at least two clear deterents that had nothing to do with this players effectiveness compared to his backup..... injury and freethrow efficiency.

maybe it has changed (it prolly has) but in the old days i felt that injury occurence was 100% related to the frequency at which a player played below fairly fresh.

and as players started to tire, their freethrowing would become awful.

i guess i need to try again and see if i notice the same problems.

one thing i should add is that, while i ALLWAYS set every player to FF, they are quite often tired to some degree in the games. especially with my fbpress team. i guess i worry with that team that they may get even more tired, which would mean lots of red and orange

I think this is one instance where HD does a good job of mimicking real life, and as a coach we have to balance tired vs. efficiency. All things go into this, from stamina to FTs and IQs I have been around a coach that doesn't care about having his best FT shooters in the game at the end, he wants his freshest. (This is real life, not HD) The other problem that comes up is what happens when there isn't a dead ball for a long period of time? It happens all the time in HD and real life and a coach has to decide do i burn a time out or let them play through it.

On my DII team a few seasons back I had a stud SG with 99 stamina. I set him to very tired, and did my very best to never let him come out of the game. Even when he was tried his production didn't fall off too much.

hmmmm... interesting.

I'm with you dave. I have always used FF almost exclusively.

The only time I use GT is if I've promised minutes to a recruit and need to boost his time a bit.

I probably use more GT than I do FF. I mix it up quite a bit.

I only use GT when I have a player that is clearly superior to his backup or one that can play multiple positions.

On my Marshall team, I have an SF (Lee) that is worlds better than his backup at SF and is probably also better than any PF/C on my roster. So, I start him at SF and have him as the backup PF. In order to get him minutes at both positions, I have him set at GT compared to FF last season.

His minutes are up from 24.8 to 29.6 from last season and his FG%, 3FG% and FT% are all down from last year. The dips may be due to a number of reasons outside of Stamina (for example, he's taking more 3s), but that might be a factor.