Posted by isack24 on 7/26/2012 10:32:00 AM (view original):

Posted by disasteruss on 7/26/2012 7:53:00 AM (view original):
Well, I mean if you want to look at it that way, no teams run a defense 100% of the time ever. Most teams mix zone and man, trap occasionally, and double teams randomly (not constantly). It's just a pointless argument to say "No team runs FCP exactly like HD", because no team does anything exactly like HD.

I was just pointing out that there are teams that are founded upon a pressing defense principle.

Not to be a dick, but I don't really think you're getting the point.  No one plays HD's version of FCP ever, at any point throughout the game.  The tag "press" doesn't demand a parallel.  Read what the HD press actually is.  It's not a real defense.  No team runs non-stop frontcourt traps.  I can't really think of a team ever doing that outside of the last couple minutes of a game.  If WIS' version picked up full court but then dropped into a pressure man-to-man, you would have a point.  But there is nothing in the real world like what WIS' FCP does in the frontcourt, and none of the real life examples offered are comparable other than that they are labeled "press defenses."

And I agree with jslot.  Almost no teams have a true defensive mix.  Teams just have one base defense and move to something else for a reason, not just because they can.

I was going to let this go, but, isack, you're wrong.  Paul Westhead's Loyola Marymount team in '89-'90 was a true FB/FCP team.   I would grant that the team defense constantly broke down, but that was virtually the point (and that Hank Gathers passed away on the court).

A more current example is Grinnell College.  Here's an article that discusses the "system": Grinnell College star shatters Division III record with 89 points.  

The problem with HD is that FCP teams simply do not have enough defensive break downs.  Unquestionably, the combination defenses (press/M2M & press/zone) should be the norm and not FCP.  Here's a thought: pressing teams should get fatigued much more quickly than at present.  Pure FCP teams (whatever offense) should not be able to run slowdown and fatigue effects should be increased.  FB/FCP should not even be allowed to run at normal tempo!

I hope that the changes I suggest in the paragraph above make sense to everyone, receive many seconds, and are implemented soon by CS.  If done properly, then I strongly believe that this game would be greatly improved without revamping the engine entirely.  

Thanks, Rogelio.  The lack of defensive breakdowns was one of my major original points.  There should be more games where even a good FCP team gets blown away for at ;east a portion of the game.  The other suggestion makes perfect sense as well.  FCP teams cant double team because they essential double team on every possession.  Same should go for  FAST break offenses, they should have to play uptempo.

+1

Posted by rogelio on 7/26/2012 10:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by isack24 on 7/26/2012 10:32:00 AM (view original):

Posted by disasteruss on 7/26/2012 7:53:00 AM (view original):
Well, I mean if you want to look at it that way, no teams run a defense 100% of the time ever. Most teams mix zone and man, trap occasionally, and double teams randomly (not constantly). It's just a pointless argument to say "No team runs FCP exactly like HD", because no team does anything exactly like HD.

I was just pointing out that there are teams that are founded upon a pressing defense principle.

Not to be a dick, but I don't really think you're getting the point.  No one plays HD's version of FCP ever, at any point throughout the game.  The tag "press" doesn't demand a parallel.  Read what the HD press actually is.  It's not a real defense.  No team runs non-stop frontcourt traps.  I can't really think of a team ever doing that outside of the last couple minutes of a game.  If WIS' version picked up full court but then dropped into a pressure man-to-man, you would have a point.  But there is nothing in the real world like what WIS' FCP does in the frontcourt, and none of the real life examples offered are comparable other than that they are labeled "press defenses."

And I agree with jslot.  Almost no teams have a true defensive mix.  Teams just have one base defense and move to something else for a reason, not just because they can.

I was going to let this go, but, isack, you're wrong.  Paul Westhead's Loyola Marymount team in '89-'90 was a true FB/FCP team.   I would grant that the team defense constantly broke down, but that was virtually the point (and that Hank Gathers passed away on the court).

A more current example is Grinnell College.  Here's an article that discusses the "system": Grinnell College star shatters Division III record with 89 points.  

The problem with HD is that FCP teams simply do not have enough defensive break downs.  Unquestionably, the combination defenses (press/M2M & press/zone) should be the norm and not FCP.  Here's a thought: pressing teams should get fatigued much more quickly than at present.  Pure FCP teams (whatever offense) should not be able to run slowdown and fatigue effects should be increased.  FB/FCP should not even be allowed to run at normal tempo!

I hope that the changes I suggest in the paragraph above make sense to everyone, receive many seconds, and are implemented soon by CS.  If done properly, then I strongly believe that this game would be greatly improved without revamping the engine entirely.  

Sorry, rogelio, either you're mistaken about LMU/Grinnell, or you don't understand what the HD FCP actually is.

The HD FCP is 100% trapping in the frontcourt AT ALL TIMES.  I'm familiar with both the Gathers/Kimble LMU and Grinnell's system.  Neither of those teams did/do that.  Here's video evidence:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Slk4sgw8G4c

See the 2:05 mark for a good shot of LMU's man-to-man defense.  There was no trapping in the frontcourt; it was straight man-to-man.  That would NEVER happen in HD's FCP.  See the 2:35 mark for evidence that they didn't press on every possession.  

