it depends on the team OR...if you have one or two guys that are head-and-shoulders above everyone else on the team offensively, then sure they are going to get the bulk of the shots no matter who you face.

But not every team is built like that. Some teams have balanced scoring, or a lot of talented offensive options that are relatively close in ability...and who they go to that night depends on matchups and who has the hot hand. Look at the Celtics in the playoffs, on any given night Rondo, Pierce, Allen, Garnett, or even little Nate Robinson off the bench could end up getting the most shots. In this series vs. the Lakers they have not been relying on their leading scorer, Paul Pierce, as much because he has a bad matchup with a strong defender(Artest).

My local pro team, the Golden State Warriors, is coached by Don Nelson who is known as a master of exploiting matchups. The Warriors Had 11 different players lead their team in scoring this past season. 11!

Some coaches and teams might be ultra-rigid with distro, but clearly not all of them. Matchups and knowing how to exploit them are an important part of basketball.

Yeah, I look at the oldder suns. Johnson, Richardson, Nash, Marion, Amare etc... All could just go off.

in college ball it doesn't make sense not to look for advantages. Otherwise why scout, watch games or even run some of the opponents sets prior to the matchup? That may be the case with AAU games where you may know next to nothing about the opponent. Just roll the ball out there and tell them to go get 'em. As John Wooden said, "Failing to prepare, is preparing to fail".

Unless the two players OR mentions are vastly better than their teammates it doesn't make sense that a third player, it could be a different guy each night, steps up and has a game better than his numbers suggest. Even occasionally surpassing one of the stars.

Such was the case that mjp8 brought up. Against a freshman center his big guy scores 22 points vs. his normal 11+ average.

here's some numbers from the past UWGB team. Although I didn't watch any of their games this season it looks like 2-3 guys were the primary producers on offense but others did occasionally step up;

seasonsingle game
Fletcher 15.8 pts always got his looks with no game less than 8 fga
Perine 13.4 pts no game less than 6 fga
Cotton 12.7 pts 9/16 3pts, 36 pts
Berry 7.7 pts 7/9 fg, 19 pts, 11 reb
Pearson 6.4 pts 7/10 fg, 17 pts
Evans 4.9 pts 5/9 3pts, 19 pts
Barkley 3.7 pts 6/12 fg, 14 pts
Smith 3.2 pts 5/6 fg, 13 pts
Nelson 2.3 pts 3/4 fg, 7 pts

maybe coach Tod saw that -4 zone and brought Evans in for his 19 pt game.

I like the increased scoring from my starters. With the old engine, I never had more than 2 players average in double-figures. My Bluefield St. team (Smith DII), currently has all 5 starters in double-figures

interesting about the numbers Ig and thx for putting in the work and effort, well done - coach tod (they call him coach K believe it or not - LOL) would have a heart attack - running plays for seth evans - coach k is really not a patient man, he might take a baseball bat to someone suggesting such a thing

evans did get 19 against a d2 school

they really don't run plays for anyone except cotton, fletcher, perrine and pearson

but the most important point of all this, a guy like barkley, who started, did not get his big games due to matchups, his 14 pt game he was guarding by a kid who might get drafted, in his 11 pt game, it was vs john leuer from the badgers, a complete mismatch (barkley was not playing by seasons end), points for guys like this come more as result of luck, throwing in a transition layup or a uncontested putback, or lucking in a few 3's, not due to plays being run by his team - he is instructed to stay away from the ball

I could give a like story for each player's successful games.

I have read some real scouting reports, they are indeed long, the ones I saw were 3-4 pages, with detailed plays, etc, I know pretty much, they were somewhat overwhelming for me - lots of play names, diagrams, lots of tendancies, thngs like when and where and who picks up the ball, what they do after made free throws, etc, etc, etc,

I also read a few from opponents for GB, again, pretty detailed, pretty spot on, they just don't change the plays either GB calls or the opponents call, butler still runs offense for mack, heywood, and howard, they ain't changing because we have our best defenders on them.

