Posted by emy1013 on 4/18/2012 2:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/18/2012 2:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by emy1013 on 4/18/2012 1:44:00 PM (view original):
Isack, according to the original developer of the game, the more a defense packs in, the more fouls they are supposed to commit.  More hands and bodies in a smaller area theory, I guess.  That's probably why Nacho is taking that stance.

One thing that I DO find amusing though is that I don't recall Nacho posting on the forums about how fouls were generated when he was leading the country in foul differential earlier this season.  Apparently it was working as intended then.  Only when it went against his team was the engine not working correctly.

Emy, do you know what it feels like when being a dick backfires and makes you look like a jackass???

Take a look at these two forum topics and the dates they were posted:

http://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?TopicID=438659&TopicsTimeframe=180

http://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?TopicID=444123&TopicsTimeframe=0&TopicsPage=2

Sorry, I missed your one little discussion on the topic despite having been starting threads about this exact same topic for over a year now. You sure do know a lot for a guy that doesn't seem to have a clue what's going on around here. Nicely try though, keep it up and maybe one day your weak sauce comments won't make you sound like a kardashian.

So you posted another thread in a forum that no one reads almost a year ago, ******** about the exact same thing as in this thread.  Wow, pardon me for missing that one!

Posted by acn24 on 4/18/2012 2:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by emy1013 on 4/18/2012 2:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/18/2012 2:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by emy1013 on 4/18/2012 1:44:00 PM (view original):
Isack, according to the original developer of the game, the more a defense packs in, the more fouls they are supposed to commit.  More hands and bodies in a smaller area theory, I guess.  That's probably why Nacho is taking that stance.

One thing that I DO find amusing though is that I don't recall Nacho posting on the forums about how fouls were generated when he was leading the country in foul differential earlier this season.  Apparently it was working as intended then.  Only when it went against his team was the engine not working correctly.

Emy, do you know what it feels like when being a dick backfires and makes you look like a jackass???

Take a look at these two forum topics and the dates they were posted:

http://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?TopicID=438659&TopicsTimeframe=180

http://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?TopicID=444123&TopicsTimeframe=0&TopicsPage=2

Sorry, I missed your one little discussion on the topic despite having been starting threads about this exact same topic for over a year now. You sure do know a lot for a guy that doesn't seem to have a clue what's going on around here. Nicely try though, keep it up and maybe one day your weak sauce comments won't make you sound like a kardashian.

So you posted another thread in a forum that no one reads almost a year ago, ******** about the exact same thing as in this thread.  Wow, pardon me for missing that one!

And it reinforces your final point that this only gets brought up when it goes against his team.

Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/18/2012 3:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by emy1013 on 4/18/2012 2:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/18/2012 2:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by emy1013 on 4/18/2012 1:44:00 PM (view original):
Isack, according to the original developer of the game, the more a defense packs in, the more fouls they are supposed to commit.  More hands and bodies in a smaller area theory, I guess.  That's probably why Nacho is taking that stance.

One thing that I DO find amusing though is that I don't recall Nacho posting on the forums about how fouls were generated when he was leading the country in foul differential earlier this season.  Apparently it was working as intended then.  Only when it went against his team was the engine not working correctly.

Emy, do you know what it feels like when being a dick backfires and makes you look like a jackass???

Take a look at these two forum topics and the dates they were posted:

http://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?TopicID=438659&TopicsTimeframe=180

http://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?TopicID=444123&TopicsTimeframe=0&TopicsPage=2

Sorry, I missed your one little discussion on the topic despite having been starting threads about this exact same topic for over a year now. You sure do know a lot for a guy that doesn't seem to have a clue what's going on around here. Nicely try though, keep it up and maybe one day your weak sauce comments won't make you sound like a kardashian.

So you posted another thread in a forum that no one reads almost a year ago, ******** about the exact same thing as in this thread.  Wow, pardon me for missing that one!

