Posted by shoe3 on 4/7/2022 4:45:00 PM (view original):

Posted by hughesjr on 4/7/2022 4:36:00 PM (view original):
Just like I don't understand the whining about losing a 75/25 battle.

If there is a 99/1 battle (you can't have those.. But if you could)... Eventually, a one will be rolled. I have played D&D type games for more than 40 years. Sometimes you roll a 20 on a D20.. Sometimes you roll a 1. Deal with it. That is, fix your expectations.

Yeah I’m glad you brought that up too, because this is actually a good analogy. There’s a reason we don’t have 99-1 recruiting battles. Or anything below 80-20 (which is actually closer to 65-35 in terms of effort credit, before stretched for the leader). Because upsets makes sense in sports, to a point, but there is a limit, past which you’re asking us to suspend disbelief. And at that point, it stops feeling like a sports simulation, and feels like some kind of casino game.

I mean .. you SHOULD EXPECT to lose 1 in 4 of your 75/25 battles :). (That's how math works)

Posted by shoe3 on 4/7/2022 4:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by trojan4309 on 4/7/2022 3:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 4/7/2022 2:49:00 PM (view original):
Just for the record, yeah. I get feisty (ie irritable) sometimes when people take the words I say, twist them around or use different ones altogether, and then present them back again as though I mean something different. Or when people repeatedly bring up issues in a thread that I’ve already discussed earlier, making me either cover it again (when people like Benis are already likely to make some kind of comment about word count pretty soon) or leave it and look like there’s just no answer for it now. So when I correct mlitney on my word choice, or tell them and trojan#### they’re not following along well because I’ve already covered the issues they’re bringing up, I’m not being outraged or uncivilized. But I can’t do anything about the way you choose to read it. Every community needs its villain, and if that’s me for you, I’m happy to play along.

Just fix tempo.

I knew you'd respond with a version of "I've covered that already." I was simply stating how I viewed the matter, and if there is overlap, then so be it. Feel free to accept my challenge in Phelan. I promise you I won't use the slowdown cheat code.

I accept most challenges (from teams that won’t obviously hurt my RPI much) right away, so accepted this well before your comment here. And would have done if I had known you were also baseball4309 (now we know) because I truly don’t care about any of this personal stuff. Don’t worry about slowdown. Play it if it makes sense for you. I’ve never said anything about coaches who use it, and as I’ve said here, I use it myself (with my non-FB teams, of course) when it makes sense. My problem is not with coaches who use it, it’s with the imbalanced tempo choices offered to us. I don’t want predictable results, or no upsets; I want the upsets that occur to make basketball sense, so this feels like a basketball simulation. “Limit possessions and hope something good will have happened along the way” isn’t it.

I’ve said in the past I was both accounts. I don’t have two teams in the same world.

No hard feelings. I agree with some of what you’ve said just don’t think it impacts shooting % or turnover risk directly. Of course, WIS should be able to provide an answer to that.

Posted by shoe3 on 4/7/2022 4:40:00 PM (view original):
For a little extra context, here is something Chris said to me in the course of our dialog:

“Maybe the common ground is plans are too strong in either direction, and should be more neutral across the boards.”

And to that, I think he’s absolutely on the right track.

Again, what I’m asking for is that slowdown and uptempo have somewhat corollary risks to go along with the benefits, beyond whatever possession benefit one might want to press (which I maintain is minimal on the slowdown side, in terms of a drawback). The stamina drain that uptempo suffers makes basketball sense. The lack of any corollary effect on the slowdown side does not.

Slowdown does ALSO have risks. Slowdown causes more variance. In any given game, more variance could benefit either team, not just the team playing slowdown. On average, if variance is the ONLY way for you to win, you take the chance even if one risk is a bigger blowout.

If you play slowdown, the opposing team's starters will average more minutes (as will your starters). If their starters are significantly better than your starters, but your benches are closer together, slowdown might be worse for you even if you are the less talented team (just one example).

If they have a more talented team, but less depth, Uptempo might be better. You chose to have 8 great players rather than 10 to 12 Average to Above Average players.

I have seen coaches recruit max ATH, DEF, BH and play FB/Press and win very consistently. Not my approach, but it also works. (Example: WhatIfSports: User Profile - Hoops Dynasty ) More DEF/ATH/STA and SPD instead of BH .. but still, outside the box thinking.