I'm also saying teams don't change their playbooks to take advantage of weak defenders, by and large college defense is a team defense game, even when running man to man, one of the reasons frosh can't play for some schools, they can't play team defense - often a bad pf defender results in the star pg getting 8 or 10 extra points before the whacky PF stepping up and getting 23

sorry for the rant - I know I am in the minority - most coaches think that poor 50 def pf is going to get torched by the soph 5 ppg pf on offense who happens to have a 51 lp, and the great coaches will increase distro to take advanage, if that is so - so be it - I think it is funny I guess - I'm noteven so sure it even works any better in the new engine than the old, I've fooled around with it some, not convinced

Quote: sorry for the rant - I know I am in the minority - most coaches think that poor 50 def pf is going to get torched by the soph 5 ppg pf on offense who happens to have a 51 lp, and the great coaches will increase distro to take advanage, if that is so - so be it - I think it is funny I guess - I'm noteven so sure it even works any better in the new engine than the old, I've fooled around with it some, not convinced

Don't be so sure OR!

I think it's a matter of the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

You bring up great points. Haven't heard many great points on the other side of this issue.

what great points? The discussion was changed.

I thought it began with a big man averaging 11+ pts a game facing a freshman center and "lighting him up" by scoring 22. My side was I think college gameplans are tilted to at least look for, and hopefully take advantage of a particular defensive weakpoint.

But if the point is now a guy averaging 5 points a game becoming the offensive focus because of a slight mismatch. Much different argument. We're going from the 2nd-3rd option on offense having an above average game to a guy that most likely is 5th option at best. Extremely rare that the 5th option would be a focus of any offensive gameplan.

whatever Iguana - if you are a coach - you know I'm right about how plays get called, how sets get run - what happens at shot clock time and what happens in transition - if you aren't - you still are a heck of a contributor to this post - one of my fav's -

I do see your point - 11 pt per game guy scoring 22 - I have no problem - what I do have a problem is a 11 ppg guy scoring 22 because of a glitch in the game - the beauty of this engine over its competitiors was its uncanny ability (when it is at its best) to simulate college basketball box scores - I hope it stays on course and try with my posts to keep it there

more or less, by and large, I am pretty sure you do too

Nail on the head: You have to make a definite distinction between a guy who isn't a real offensive threat "exploiting" a weaker defender, and a guy who actually is an offensive threat doing so.

OR, I agree that the former is weak, but the latter makes complete sense to me.

I have not coached bball but I've covered it and talked to a lot of coaches. I've seen plenty of times where a coach has singled out a matchup to exploit (be it a specific defender or a general strategy such as "we're much bigger so we're going to pound it inside"). Not saying it should be easy or routine, but if the right opportunity is there -- capable scorer vs. overmatched defender -- I think that is perfectly natural.

Heck, I just finished playing in a short league (10-game season + playoffs), most of us had never played together before, and I'd say probably half the games we specifically found something to exploit. (I sure as heck wasn't capable of doing the exploiting, but we had 3-4 guys that were. And I see no correlation between the fact that we finished 4th during the regular season and won the semis and finals when I was out-of-town.)

Quote: Originally posted by dalter on 6/12/2010Nail on the head: You have to make a definite distinction between a guy who isn't a real offensive threat "exploiting" a weaker defender, and a guy who actually is an offensive threat doing so.OR, I agree that the former is weak, but the latter makes complete sense to me. I have not coached bball but I've covered it and talked to a lot of coaches. I've seen plenty of times where a coach has singled out a matchup to exploit (be it a specific defender or a general strategy such as "we're much bigger so we're going to pound it inside"). Not saying it should be easy or routine, but if the right opportunity is there -- capable scorer vs. overmatched defender -- I think that is perfectly natural.Heck, I just finished playing in a short league (10-game season + playoffs), most of us had never played together before, and I'd say probably half the games we specifically found something to exploit. (I sure as heck wasn't capable of doing the exploiting, but we had 3-4 guys that were. And I see no correlation between the fact that we finished 4th during the regular season and won the semis and finals when I was out-of-town.)

I really do get it - I understand how to real life exploit bad players, both as a player and as a coach, if anything, most of you should realize I am somewhat a competitive person.

What you guys are all describing for HD is fine and has always been a part of the engine, not anything new, but if it becomes a rock, paper,, scissors thing such as the original post seemed to be suggesting as a good thing, I am on record in opposition.

By the way, my guess is I will be very good at the rock, paper, scissors thing, I just prefer the weighted random probability game that tarek and now seble have developed and nutured.

The new engine will simply further PeteC's dominance of HD.  Hail Hail!!