Oh, you're excused, something tells me there is a lot of stuff that slips past you. And if you're refering to the two different threads that were placed specifically in a HD forum created by the admin and labelled "Suggestions" as the one that nobody reads then it only re-confirms my notion that was exactly the best place to put it - somewhere trolls like yourself don't bother going because nobody will see their retardedly pretentious comments and also potentially monitored by those who have the ability actually make the game better.

Posted by isack24 on 4/18/2012 2:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/18/2012 1:57:00 PM (view original):
I hope this goes on as long as needed. It's not that I don't think a sagging zone is a bad way to go about limiting the drive, but I don't think it had that large of an impact on my offense, which I've already gone on at length about. It's not conducive to limiting fouls because more defensive bodies that are in the area of a offensive player increases the chances for one of them to commit a foul. Which is more likely to end in a foul: one player trying to block a driving shot in the lane or three peope trying to block a shot in the lane? Plus, I've specifically seen it in more than one place on this site's helpful information (not forums) that playing a negative defensive setting can increase a team's probability of committing fouls.

I haven't been disingenuous in the slightest, and I never tried to hide that point one bit. But the 12 of  those previous14 they made that half were the the only reason they were in the game. If they would have only gone 9 for 13 then we wouldn't have needed to start fouling, which is just one less foul on me, so I don't even want to even get started on what would happen if I could have gone 4-4 instead of 2-2 on their 4 fouls. 

The first paragraph all operates under the assumption that you're getting in the lane at the same frequency.  A sagging zone prevents people from even getting into the lane where all those appendanges are flailing wildly.

Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/18/2012 4:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by acn24 on 4/18/2012 2:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by emy1013 on 4/18/2012 2:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/18/2012 2:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by emy1013 on 4/18/2012 1:44:00 PM (view original):
Isack, according to the original developer of the game, the more a defense packs in, the more fouls they are supposed to commit.  More hands and bodies in a smaller area theory, I guess.  That's probably why Nacho is taking that stance.

One thing that I DO find amusing though is that I don't recall Nacho posting on the forums about how fouls were generated when he was leading the country in foul differential earlier this season.  Apparently it was working as intended then.  Only when it went against his team was the engine not working correctly.

Emy, do you know what it feels like when being a dick backfires and makes you look like a jackass???

Take a look at these two forum topics and the dates they were posted:

http://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?TopicID=438659&TopicsTimeframe=180

http://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?TopicID=444123&TopicsTimeframe=0&TopicsPage=2

Sorry, I missed your one little discussion on the topic despite having been starting threads about this exact same topic for over a year now. You sure do know a lot for a guy that doesn't seem to have a clue what's going on around here. Nicely try though, keep it up and maybe one day your weak sauce comments won't make you sound like a kardashian.

So you posted another thread in a forum that no one reads almost a year ago, ******** about the exact same thing as in this thread.  Wow, pardon me for missing that one!

And it reinforces your final point that this only gets brought up when it goes against his team.

hahaha, now that's precious, keep backing up the guy who just got squared the F away. Especially, by linking it to the exchange directly after he pulls a full douche with his sorry comeback. The only thing people dislike more than a douche is his lacky. 

Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/18/2012 4:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by isack24 on 4/18/2012 2:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/18/2012 1:57:00 PM (view original):
I hope this goes on as long as needed. It's not that I don't think a sagging zone is a bad way to go about limiting the drive, but I don't think it had that large of an impact on my offense, which I've already gone on at length about. It's not conducive to limiting fouls because more defensive bodies that are in the area of a offensive player increases the chances for one of them to commit a foul. Which is more likely to end in a foul: one player trying to block a driving shot in the lane or three peope trying to block a shot in the lane? Plus, I've specifically seen it in more than one place on this site's helpful information (not forums) that playing a negative defensive setting can increase a team's probability of committing fouls.

