Near future plans Topic

qistat
Posts: 31 (0)
Hall of Famer
7 203
Prospect
Ist off nobody called me on anything - The 20 game sample is sufficient to give a decent estimate of the strength of the relationship between fg% and fg%+.

2ndly a 20 game sample would also be sufficient to get a decent estimate regarding sim functioning for examples you provide. A 1 game sample is not close to being sufficent. When deterimining whether a sample size is truly sufficient you need to know what constitutes a meaning difference (effect size) and other factors like desired power , significance level, type of analysis etc... but that all gets pretty complicated.

The rule of thumb n="30" is really just an absolute minimum recommendation and in most cases is far to small.
8/14/2008 4:56 PM
ncmusician_7
Posts: 1832 (0)
Hall of Famer
70 164 12 18
All Star
Quote: Originally Posted By bball_jones on 8/14/2008
Quote: Originally Posted By ncmusician_7 on 8/14/2008
If the # number is provided, there is no need to compare the real life stat to the # stat. The sim engine uses the # stat.
From my own personal experience and from what other owners have been debating about in the MLB forums it doesn't seem to be that simple. You can't really expext the sim to give you only # stats, it's more like seble said, somewhere between real stats and normalized stats.

Seble said that the nba sim engine uses a number between the real life FG% and the normalized FG%, whereas the mlb sim uses the normalized number. In the mlb sim, I never pay attention to the real life number if a normalized number of that stat is searchable.
8/14/2008 4:56 PM
monkee
Posts: 0 (0)
Hall of Famer
8 192 7 7
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By qistat on 8/14/2008
Ist off nobody called me on anything - The 20 game sample is sufficient to give a decent estimate of the strength of the relationship between fg% and fg%+.

um - blah blah blah

dude called you on sample size - you may have rebutted effectively

but he definitely called you out on it

and that amuses me
8/14/2008 5:09 PM
qistat
Posts: 31 (0)
Hall of Famer
7 203
Prospect
Yeah, he was wrong, I was right, but lets not worry about the details. What matters is that you could use an erroneous call and apply it (again in error) to substantiate your unsubstantiated opinion.

There are alot of areas where I am sure you know alot more than me. I wouldn't try to debate you in those areas. Rather than forming an uniformed opinion and looking for others (similarly uninformed) to stengthen that view I would gather more info and improve my knowledge base.

8/14/2008 5:31 PM
ncmusician_7
Posts: 1832 (0)
Hall of Famer
70 164 12 18
All Star
Quote: Originally Posted By qistat on 8/14/2008
To test the FG+ normalization I simmed 20 games

83-84 pistons vs 53-54 celts and looked at Cousy and Isiah FG%. They were both very similar defensively so that effect should be constant. INRL Cousy shot 38.5% to Isiahs 46.2% but Cousy was 103fg+ to Isiah 94fg+.

In the 20 game Cousy shot 41.6% and Isiah 46.6%. The normalization didn't appear to have a very big impact in this 20 game sim.



I don't think you can draw much of a conclusion from this because ast% affects FG% and the teammates of Cousy don't have the same ast% as the teammates of Thomas. What you could do is sim the 53-54 celtics against the 53-54 Celtics minus Cousy plus 04-05 Allen Iverson. Iverson has a higher FG% but lower FG%+ than Cousy.
8/14/2008 6:00 PM
qistat
Posts: 31 (0)
Hall of Famer
7 203
Prospect
That is a vallid comment.

I doubt the team ast%s (minus cousy&thomas) vary enough to skew the results enough to alter the interpretation though.

The simmatchup doesn't easliy allow for those manipulations which is why I just played team vs team to get a quick look.
8/14/2008 6:07 PM
ncmusician_7
Posts: 1832 (0)
Hall of Famer
70 164 12 18
All Star
Quote: Originally Posted By qistat on 8/14/2008

That is a valid comment.

I doubt the team ast%s (minus cousy&thomas) vary enough to skew the results enough to alter the interpretation though.

The simmatchup doesn't easliy allow for those manipulations which is why I just played team vs team to get a quick look.

Use the dream team feature.
8/14/2008 6:15 PM
sappy
Posts: 1816 (0)
Hall of Famer
98 399 2 8
Rookie
I have been wondering why I consistently get my *** kicked in these leagues and after trying to keep up with this thread I know why. I am an IDIOT.
8/14/2008 6:44 PM
monkee
Posts: 0 (0)
Hall of Famer
8 192 7 7
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By qistat on 8/14/2008

Yeah, he was wrong, I was right, but lets not worry about the details. What matters is that you could use an erroneous call and apply it (again in error) to substantiate your unsubstantiated opinion.

