I really think the value of 30 passing (60-90) is probably more like 1.5-2 points per game.  Limited experience, though...

The RL NCAA D1 assist leader the past few years (09-10 was a bit of an anomaly unless there was some rule change):  6.4, 7.8, 8.0, 8.8, 8.4, 8.1, 8.4, 8.3, 7.7

I don't even mind the upper bound of 6apg so much (although anything more than a 1 year history of RL shows that is way too low), but I really don't like the unadvertised change moving the bound from 9ish to 6ish in the sim without any clarification.  The lack of upside variance is sort of disgusting too.  In the first 5 games this year, not one pg has more than 29 assists and this is the part of the schedule where many elite teams are crushing cupcakes.  Not 1 across D1, D2, and D3.  Just 4 seasons ago a guy finished his CAREER with an average of 6.2apg and now not one player in any div can even beat his career average in a sample of 5 games.  I had a pg a few seasons back that regularly had 5 game samples of over 55+ assists (11+apg).  

Again I'm not calling for a return of those days although the numbers I quoted seemed to show the old sim was hitting the top end bounds of the past 10 RL years much better than the current engine is.  But I would like a little clarification on what or why the adjustment was made, what the role is of assists in the current sim, and the effect of the PA ratings, and why there is no variance anymore.

Actually, the part of the season where elietes are crushing cupcakes I woudl expect LESS. . because guys are being taken out early for backups AND. . . 

In my experience the elites aren't scheduling cupcakes early in the sim, they schedule other elites.  For the SOS.

it would be a question for seble - I seem to recall that things were moved around a bit - at one point - big men never got any assists in this game - now on one of my teams I am pretty sure I have a big man close to 1.5 assists - but he is a skilled passer and he does not shoot real much.  I think this is a good thing, not a bad thing.

My opinion is real life sometimes the assist numbers you see get trumped up by minutes and abnormal offensive sets - i.e. coaching.  This game has to be in the middle of some of these things, the extremes in real life sometimes cannot be simulated, if they are man made.

but, for anyone wanting a 6-8-10 assist PG, I think the best ways to do it are, give him zero distro, start all 1 passers with him, and play him 40 minutes - I doubt your team will win, but he will get alot of assists - just like real life, man made assist leaders, on a team that does not have alot of other passing, so I think the game sort of has things like assists right - maybe not perfect, but pretty darned good.

I agree that a better analysisthan one comparing the tails is necessary, my goal was only to show that something clearly has changed. The lack of variance is also quite disturbing. We went from 5 to 6 games over night and the tails reeled even more as expected as n increases.

I don't seek a perfect engine but we need to be somewhat consistent or clear about changes. I was trying with some success to build a team around a pass-first point guard and was having success and overnight that strategy was vaporized. I've since started recruited for new strategies. I'm not lobbying here for a change to old ways just for changes to be better noted and explained. I am forced to be vocal here because most people not on the tails wouldn't even notice that a pretty big change was made to the utility of the pass rating.

Also, I never sought a 9apg point guard - I just wanted to win. I was running mostly slowdown at the time and building a program from scratch so recruited unique role players instead of a roster of interchangeable parts. It's because of that I am aware of the big change to the sim's treatment of the passing rating. I really have no vision for what the sim should be, I just operate within it. I'm not asking for a change simply pointing out that one was made to the passing rating for those that might not have noticed as quickly because they didn't live on the tail, but are still affected the same.

You made a point about extremes made in rl. The problem is actually a two way street. In hd a coach is actually able to do more extreme things than in real life because he's not limited by potentially being fired or something ridiculous like the guy in the 52 point thread who ran his guys into the red all the time. I have no issue with the goal of matching rl numbers when run under normal settings but when a large number of hd coaches run abnormal gameplans the aim shouldn't constantly be tweaked to reflect rl where their aren't so many whack jobs.

This was the crux behind the -5. Some bad teams started to run-5 to increase variance and have a higher chance of beating a better team. This is a fine strategy. Well as more and more coaches ran -5, the 3 point rates across the league went up. So admin adjusted those 3 point rates down to match rl where fewer teams completely leave the perimeter unguarded. As a result, the penalty for running -5 dropped in hd and running -5 every game became a realistic approach. Naturally 3 pt rates rose again and admin reduced league wide 3 pt rates again exacerbating the problem of negative 5.