I haven't been disingenuous in the slightest, and I never tried to hide that point one bit. But the 12 of  those previous14 they made that half were the the only reason they were in the game. If they would have only gone 9 for 13 then we wouldn't have needed to start fouling, which is just one less foul on me, so I don't even want to even get started on what would happen if I could have gone 4-4 instead of 2-2 on their 4 fouls. 

The first paragraph all operates under the assumption that you're getting in the lane at the same frequency.  A sagging zone prevents people from even getting into the lane where all those appendanges are flailing wildly.

That may be the case in real life, but when it comes to how the engine works that can only be conjecture at best, and I'm honestly not trying to be rude when I say that.

I don't know why this piece of information about the game can simply be treated as if it probably doesn't apply anymore? It came from the people that made the game and I haven't seen this information refuted anywhere or said to not apply anymore, especially considering how few and far between change is around here if it concerns the engine, though it has come along way.

Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/18/2012 3:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by acn24 on 4/18/2012 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/18/2012 12:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by acn24 on 4/18/2012 11:45:00 AM (view original):

Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/18/2012 10:44:00 AM (view original):
acn24, missing a few free throws in the first half is a sympton of the real problem. In the first half, my team only committed 6 fouls (only two of which were by a starting player), and with only one as a shooting foul the other team went 1 for 1 from the free throw line; while the other team committed 11 fouls, putting us in the bonus with 10 minutes remaining in the half, and we went 8 for 18. However, in the second half, my team committed 16 fouls (10 of those coming before the intentionals) with 4 of the first 7 being shooting fouls and reaching the bonus with 8 minutes remaining, and going 22 for 27 from the line in the half; while my opponent managed to only commit 4 total fouls in the second half, with only one being a shooting foul, limiting us to 2 for 2 from the line.

There is no reason for this wild of a swing in fouls, especially given that (without my RS or their walkon taken into account) my team is at a minimun 10 points better than this opponent in each ATH, SP, and DEF ratings, a much better STM rating, superior IQs in both offense and defense, and my opponent playing -3 defensive positioning. If randomness can account for such a wild swing for these two halfs and between these two teams then there is a serious problem with how fouls are determined by the engine. 

You still keep counting the intentionals.  6 fouls to 10 is a huge swing?  Given that they switched to extreme sagging, and the 11 fouls in the first half is almost their entire per game average a reduction in fouls for IW makes sense.  

I agree with Isack, you had the better team and probably win 7 or 8 times out of 10, but honestly out of your two losses this one makes a lot more sense than your offense getting shut down and being blown out by NJ Tech.

Again, the swing isn't entirely based on my defensive performance. Besides, I've dredged all the literature (FAQ's and whatnot) on this site and I've never read anything relating to the positive enfluence negative defensive settings have on preventing fouls, everything I've found actually conveys the opposite notion.

Fact:  You only matched your season high in fouls because of 6 intentional fouls in the last 44 seconds of the game.  You keep ignoring this fact.  In the normal flow of the game you had 16, right in line with your average.

Fact:  While you keep touting the fact that you were #1 in foul margin, that was built primarily against man and press teams.  In 4 games against human coached zone teams prior to the NT, (and removing 2 intentional fouls at the end of the Pitt, Johnstown game) your foul margin was 5 per game, which would have tied you for 16th.  That would be slightly ahead of Incarnate Word.

Fact:  On the season, you committed more fouls than Incarnate Word.  They were #7 in fouls committed, you were #13.  Zone teams commit fewer fouls than man or press teams. 

The foul situation in this game was not outrageous.  It wasn't the reason you lost this game.  You lost because you couldn't hit FTs, didn't have the lineup to exploit the zone's weakness on the boards and couldn't force as many TOs as you usually did.  I get that you were a 1 seed that lost to a 16, and this is an upset, but I get the feeling you want everyone to agree with you on what a travesty this is.  It isn't.  I've seen much worse upsets in WIS and certainly in real life.

