Quote: Originally Posted By kmasonbx on 1/18/2010

There's an easy example from college basketball of a kid regressing, Julius Hodge won ACC POY as a junior, shot slightly over 50% his junior year shot a respectable 36% from 3, and for his career was over 80% from the line. His senior year he shot under 44% from the field, under 25% from the field and shot 60% from the line.

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 1/18/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By kmasonbx on 1/18/2010

There's an easy example from college basketball of a kid regressing, Julius Hodge won ACC POY as a junior, shot slightly over 50% his junior year shot a respectable 36% from 3, and for his career was over 80% from the line. His senior year he shot under 44% from the field, under 25% from the field and shot 60% from the line.

Actually, Hodge shot 50% from the field as a senior as well. His ft and 3pt percentages did drop, but considering he was an 82% ft shooter as a soph and jr, I'd bet anything that was some kind of weird confidence issue. 82% ft shooters don't just become 67% ft shooters overnight.

You also conveniently out the fact that as a junior, Hodge had almost as many to's as assists, and as a senior he improved that dramatically to a nearly 2:1 ratio. That's a really major improvement. And isack's right, you can throw out anecdotal examples on both sides, but they prove nothing. Again, not that it doesn't happen, but the fact remains that it happens much, much, much more in HD than in real life.

(You want a kid who regressed, here's a blast from the past for you: Antoine Joubert.)

Quote: Originally Posted By kmasonbx on 1/18/2010
Dalter, just because the majority of the most talented players leave early, doesn't mean the majority of players leave early. The vast majority of D1 players stay their whole 4 years. I would estimate on average their are 50 players from each senior class that went pro early, it's not really a big #.

Yes, but in that context, we are only looking at kids who would otherwise have a good chance to be drafted, so that's actually a huge number.

So the sample size of players not getting much better from their junior to senior year is really big.

And no, that doesn't mean that the rest of those players are not getting better from junior to senior year. It just means they're not part of the uber-talented group that was good enough to leave early for the pros.

And using the players leave early argument is an awful one when comparing it to HD, because players leave early in HD also. So if the most talented players leave early in both real life and HD and the most talented players are the one who keep improving, why is it a surprise that the players that hang around in HD don't improve?

I didn't say that it's the most talented players that keep improving.

Your argument was that the reason seniors aren't top draft picks is because they stop improving. I said no, the reason is because the best players leave early, and those are the top draft picks.

Isack, when I say the college games are sloppier I'm not talking about player skills, I'm talking about player knowledge, guys making mental mistakes. Taking bad shots, not making the right pass, driving into 3 defenders, throwing lob passes that have no hope of working, not anticipating how the defense to react to what they do. In the NBA players pick up on this stuff and and are thinking 2 steps ahead, while college players are usually thinking in the moment.

My point is, don't say it's unrealistic that players stop improving, because it is, the evidence is there. Just watch a lot of college basketball. Look at it like this how many players decide to come back for their junior year and then improve their draft stock because of their improvement their senior year? I can't think of 1, the reason should be obvious.

If you want to say since this is a game we should be able to continue to improve our players throughout their career then that's fine. But it's actually very realistic players plateau at some point during their college career, it's actually unrealisitic if the majority of players continued to improve their skills throughout their college career.

I couldn't disagree more. I covered college basketball. I have numerous friends that cover college and pro sports. I don't know anyone who is of that opinion.

That's the first issue. The second issue: Let's suspend disbelief for a moment and say that most players stop improving in real life. Fine. But the real question we need to ask is whether that's the best approach for HD, and I'd say that even if it is that way in real life, it's certainly not the best set-up for HD.

Quote: Originally Posted By kmasonbx on 1/18/2010
Dalter, just because the majority of the most talented players leave early, doesn't mean the majority of players leave early. The vast majority of D1 players stay their whole 4 years. I would estimate on average their are 50 players from each senior class that went pro early, it's not really a big #. So the sample size of players not getting much better from their junior to senior year is really big. And using the players leave early argument is an awful one when comparing it to HD, because players leave early in HD also. So if the most talented players leave early in both real life and HD and the most talented players are the one who keep improving, why is it a surprise that the players that hang around in HD don't improve?

Isack, when I say the college games are sloppier I'm not talking about player skills, I'm talking about player knowledge, guys making mental mistakes. Taking bad shots, not making the right pass, driving into 3 defenders, throwing lob passes that have no hope of working, not anticipating how the defense to react to what they do. In the NBA players pick up on this stuff and and are thinking 2 steps ahead, while college players are usually thinking in the moment.

You said they get stronger and more athletic (or something like that). It's true, they do. Males don't peak phusically until their mid-20s.

The stuff that you're saying is correct, too, but the fact is that these guys are capable of getting better. Whether they do is another question.

My point is, don't say it's unrealistic that players stop improving, because it is, the evidence is there.

It's unrealistic that ALL players with a WE over 20 stop improving.

Just watch a lot of college basketball. Look at it like this how many players decide to come back for their junior year and then improve their draft stock because of their improvement their senior year? I can't think of 1, the reason should be obvious.

That's not even close to true. I already gave you two off the top of my head, and essentially everyone who is drafted as a senior improved their draft position.

The reason that this argument is faulty is that drafted players are top-tier players. I'm not talking about those guys necessarily. I'm talking about everyone. Second-tier players aren't going to get drafted regardless, but that doesn't mean they aren't getting better.

If you want to say since this is a game we should be able to continue to improve our players throughout their career then that's fine. But it's actually very realistic players plateau at some point during their college career, it's actually unrealisitic if the majority of players continued to improve their skills throughout their college career.

You're not basing that on anything other than your opinion.

Quote: Originally Posted By isack24 on 1/18/2010
Haha, I've done the same thing plenty of times. Really makes you not want to respond. I won't call it a win - we'll just agree to disagree :)

In the end, you're going to win, because WiS isn't going to change it anyway.