Quote: Originally Posted By furry_nipps on 12/27/2009

The fact you would have 10+ teams as a more quality win then beating the national champion means your system in general needs more shoring up. There is no way that beating the best team in that world is not the most quality win. The overall team rating SOS focuses on W-L based on the TALENT of the opponent, rather than the PERFORMANCE of the opponent. You can't accurately and concretely measure team TALENT in real life, in this game and in many games you can, so I say why not use it? Just no way. You can't make any arguement against that. If you beat the best team, that is better then beating the 16th best team. Agreed and my real life rankings say this, but when you're talking about better and best teams, you also have to ask yourself, TALENT or PERFORMANCE...in real life there's only one...in this game, there's both. Period.

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/27/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By isack24 on 12/27/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/27/2009

If the ratings determine the outcomes in the game....I think they work for themselves...

Except that not all of the ratings affect actual gameplay. That seems to be the major flaw here.

The overalls need adjustment admittedly, I would eliminate WE-DU-ST while adding IQ and potentially FT shooting in an ideal world. I also want to base a team's overall rating based upon the minutes that specifically rated guys play...the overalls need shoring up no doubt....I'll give you that all day

Quote: Originally Posted By a_in_the_b on 12/27/2009Ok, plainer english: First, there is a positional penalty for being more than two steps away from your original position> SO, in the example of the team composed of Point guards and shooting guards, the ones of those playing at small forward and center don't even get the full benefit of their rankings. And then there is the fact that their rankings, while good, are unlikely to be well suited for post play. Its would be a tricky situation really, I'd perhaps use the NBA sim % numbers where generally you get your main position at 100%, secondary at 90%, 3rd at 80%, 4th at 70%, 5th at 60%. With that said, the situation is extremely unlikely and if a player wants to set up his/her team that way, then he/she will suffer the consequences. If I came across a team with 12 players at the same position, I would attempt to make an adjustment.

Incidentally, the person using the word "Retrodictive", while I know what it means, has little standing to complain about someone else not using 'lay terms" I'm sorry about that, but there really isn't a could opposite for predictive...I honestly don't like using the term retrodictive and wish there was something simpler. I wasn't trying to say that you were being "too smart for me" per se, I just didn't understand what you wanted me to reply to, the way it was written.

Quote: Originally Posted By furry_nipps on 12/27/2009So you would ignore my performance and put the national champion as the 10th or so most talented team rather then the most talented team? I don't think you can say the team who won the NT isn't the most talented team no matter what the ratings say. They won it all for a reason, no?

Quote: Originally Posted By a_in_the_b on 12/27/2009No problem, as I have actually said earlier somewhere in this morass of posts, with it being a component of SOS. Just can't agree with it being the entirety of SOS.

Quote: Originally Posted By furry_nipps on 12/27/2009So you would ignore my performance and put the national champion as the 10th or so most talented team rather then the most talented team? In a ranking that solely uses an adjusted overall team rating as SOS, yes. I don't think you can say the team who won the NT isn't the most talented team no matter what the ratings say. They won it all for a reason, no? The most talented teams in real life don't always win National Titles either...85 Georgetown comes to mind. You won your NT(s) on more than talent alone obviously, you won it through coaching, offense/defense, and other factors that contributed to your team's talent. If I were to do a TALENT SOS ranking in real life, I would be ridiculed mercilessly and rightfully so...I would not and could not argue that, but games like these give you that behind the scenes access and ratings that you could never attempt to gain in real life. In real life, you judge TALENT based off of PERFORMANCE, in this game you judge TALENT based off of RATINGS...its an interesting dynamic, to me at least.

Quote: Originally Posted By a_in_the_b on 12/27/2009
Except you CAN'T accurately measure talent. YOu can accurately measure the COMPONENTS of talent. The individual categories that make it up. But not the aggregate. A 40 speed and an 80 Athleticism is an equal aggregate to an 80 speed and a 40 Athleticism, but in the context of the game they mean vastly different things about the player.