Posted by hughesjr on 4/7/2022 6:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 4/7/2022 4:40:00 PM (view original):
For a little extra context, here is something Chris said to me in the course of our dialog:

“Maybe the common ground is plans are too strong in either direction, and should be more neutral across the boards.”

And to that, I think he’s absolutely on the right track.

Again, what I’m asking for is that slowdown and uptempo have somewhat corollary risks to go along with the benefits, beyond whatever possession benefit one might want to press (which I maintain is minimal on the slowdown side, in terms of a drawback). The stamina drain that uptempo suffers makes basketball sense. The lack of any corollary effect on the slowdown side does not.

Slowdown does ALSO have risks. Slowdown causes more variance. In any given game, more variance could benefit either team, not just the team playing slowdown. On average, if variance is the ONLY way for you to win, you take the chance even if one risk is a bigger blowout.

If you play slowdown, the opposing team's starters will average more minutes (as will your starters). If their starters are significantly better than your starters, but your benches are closer together, slowdown might be worse for you even if you are the less talented team (just one example).

If they have a more talented team, but less depth, Uptempo might be better. You chose to have 8 great players rather than 10 to 12 Average to Above Average players.

I have seen coaches recruit max ATH, DEF, BH and play FB/Press and win very consistently. Not my approach, but it also works. (Example: WhatIfSports: User Profile - Hoops Dynasty ) More DEF/ATH/STA and SPD instead of BH .. but still, outside the box thinking.

Whatever you think about the risk of going slowdown, especially as an underdog - as you say, who cares if it’s a bigger blowout? - the point is that any risk is not on the same level as the effects incurred by running uptempo.

And however you want to think about possessions - and I use similar processes to determine tempo myself, with teams that can use all 3 - the fact remains that slowdown has extra advantages incurred from fatigue mitigation, at least. So even if you’re not buying that there’s a direct benefit to slowdown in terms of FG% and turnovers, if your best players are in the starting lineup, the worst thing that happens when you play slowdown is that your best players get more minutes on the floor. And maybe your opponent’s do too, but as we know, your tempo mostly impacts your team, much less your opponent (which is also why an uptempo team can’t drag a slowdown team into more possessions, and certainly not more positive possessions). And you can’t control what your opponent does anyway. All that to say, stamina drain and fatigue, and the player quality effects they cause are a far greater concern than whether you might get a bad sim (which can happen in any tempo) and run out of possessions against a weaker team.

This is all what creates the imbalance.

Haven't read everything here.. but it's simple. Slowdown causes SOME variance in a 'typical' result due to fewer possessions. But this is likely minor as going slowdown vs normal only creates a couple more possesions in a given game. If you're heavy favorite, this probably isn't enough to cause a wild outcome. Seems simple enough and I think we should all agree on that. Hughes's point of flipping a coin 100 times or 10,000 is totally correct - but that's difference in flips/sims is not even close to what we would see in any given HD game. Not close. At All.

The answer is all about impact upon fatigue/depth and the already occuring variance that occurs in any given game. Any thought around this occuring more in upsets or whatever - is incorrect and an illusion caused by confirmation bias.

“Any thought around this occuring more in upsets or whatever - is incorrect and an illusion caused by confirmation bias.”

Yes. And since no one is having that thought except in Benis’s head, we can file this one away. Thanks for playing buddy.

Whether the impact is direct or indirect, the effect slowdown has on stamina drain and fatigue mitigation is significant. Whether played by underdogs or favorites, the effect slowdown has on stamina drain and fatigue mitigation is significant. That means there is a significant imbalance in the power of the two tempos as they vary from normal.

What you call imbalance, others would call a strategic feature Poopshoe.

“Others” being those who want to keep slowdown very strong, neutralizing the coaches who manage to field press teams featuring a deep, talented roster. For “strategic” reasons, right? We’re tracking now?

This thread has been very entertaining. But you guys ran me out of popcorn.

Posted by shoe3 on 4/7/2022 10:19:00 PM (view original):
“Others” being those who want to keep slowdown very strong, neutralizing the coaches who manage to field press teams featuring a deep, talented roster. For “strategic” reasons, right? We’re tracking now?

Please get help.

