Some years there will be more guys off the big board than others. I have a sheet to model this I posted that never really gained much traction. Iba teams will lose an average of 4.2 combined players off the big board this year, be careful guys!

Posted by cubcub113 on 10/9/2020 2:35:00 PM (view original):
Some years there will be more guys off the big board than others. I have a sheet to model this I posted that never really gained much traction. Iba teams will lose an average of 4.2 combined players off the big board this year, be careful guys!

4! Really??

The most I've ever seen from one world is two.

Posted by Benis on 10/9/2020 2:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cubcub113 on 10/9/2020 2:35:00 PM (view original):
Some years there will be more guys off the big board than others. I have a sheet to model this I posted that never really gained much traction. Iba teams will lose an average of 4.2 combined players off the big board this year, be careful guys!

4! Really??

The most I've ever seen from one world is two.

25 sr.
32 jr.
34 so.
9 fr.

For Iba.

Compare this to the more normal Wooden big board:
40 sr
33 jr
19 so
4 fr

or Allen

35 sr
27 jr
28 so
10 fr

Posted by shoe3 on 10/9/2020 2:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mtnwild on 10/9/2020 11:32:00 AM (view original):
I mean, I don't even see this guy being drafted this season (maybe next year if he stayed): Brian Bicknell

This player is actually a really instructive example, looking more closely. He is top 20 by position as a recruit (not an actual standard, but another good rule of thumb), he has an elite skill - distributing, with high 90s speed and passing, he’s a fairly good scorer with LP+per nearing the 140 mark, and his physical/defense cores are passable, if not excellent. His OVR is deceiving because of his low durability, which the system ignores just like we do - if he had 50 durability, his OVR would be over 800.

I’d ignore the snarky comment about holding back his defense or speed, but there is an important player development issue to think about, related to those key areas above, specifically the scoring attributes. Did you really need those extra 7 points of LP this season? How much value did they add to your team in the postseason? My suspicion is if you would have held off developing LP until his senior season, he would have been safe.

So the next question is usually “but how was I supposed to know he was that close if he wasn’t on the Big Board?” And that’s kind of the point. The Big Board isn’t supposed to be a substitute for your player evaluation skills. With experience, a coach should be able to gauge whether or not a player they recruit *might* leave early without the Big Board, which is an evaluation tool, not an outcome.

I don't think this is a great take. Ridiculously unrealistic to cut players' wings who are on the big board... but to cut every high-level juniors' wings... yikes

Posted by shoe3 on 10/9/2020 2:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mtnwild on 10/9/2020 11:32:00 AM (view original):
I mean, I don't even see this guy being drafted this season (maybe next year if he stayed): Brian Bicknell

This player is actually a really instructive example, looking more closely. He is top 20 by position as a recruit (not an actual standard, but another good rule of thumb), he has an elite skill - distributing, with high 90s speed and passing, he’s a fairly good scorer with LP+per nearing the 140 mark, and his physical/defense cores are passable, if not excellent. His OVR is deceiving because of his low durability, which the system ignores just like we do - if he had 50 durability, his OVR would be over 800.

I’d ignore the snarky comment about holding back his defense or speed, but there is an important player development issue to think about, related to those key areas above, specifically the scoring attributes. Did you really need those extra 7 points of LP this season? How much value did they add to your team in the postseason? My suspicion is if you would have held off developing LP until his senior season, he would have been safe.

So the next question is usually “but how was I supposed to know he was that close if he wasn’t on the Big Board?” And that’s kind of the point. The Big Board isn’t supposed to be a substitute for your player evaluation skills. With experience, a coach should be able to gauge whether or not a player they recruit *might* leave early without the Big Board, which is an evaluation tool, not an outcome.

That's true about rising his LP. It was his last black rating, however ST & PS were yellow and I probably would've put those minutes on Conditioning and/or Passing giving a few more points to those. So with that, he still may have left early. It's all good, I have some backup plans. :) Mostly irked about losing my starter was was #76 on the board.

Posted by cubcub113 on 10/9/2020 3:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 10/9/2020 2:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mtnwild on 10/9/2020 11:32:00 AM (view original):
I mean, I don't even see this guy being drafted this season (maybe next year if he stayed): Brian Bicknell

This player is actually a really instructive example, looking more closely. He is top 20 by position as a recruit (not an actual standard, but another good rule of thumb), he has an elite skill - distributing, with high 90s speed and passing, he’s a fairly good scorer with LP+per nearing the 140 mark, and his physical/defense cores are passable, if not excellent. His OVR is deceiving because of his low durability, which the system ignores just like we do - if he had 50 durability, his OVR would be over 800.

I’d ignore the snarky comment about holding back his defense or speed, but there is an important player development issue to think about, related to those key areas above, specifically the scoring attributes. Did you really need those extra 7 points of LP this season? How much value did they add to your team in the postseason? My suspicion is if you would have held off developing LP until his senior season, he would have been safe.

So the next question is usually “but how was I supposed to know he was that close if he wasn’t on the Big Board?” And that’s kind of the point. The Big Board isn’t supposed to be a substitute for your player evaluation skills. With experience, a coach should be able to gauge whether or not a player they recruit *might* leave early without the Big Board, which is an evaluation tool, not an outcome.

