Early Entries, Injuries and Blind Luck Topic

dalter
Posts: 71 (0)
All Star
25
Prospect
I really didn't know if my feelings on this were driven by personal circumstance rather than HD as a whole, so it's reaffirming to get wholehearted agreement right away from 10-12 top coaches. At least I know I'm not crazy (and/or wasn't just being a baby).

To address a few specific points people made:

OR: Yes, that's a huge part of the problem: When a big-time school loses someone, they can reload. Not so at Montana, UWGB, etc. The EE is potentially catastrophic for schools like that.

How about perhaps making the threshold for a player leaving from a non-BCS school a little higher?

metsmax, et al: I agree -- either make EE's better and more sensible, or get rid of them. The sheer randomness is awful.

Z: I think it's OK if Montana loses players early. But if that's going to happen, they have to open up the prestige a bit so that if a team goes 30-3 w. an Elite 8, they get a clear bump in prestige. (Again, not like a BCS team, but more than it is now.) The combination of early entries plus an overly rigorous prestige cap doesn't make sense and isn't fair.

js: I would be 100% for getting rid of EE's and injuries. Or at the very least, fixing EE's so that scouting reports, etc. are meanginful, and getting rid of injuries. But my first vote would be to get rid of them ... as OR said, nice real life thought, not nice for HD.
10/20/2009 11:48 AM
jarvisb
Posts: 5 (0)
Hall of Famer
138 7
Prospect
The two issues should be tied more closely together. If it's tougher for a small school to increase their prestige--which it demonstrably is--it should also be tougher for them to lose a player early.
10/20/2009 11:59 AM
gw795
Posts: 1 (0)
Hall of Famer
62 33 1
Prospect
I can kinda see why some of these things happened to you. Montana is not an ideal place to build a college basketball dynasty. It's in one of the worst conferences in D1 basketball and is not in an ideal location. There's probably a limit to how high your prestige can get if you're in the Big Sky Conference unless you go undefeated or something. Davidson, which is in a better conference than Montana, did not see a jump in the quality of players they got during recruiting despite how much attention they were receiving after their Elite 8 run. Mid majors need to find diamonds in the rough, guys overlooked by BCS schools. Unfortunately, this is kind of WIS's fault for making it so easy to see how a recruit will turn out in college. If a guy you recruit turns out to be really good then he might leave by Jr. year, but there shouldn't be that many guys leaving early out of a school like Montana. The only mid majors who should have multiple guys leaving should be from the A10 or Conference USA.
10/20/2009 12:00 PM
daveymac
Posts: 1065 (0)
Hall of Famer
126 523 64 83
Rookie
ee's and injuries don't bother me, that's just life, hell, I think there should be more transfers and adversity :)

But Dalter is spot on about the prestige bump, I went thru this at Bethune-COokman and Richmond every year I lose EE's and yet I can't really get above a b/b+ prestige. If my guys are good enough that the NBA is coming to games then I think I should have more prestige. And if I don't have any presitge why the hell does the NBA want my underclassmen?
10/20/2009 12:05 PM
coach_billyg
Posts: 2072 (0)
Hall of Famer
92
Pro
i agree, this is a strategy game where luck is an intrinsic part because of your chance of winning each game. but, outside that, i feel luck should play as small a role as possible - if we were looking for a luck based game, clearly, we would not spend hours playing HD!

early entries are completely the opposite. the difference in your teams quality between taking the best player vs the best 3, or none vs the best 2, or none vs the best 5 as the case may sadly be, just completely dwarfs anything you can do to compensate in the regular season. scheduling, game planning, what is the point after your 4 star players are whisked away? personally, that is why i much prefer d2. after a pretty solid run through d1, most of the excitement was boiled down to the hour after the NT game when i got to see if I would be a top 1 team or a top 50 team. having that "decision" completely out of my hands just sucks, i can't imagine people enjoy it?
10/20/2009 12:07 PM
orrdc
Posts: 146 (0)
Hall of Famer
101 41
Prospect
I am with JS here, I find it hard to believe that almost anyone would miss injuries. EE I think has a place, but it should be made more customer friendly. OldR has had a good plan in the past.

Perfect example is EE out of wack is Seton Hall in knight. They made it too the 2nd round and lost THREE! Even better is that ALL three got drafted in the 2nd round. Now I know kids make mistakes blah blah but I would seriously doubt its ever happened that 3 guys leave a school after a 2nd round NT appearance and all 3 guys get drafted in the 2nd round
10/20/2009 12:08 PM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
Can someone please give me an example of exactly what they don't like, CS has asked for one and I am too busy at work to find one myself. Maybe players who should have over those that did? Or a team that goes deep and loses no one? Please include rantings.
10/20/2009 12:22 PM
wronoj
Posts: 893 (0)
Hall of Famer
179 1
Rookie
how about this-- a school with lower prestige gets a bigger bump from having someone drafted than a major-conference school.

in RL, surely a guy like Curry at Davidson, combined with their good NT run, has brought their profile up considerably (and since we have no academic issues here in HD-world, that would equate to a significant prestige bump).