Posted by Benis on 4/7/2022 11:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 4/7/2022 10:19:00 PM (view original):
“Others” being those who want to keep slowdown very strong, neutralizing the coaches who manage to field press teams featuring a deep, talented roster. For “strategic” reasons, right? We’re tracking now?

Please get help.

Because it isn’t a game if it can’t be rigged in your favor, am I right?

Shoe I feel the problem is that you're trying to narrow down things that don't even matter. "Win button" you dont even know what that means? But "upset button" to you has some direct specific precise meaning that's totally different? No one cares about the difference! It's the same thing GENERALLY in what you're trying to say! Along with the rest of your points in this topic.

Yes, I said basketts instead of mlitney. Fire me. My bad. I apologize to all those tho were offended by that.

Only other thing I care about to mention is the fact that you said running slowdown should come with less FG% or some sort of turnover effect?! And that it makes perfect sense that it should? How????? What offense takes its time in real life, only to throw up a terrible shot?! The point of slowdown would be to work towards the better shot. The extra pass. How could one see otherwise?

Posted by shoe3 on 4/8/2022 12:25:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 4/7/2022 11:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 4/7/2022 10:19:00 PM (view original):
“Others” being those who want to keep slowdown very strong, neutralizing the coaches who manage to field press teams featuring a deep, talented roster. For “strategic” reasons, right? We’re tracking now?

Please get help.

Because it isn’t a game if it can’t be rigged in your favor, am I right?

Rigged? You're stooping here terribly man.

Please just start over and write down that you don't like slowdown and leave it at that.

I feel like in most threads, SOME people see you as a helpful coach with lots of knowledge. But you're so far off based with your comments in this one that you're hurting your credibility. Just keep it short and sweet!

a few thoughts on the tempo discussion, a few questions. there is a LOT to unpack, i think we can dive into a bunch of specifics...

1) i agree that from a fatigue standpoint, there is a clear impact on fatigue from tempo, which gives uptempo an extra fatigue obstacle to overcome, while taking one away for slowdown. this is what causes folks to see better fg% and lower TOs from slowdown, IMO, and lower fg% with more TOs from uptempo.

- however, you guys don't seem to be really talking about how this impacts both teams. if you run slowdown, my team is going to be less tired and is going to have better fg%, too. i think this helps keep it at least somewhat balanced?

2) fatigue is a big part of the tempo picture - the impact of possessions on volatility is another big part. fewer possessions results in more volatility. this is great for the underdog, not so much for the favorite. there is a lot of mixing here, folks talking about feeling like slowdown is OP both for underdogs and favorites. neither one of those positions is unreasonable, but, IMO there is a big difference between the two. its almost two separate conversations.

- higher pace is a major advantage for championship favorites. i prefer to get mine in the form of press. having a pace of slowdown man, or slowdown zone, makes it significantly harder to win championships than a higher pace would. a lot of folks seem to generally agree that slowdown is too powerful, but, i suspect there's a lot of folks who disagree, too. anyway, i am curious to you folks who generally think slowdown is overpowered - do you think it is overpowered for the top tier of teams, for them to use it, i mean? what about if they are press vs man/zone, that sort of thing?

i think the 4 main cases to talk about here are: slowdown for (1) favorites with press (fb/press as a sub-case, etc), (2) favorites with man/zone, (3) underdogs with press, (4) underdogs with man/zone - and i suspect many folks think slowdown is powerful in some of those cases, but less so in others. i am definitely curious where folks see issues and where they don't, would like to read what people think if anyone is up to break those out and share their thoughts!!


3) there's (obviously) nothing wrong with folks running slowdown. morally or whatever, it doesn't cheapen their success... not sure what that was brought up, but i kinda think people don't really think that. and if they do, they are sort of idiots, without really meaning offense. there's a lot of interesting stuff to discuss here about slowdown IMO, without it being personal

Posted by shoe3 on 4/8/2022 12:25:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 4/7/2022 11:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 4/7/2022 10:19:00 PM (view original):
“Others” being those who want to keep slowdown very strong, neutralizing the coaches who manage to field press teams featuring a deep, talented roster. For “strategic” reasons, right? We’re tracking now?

Please get help.

Because it isn’t a game if it can’t be rigged in your favor, am I right?

Hopefully you can spend some time with the wife and kids this weekend. Get outside for some fresh air.

Take your mind off HD for awhile because you are not well.