I don't think this is a great take. Ridiculously unrealistic to cut players' wings who are on the big board... but to cut every high-level juniors' wings... yikes

8.5.1

A coach can and should make their own determination about when and how to “cut players’ wings.” You’re misreading me if you think I’m telling this coach what they should have done. I’m just laying out what that cost-benefit analysis looks like. If you value “wings,” by all means, let them grow. But there is a cost, because the fake NBA values them, too.

The questions a coach needs to ask for a player in this situation are: 1) how much do I think those 5-10 points in the wings are going to move the needle for me this year? Is this player all that much different at 52 LP than he would have been held to 45? And then 2) is that value worth the increased odds of him leaving early?

Posted by shoe3 on 10/9/2020 9:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cubcub113 on 10/9/2020 3:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 10/9/2020 2:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mtnwild on 10/9/2020 11:32:00 AM (view original):
I mean, I don't even see this guy being drafted this season (maybe next year if he stayed): Brian Bicknell

This player is actually a really instructive example, looking more closely. He is top 20 by position as a recruit (not an actual standard, but another good rule of thumb), he has an elite skill - distributing, with high 90s speed and passing, he’s a fairly good scorer with LP+per nearing the 140 mark, and his physical/defense cores are passable, if not excellent. His OVR is deceiving because of his low durability, which the system ignores just like we do - if he had 50 durability, his OVR would be over 800.

I’d ignore the snarky comment about holding back his defense or speed, but there is an important player development issue to think about, related to those key areas above, specifically the scoring attributes. Did you really need those extra 7 points of LP this season? How much value did they add to your team in the postseason? My suspicion is if you would have held off developing LP until his senior season, he would have been safe.

So the next question is usually “but how was I supposed to know he was that close if he wasn’t on the Big Board?” And that’s kind of the point. The Big Board isn’t supposed to be a substitute for your player evaluation skills. With experience, a coach should be able to gauge whether or not a player they recruit *might* leave early without the Big Board, which is an evaluation tool, not an outcome.

I don't think this is a great take. Ridiculously unrealistic to cut players' wings who are on the big board... but to cut every high-level juniors' wings... yikes

8.5.1

A coach can and should make their own determination about when and how to “cut players’ wings.” You’re misreading me if you think I’m telling this coach what they should have done. I’m just laying out what that cost-benefit analysis looks like. If you value “wings,” by all means, let them grow. But there is a cost, because the fake NBA values them, too.

The questions a coach needs to ask for a player in this situation are: 1) how much do I think those 5-10 points in the wings are going to move the needle for me this year? Is this player all that much different at 52 LP than he would have been held to 45? And then 2) is that value worth the increased odds of him leaving early?

The answer is nearly always, no the wings are not worth it. 90+ Capped PER/conditioning/ ft are usually the only areas I Put minutes into on the big board. So many people are turned off by this I talk to. People want the game to shadow real life and not developing your players is frustrating and unrealistic

The problem - that elite players are hard to get, and sometimes they leave early, and are hard to replace, and that’s frustrating - is absolutely realistic. The methods coaches develop to cope with that problem may or may not be realistic, but that’s not for me to judge. This is “WhatIfSports” after all, not “ThisHappenedLastNightSports.”

I think some people over exaggerate how much withholding some growth on a player impacts his chances of leaving. If the OP's player hadn't grown 6pts in LP, what does everyone think the chances of him staying increase by? Based upon the repeated conversations on the forums, it seems like people think it's like 10, 20, 30% increase in chances of staying. But in reality it's like a difference of single digit %. Probably like 1-2% difference.

It's like if you lost a roll when you were at 60% and the response would be - Dude, you should have sent 200 more AP so your chance would increase to 62%.

Unless you're on the cusp of changing from On the Fence to Likely Going (or similar type change), the position change on big board has a pretty minimal affect of chances of leaving early.

Posted by Benis on 10/12/2020 10:32:00 AM (view original):
I think some people over exaggerate how much withholding some growth on a player impacts his chances of leaving. If the OP's player hadn't grown 6pts in LP, what does everyone think the chances of him staying increase by? Based upon the repeated conversations on the forums, it seems like people think it's like 10, 20, 30% increase in chances of staying. But in reality it's like a difference of single digit %. Probably like 1-2% difference.

It's like if you lost a roll when you were at 60% and the response would be - Dude, you should have sent 200 more AP so your chance would increase to 62%.

Unless you're on the cusp of changing from On the Fence to Likely Going (or similar type change), the position change on big board has a pretty minimal affect of chances of leaving early.

So the key Benis, is when you're dropping a guy so that there's a chance 60 guys might declare before him. I dropped a JR from 84 to 97 through the season, and he went from 30% or so to 3%, and it ended up that the 93rd guy was the 60 pick, so he didn't even make a decision on drat night. That what my spreadsheet simulates.