And if George Mason had had 2 guys drafted the season they made the Final 4, wouldn't they have gotten a lot of looks from better players than they normally get?

So Montana loses a guy, but gets bumped to B+, or even A- if the guy is drafted high enough.
10/20/2009 12:42 PM
dalter
Posts: 71 (0)
All Star
25
Prospect
Excellent call wronoj, that had crossed my mind as well and I think is a good and fair compromise.

No question that a guy getting drafted (and even more so multiple guys over a couple seasons) means more to a school like Montana than it does to an ACC team, where players getting drafted is pretty status quo. It's a signpost to potential requests saying, "Hey, we're a player, too ... come play here and you can make the NBA!". Definitely a big deal.
10/20/2009 12:53 PM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 10/20/2009
Excellent call wronoj, that had crossed my mind as well and I think is a good and fair compromise.

No question that a guy getting drafted (and even more so multiple guys over a couple seasons) means more to a school like Montana than it does to an ACC team, where players getting drafted is pretty status quo. It's a signpost to potential requests saying, "Hey, we're a player, too ... come play here and you can make the NBA!". Definitely a big deal.



Soild idea but I don't know if that would work well, I have noticed since floating prestige came and was made seeable that prestige gained by draftees is very easily lost.
10/20/2009 1:04 PM
cmthieme
Posts: 28 (0)
Hall of Famer
37 61
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 10/20/2009
Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 10/20/2009

Excellent call wronoj, that had crossed my mind as well and I think is a good and fair compromise.

No question that a guy getting drafted (and even more so multiple guys over a couple seasons) means more to a school like Montana than it does to an ACC team, where players getting drafted is pretty status quo. It's a signpost to potential requests saying, "Hey, we're a player, too ... come play here and you can make the NBA!". Definitely a big deal.




Soild idea but I don't know if that would work well, I have noticed since floating prestige came and was made seeable that prestige gained by draftees is very easily lost.
I think that's the way it should work, and it still adresses the issue at hand. The prestige bump, even if temporary, would help the school replace the player(s) it lost.
10/20/2009 1:13 PM
cmthieme
Posts: 28 (0)
Hall of Famer
37 61
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 10/20/2009

Can someone please give me an example of exactly what they don't like, CS has asked for one and I am too busy at work to find one myself. Maybe players who should have over those that did? Or a team that goes deep and loses no one? Please include rantings.

I've had backups go pro early while my clearly-superior starters at the same position have stayed a couple times in the past few seasons. I don't have ratings, but maybe CS can take a look at the history. This past season I lost a Jr PF early while I kept a 950+ So PF that started ahead of him. I just figured it was that one was a Jr and the other a So, but that still doesn't make it very logical.

And I think what most people don't like about EE is the idea that NT success plays such a big role in the decision.
10/20/2009 1:15 PM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
Quote: Originally Posted By cmthieme on 10/20/2009
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 10/20/2009

Can someone please give me an example of exactly what they don't like, CS has asked for one and I am too busy at work to find one myself. Maybe players who should have over those that did? Or a team that goes deep and loses no one? Please include rantings.

I've had backups go pro early while my clearly-superior starters at the same position have stayed a couple times in the past few seasons.

And I think what most people don't like about EE is the idea that NT success plays such a big role in the decision.

Agreed, according to WIS it doesn't play 'too much' of a role. Do they even play their own game?
10/20/2009 1:18 PM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
The part I don't get about not just having the best players usually go pro is, if you have the best players shouldn't you be in the NT? and if you aren't well that's kinda on you as a coach already right? So since you sucked as a coach that year you get to keep your stud?
10/20/2009 1:19 PM
jbasnight
Posts: 113 (0)
Hall of Famer
3 325 8
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 10/20/2009The part I don't get about not just having the best players usually go pro is, if you have the best players shouldn't you be in the NT? and if you aren't well that's kinda on you as a coach already right? So since you sucked as a coach that year you get to keep your stud
Not to hijack the thread here, zhawks, but you're making the heroic assumption that players will play up to their ratings.
10/20/2009 1:49 PM
◂ Prev 1|2|3|4...7 Next ▸
Early Entries, Injuries and Blind Luck Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 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.