Posted by isack24 on 10/10/2010 12:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by arssanguinus on 10/10/2010 3:12:00 AM (view original):

Posted by isack24 on 10/9/2010 10:09:00 AM (view original):
The comparisons to real life rebounding are just off base.  This default to, "well, look at real life margins," is monumentally flawed.  They don't have reb ratings in real life, so we don't know if there is any comparison. 

What I know is, if both teams are playing man, and my guy is 89 ath/99 reb matched up with his 60 ath/75 reb guy, my guy should consistently outrebound his guy by more than one or two per game, otherwise the ath/reb ratings are pointless, at least with respect to rebounding.

Isn't real life what we are trying to imitate?  What other baseline are we going to use, if not real life numbers?

 

I don't think so, at least not in some strict it-must-be-line-with-real-life way.  What's the point of ratings if the end result is some set deviation from the real life mean?

Even if you disagree with me, as I posted earlier, rebound margin is way low compared to real life anyway.

No. . what you showed is that the EXTREMES of rebound margin, on the high end, are lower than the extremes of rebound margin in real life.  Which is a different animal.  The extremes are GOING to vary;  for example, in HD the best teams, the ones most likely to be able to assemble huge rebounding margins tend to play non conference slates filled with much stronger teams than their real life counterparts do.  WHich is likely to reduce the rebounding margins they accumulate.  In real life, you usually have patsies on the non conference schedule.  

Just as one example.

In other words, the rebounding margin isn't way lower, the standard deviation of the rebounding margin is lower.

i'm not going to argue whether or not the engine change is good or bad - but regardless of it being anecdotal or not, i would say with 100% certainty there has been a drastic change to how rebounds are awarded and the overall margin (i can only speak to DIII)

i don't know if it's better for the game or worse but the change is there and it's a big one

my first impression is that it's worse for the game thus far - basing that on feeling like you were "building" and "coaching" a team to your style in the past (great rebounding) but can no longer do so...i won't pull out the dreaded "random" word here, but I'm having a hard time correlating ratings to rebounding success whereas before a 80+ REB rating almost always led to solid rebounding on an individual basis giving you the option of trotting out 3 guys with 80+ (in DIII e.g.) and use that a core strength...this does NOT exist anymore at the levels previously...

personally, i think you should be able to build a team into a monster rebounding team with 10-15+ rebounding margins - albeit sacrificing perhaps in other areas.  of course this margin advantage was typically nullified as you played good teams who had similar o better REB ratings.

i guess i'm not sure why they made the change (assuming they know they did it)

I 100% agree.

Yep, I agree as well. If the effect of differences in REB ratings has been tempered (and it appeared to me that it had even before I read this thread), I think that's a bad thing. You want to encourage coaches who want to build a specific style of team - whether that's high-DEF M2M, speed-based, or any other strategy. That diversity of styles makes game play more interesting, and also lets newer coaches feel a sense of control. If you dampen the effect of having a big advantage in REB (or any other factor), you make the game more homogeneous.

In fact, the only place I still see drastic differences in outcomes is with press teams being able to force turnovers - that still seems to have a huge cause-and-effect, esp if you have a lot of upperclassmen running the press. Maybe the press isn't magic; maybe it's just the one area where big ratings advantages still equal big outcomes.

Right.  One of the major complaints post-potential was a lack of control over being able to build your team a specific way, and this only compounds that.