Just because you put the word Fact in front of what your about to say doesn't actually make it true, let alone a actual fact. Here is an example, I never ignored or  downplayed those six fouls and I just previously addressed that, so it's not a "Fact" but rather a rhetorical device to discredit me by making me look like a liar. Wow, I'm still very impressed considering two of those zone teams have top 25 rpi's and against them my foul margin was -7.5 (still good enough for #3), and that I ran uptempo the other times against a respectable zone team so those numbers are skewed a bit. As for the third of your not so persuasive fact list, if you remove the game between my team and Incarnate Word then I averaged 14.862 and they averaged 14.76 (only .095 of a percentage point behind), roughly ranking us in the 5 and 6 range. And given my SOS & half season of uptempo along with Incrn Words less than stellar SOS, I think it's safe to assume which one of these teams was really better at not committing fouls.

Oh, and if you're gonna bring up team fouling averages then let's not forget to point out which team was better at drawing fouls, you wouldn't want somebody to insinuate that you were being untruthful for no reason. That stat stays just as high (if not a touch more) for the average of only my non-conf and regular tempo games as well.

I've already shown in previous posts and at length how I don't have any issues with how my offense performed. Plus, my FT average for the 2nd half was 100%, lulz. What I did find extremely interesting was your interpretation that I couldn't exploit the rebounding weakness of a zone team that played an average of defense setting of -4, ESPECIALLY given the pecular pieces of data that show I actually out rebounded him, though he did get 2 more off. boards, but we still managed to grab at least 10.

Posted by nachopuzzle on 4/18/2012 5:56:00 PM (view original):
acn24, that was getting way to long for me. Honestly, how many times have I addressed those last 6 fouls in the final seconds of the game let alone never tried to mask their existence in the first place, or those FT. As a thought experient, lets pretend my team committed two (though I only need one) less fouls but they still managed to go 12 for 12 from the line before my team began; now, based on purely this reduction in fouls and not points, my team has much higher odds of being able to tie the game.

If the -5 2-3 zone is this magical then I'm surprised all the people that still run press because they feel the same way about it haven't switched yet. There are consequences for playing that way though or else the wouldn't be at all. Twenty-five percent of my FG attempts were 3 pointers (excluding a last second fullcourt shot), of which we made 50%, and I'm fine with getting at least 10 off. boards and more total rebounds against that settings. I've used both and always thought a 2-3 was much better at rebounding than man, how could it not be with 3 defenders continuously located in the spots most likely to see deflections from missed shots.

I'm not making a crazy bat**** claim that the engine is out to get my team, just that the criteria for determining when and to whom a fould is assests in much to random . And it does make me feel like I'm taking crazy pills because people always say that's just one of those 5% or 1% games, but I hear that cliche much too often for that to be the case.  

I would say that by the mere fact that Nacho was a 1 seed who lost to a 16 seed, he did get screwed.  At the same time, without those 'screwings', a season would be over after the regular season, right?
   At the same time, I have also seen a wide disparity in fouling even when using similar settings and playing like-teams.  I also was understanding that + settings definetely increased fouls while - settings wouldn't have a factor.  I think we all agree the + definetely increases fouls but the - seems to be somewhat random.  If the - settings prevent the penetration, then no increase in fouls.  However, if the team is able to penetrate, the personal fouls go way up, especially at higher - settings.  Can any experts provide their thoughts on that?
  

Posted by tbird9423 on 4/18/2012 9:34:00 PM (view original):

I would say that by the mere fact that Nacho was a 1 seed who lost to a 16 seed, he did get screwed.  At the same time, without those 'screwings', a season would be over after the regular season, right?
   At the same time, I have also seen a wide disparity in fouling even when using similar settings and playing like-teams.  I also was understanding that + settings definetely increased fouls while - settings wouldn't have a factor.  I think we all agree the + definetely increases fouls but the - seems to be somewhat random.  If the - settings prevent the penetration, then no increase in fouls.  However, if the team is able to penetrate, the personal fouls go way up, especially at higher - settings.  Can any experts provide their thoughts on that?