As for Grinnell, I don't really think that article explains anything about their defense, but they don't even play halfcourt defense.  Yes, they play a fullcourt trapping defense, and it's the closest thing that exists to HD FCP.  Maybe you can count that, I guess.

I think the problem is that people are just trying to find teams that run as uptempo as possible; a team that presses on every possession.  But people are ignoring that HD FCP requires a full halfcourt trapping defense at all times, on every possession.  No team would ever run that because it's ridiculous and, as you noted, would have massive breakdowns.

Also, see my first post on this thread in which I state the biggest problem: there's no way you could run this with ten people.  They would all be dead tired by the end of the first half.

"Maybe you can count that, I guess."   Apology accepted!     Take a look at this paper & this site. 

I can't resist pointing out that the example you provide to defeat the straw man argument, that you accuse me of taking, is trivial.  Tarkanian's 1990 UNLV team could roll up most any college team's defense and force them to do something else; especially a team that was trying to outrun them.  I'm not sure that proves very much.

We agree far more than we disagree.  HD's FCP is much more effective than it should be.  If a team did try to run it, then the games would look like the system run by Grinnell/LMU.    My point is that the game would be substantially improved by the changes that I suggested.  The point of those changes is to make it unlikely that a team could have enough of a stamina advantage over its opponent to successfully run FCP all the time.  Your thoughts?

As an aside, there is a such thing as a 1-3-1 trap (it's not just for hockey).  The thing to note about any halfcourt trap is that it attempts to trap only certain areas of the floor, rather than everywhere and at all times.  An FCP team could be imagined to be trapping only in certain areas once the ball crosses midcourt.  

This suggests another game fix for the team defenses. That would be to have 3 skills to practice: m2m, zone & trap.  Then allow the in-game defense to be FCP, 3/4 court, 1/2 court, & normal with regressing fatigue adjustments.  As an example, a 1-3-1 trapping team would need to be proficient in zone & trap (it's basically a 3-2 defense with the posts stacked).  Another example, a team that did anything greater than the "normal" setting would need to have some proficiency in the trap skill or be abused.

I like this latter idea as well, but it is a much bigger change to the game than my original suggestion.

Just found this discussion, and as a former basketball coach (in real life) I have to agree with those criticizing how HD does the FCP. There is just no reality at all to how it's done here. We used to LOVE when even good teams FCP'd us, because we knew how to break one, and crushed them. In HD, unless the team applying the press is just awful, that rarely happens. It's been a frustration with me since I started at D-3.

Posted by milwood on 7/26/2012 10:29:00 PM (view original):
Thanks, Rogelio.  The lack of defensive breakdowns was one of my major original points.  There should be more games where even a good FCP team gets blown away for at ;east a portion of the game.  The other suggestion makes perfect sense as well.  FCP teams cant double team because they essential double team on every possession.  Same should go for  FAST break offenses, they should have to play uptempo.

+1

Good FCP teams do get blown away for portions of the game and lose to inferior opponents more often (at least, IMHO) than other defenses.  It's much more of a crapshoot than M2M or Zone.

And I've never understood why a FB/FCP team would want to run anything but uptempo.  I certainly never do.

Posted by girt25 on 7/25/2012 5:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by isack24 on 7/25/2012 4:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by disasteruss on 7/25/2012 3:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by isack24 on 7/25/2012 1:53:00 PM (view original):
No team has ever run 40 minutes of FCP/trapping the way that HD's FCP is supposed to be run.  It's a totally ludicrous defense and you would need 10 players with staminas of "120" to even come close to pulling it off in real life.

On another note, I like how I now import HD ratings to real life players.  Andrew Goudelock is lights out.  He's like a 97 per.

Well, considering Arkansas and UAB both ran a defense called "40 minutes of hell", I would tend to disagree. It's not super common, but some teams do it. Bruce Pearl did it at UWM/Tennessee. VCU has done it. Alabama is trying to run something similar now. You just have to have a good amount of depth who are willing to run up and down the floor.

Anyway, as far as the FCP goes in HD, you see an inordinate amount of it for a couple of reasons. The biggest is that it seems like everyone basically dismisses the non FCP and M2M defenses. I'd say it's a pretty even split between those two.

They can call it whatever they want, I watched those games, as I watched Pearl wt UT and UWM.  None of those teams pressed 100% of the time in the backcourt AND ran full-game-long double team traps in the frontcourt for 40 straight minutes.

And no, St. John's wasn't even close to doing that, either.

Exactly.

I don't care if a coach calls a defense "40 Minutes of Full Court Press that is Exactly Like They Play it in Hoops Dynasty", it matters what's happening on the court. And there's zero question that no DI team has ever run a press that really even resembles HD's version. The Nolan Richardson teams basically had a hard halfcourt press/trap and fell back into pressure man-to-man. It wasn't even close to the HD model of pressing all the time.

What exactly is "HD's Version" ... since we have no people doing any running at all and it is just some calculation done with a couple of attributes that are important.