There are alot of areas where I am sure you know alot more than me. I wouldn't try to debate you in those areas. Rather than forming an uniformed opinion and looking for others (similarly uninformed) to stengthen that view I would gather more info and improve my knowledge base.






I think I have enough info now to know that you are uptight

if you read back you'll have a hard time finding anywhere that I actually tried to debate you on the sample size argument per se

what you might find in another thread is an argument as to whether turning the sim into a statistical simulation wherein the sample size argument is used to explain away behaviors that turn off and reduce user base was a good idea - I know you are smart enough to understand the distinction
8/14/2008 7:13 PM
qistat
Posts: 31 (0)
Hall of Famer
7 203
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By monkee on 8/14/2008
Quote: Originally Posted By qistat on 8/14/2008

Yeah, he was wrong, I was right, but lets not worry about the details. What matters is that you could use an erroneous call and apply it (again in error) to substantiate your unsubstantiated opinion.

There are alot of areas where I am sure you know alot more than me. I wouldn't try to debate you in those areas. Rather than forming an uniformed opinion and looking for others (similarly uninformed) to stengthen that view I would gather more info and improve my knowledge base.






I think I have enough info now to know that you are uptight

if you read back you'll have a hard time finding anywhere that I actually tried to debate you on the sample size argument per se

what you might find in another thread is an argument as to whether turning the sim into a statistical simulation wherein the sample size argument is used to explain away behaviors that turn off and reduce user base was a good idea - I know you are smart enough to understand the distinction
I hate these back and forths and try to avoid them most of the time. I usually post when statistical info may help to inform a discussion .

That was the case with this thread. There was discussion regarding fg% and fg+ and the import of each in the sim. A simple simiulation comparison suggests that INRL fg% is alot more important in the current sim than fg+.

You seemed to get pleasure when someone corrects my interpretation not caring whether the comment was vallid. Thats seems pretty juvenile to me.

As for the other argument (sim randomness), I am well aware of your position about user satisfaction. That was the whole point of the stats I presented. I was trying to show that by reducing in game 'randomness' the effects would likely lead to more not less user disatisfaction.

The 'uptight' comment could not be farther off. I have my faults and there are plenty of things I'm not real good at. I'm widely known for my laidback, easy going manner. My faults tend to lie at the other end of the spectrum.

8/14/2008 9:09 PM
monkee
Posts: 0 (0)
Hall of Famer
8 192 7 7
Prospect
here's the deal - the dynasty sims are more popular

and guess what?

if your O line averages core 70s and his D line averages core 65s you run over him - never fails - that is one mechanistic universe those dynasty leagues live in

but over here in random-land right now Im sitting in an open league with 8 teams in on day 5 and waiting

and you and I can both remember a time when leagues filled a hella lot faster than they do now - and that was before all the links and sponsors and partners

8/14/2008 9:54 PM
ncmusician_7
Posts: 1832 (0)
Hall of Famer
70 164 12 18
All Star
The 52-53 Bobby Wanzer and 69-70 Hal Greer would be 2 other player seasons that could test the normalized FG% fairly well.
8/14/2008 11:00 PM
monkee
Posts: 0 (0)
Hall of Famer
8 192 7 7
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By monkee on 7/20/2008
Quote: Originally Posted By seble on 6/22/2008
Wow, you guys are impatient. Changes take time. Should be in the next few weeks though.
ha ha ha ha ha ha (...suckers
ha ha ha ha ha ha (...suckers)
8/20/2008 1:56 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
wildly entertaining
8/20/2008 4:30 PM
bball_jones
Posts: 29 (0)
Hall of Famer
27 48 13
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By seble on 8/07/2008Probably a week or 2. We're in the testing phase now
It's been nearly three weeks now. Tests aren't conclusive or it's for very soon?

Getting impatient in the draft center, looking at all these nonsense perimeter range ratings, the more time I spend in there the more clueless I become at trying to understand all these perimeter ratings. There are hundreds of em with perimeter ratings that have nothing to do with real life. There are way WAY too many unjustified perimeter ratings. I said it before and I'll say it again, most players should be midcourt unless they are clear cut paint or perimeter.
8/24/2008 9:18 AM
◂ Prev 1...8|9|10|11|12...18 Next ▸
Near future plans Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2025 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.