If the player is the last pick in the draft (we won’t know until tomorrow) and hypothetically say the player behind him was a graduating senior, dropping him one single spot increases his odds of staying to 100%. Cub is right. If you’re going to use this approach to player development, you want to know where cusps are, in terms of when odds start making jumps, and adjust accordingly. If you have a junior who starts the season projected #10, there is no sense withholding anything, you’re not going move that needle much at all. For guys at the low end or off the board, the needle is *very* movable.

Mark Graziani started his soph season “likely staying” at something like #32. He’s currently sitting at #41, which is about where I wanted him. He has some black growth in speed, rebounding, block, perimeter, and passing, so I have his development focused mostly on FT, with a little in conditioning, the rest just on maintenance (zeroed out perimeter with that high WE). My assumption is that being too close to the cusp of the first round, where sophs start moving to “on the fence,” will put him at risk of leaving. If this was my Oregon team, with just one graduating senior, I probably wouldn’t sweat it, and would let him advance, because there will be no keeping him out of the first round next season anyway. But on this team, losing 4 seniors, it’s important that I keep him around another year.

Posted by cubcub113 on 10/9/2020 3:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 10/9/2020 2:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cubcub113 on 10/9/2020 2:35:00 PM (view original):
Some years there will be more guys off the big board than others. I have a sheet to model this I posted that never really gained much traction. Iba teams will lose an average of 4.2 combined players off the big board this year, be careful guys!

4! Really??

The most I've ever seen from one world is two.

25 sr.
32 jr.
34 so.
9 fr.

For Iba.

Compare this to the more normal Wooden big board:
40 sr
33 jr
19 so
4 fr

or Allen

35 sr
27 jr
28 so
10 fr

8.5.1

Interesting use of that data - would a simple way of looking at this be that the more seniors on the big board, the lower the risk of an off board guy leaving?

Especially interesting for the case where a guy is on the Big Board but one can hold him back and get him to drop off - to say 102 or 105 ish....

Posted by shoe3 on 10/12/2020 11:39:00 AM (view original):
Mark Graziani started his soph season “likely staying” at something like #32. He’s currently sitting at #41, which is about where I wanted him. He has some black growth in speed, rebounding, block, perimeter, and passing, so I have his development focused mostly on FT, with a little in conditioning, the rest just on maintenance (zeroed out perimeter with that high WE). My assumption is that being too close to the cusp of the first round, where sophs start moving to “on the fence,” will put him at risk of leaving. If this was my Oregon team, with just one graduating senior, I probably wouldn’t sweat it, and would let him advance, because there will be no keeping him out of the first round next season anyway. But on this team, losing 4 seniors, it’s important that I keep him around another year.

Okay so a SO #32 has a 36.5% chance of going and #41 has a 24.7% chance of going. This is a juicy place to drop guys on the big board for sure. But why the hell stop at 41? 9 more spots to 50 and he has a 17.3% chance to leave!

JR60 to JR90 is 3.3 times as many spots and only lowers the chance from 43.4% to 31.3%, a similar change.

Posted by cubcub113 on 10/12/2020 11:10:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 10/12/2020 10:32:00 AM (view original):
I think some people over exaggerate how much withholding some growth on a player impacts his chances of leaving. If the OP's player hadn't grown 6pts in LP, what does everyone think the chances of him staying increase by? Based upon the repeated conversations on the forums, it seems like people think it's like 10, 20, 30% increase in chances of staying. But in reality it's like a difference of single digit %. Probably like 1-2% difference.

It's like if you lost a roll when you were at 60% and the response would be - Dude, you should have sent 200 more AP so your chance would increase to 62%.

Unless you're on the cusp of changing from On the Fence to Likely Going (or similar type change), the position change on big board has a pretty minimal affect of chances of leaving early.

So the key Benis, is when you're dropping a guy so that there's a chance 60 guys might declare before him. I dropped a JR from 84 to 97 through the season, and he went from 30% or so to 3%, and it ended up that the 93rd guy was the 60 pick, so he didn't even make a decision on drat night. That what my spreadsheet simulates.

8.5.1

Yeah I think this where I'm losing you. Maybe it's the way we're assuming the big board and EE selection process actually works.

Your assumption is that it goes down the line and gives each player a predetermined chance of going early based upon class and location on big board right? And then it does it's yes/no scenario on down the line until it fills all 60 draft spots (graduating seniors are 100% obvs).

I think this makes sense but maybe i'm just super duper slow (most likely) but the actual results don't seem to really mirror this. You would think it's much more of a linear degradation of chance to leave early as you climb the big board but the final results don't really indicate this.

For example, from my spreadsheet where I've tracked 842 Soph EEs and 1232 Jr EEs, the % of Jr EEs from a cluster ranked in the 50-60 range is about the same as a 85-95 range. And then the same thing is true for the Soph EEs from 50-60 is about the same as 85-95.

What I mean is - out of the 135 Jrs who were ranked from 50-60, 36% of them left early. Then out of the 94 Jrs ranked from 85-95, 38% of them left early. Out of the 101 Sophs ranked from 50-60, 8% left early while out of the 97 Sophs ranked from 85-95, 9% left early.

If it worked like your example, you would see a sharp drop in chance to leave early as you get closer and closer to the #100 ranked player but you don't so I'm trying to make sense of it so let me know your thoughts!