gil, take a look at my roster and see what you think in terms of Point 1. I also use 3's at the 4 often, usually as backups but I have started them there in the past.

2) While I agree with added time could result in that I think you addressed this earlier with the quick off the rebound. I don't recruit Cs because none of them measure up to my standards with how WIS currently generates recruits, they are all too slow for me. I find it a very big advantage when I go up against teams with slow big men.

3) When you say this are you implying that my team wouldn't have good enough bh/pa to take time? (I don't think you are) because I don't agree with that, I think that our bh/pa allows us to get a better first shot then if it were poor. ( I think that is a given though)

Z, to be fair when you offer up those fg% stats, so far you've played a really weak schedule (I'm sure it's because you have a young team), so that has to come with a pretty gigantic grain of salt.

Quote: Originally posted by dalter on 12/28/2009Z, to be fair when you offer up those fg% stats, so far you've played a really weak schedule (I'm sure it's because you have a young team), so that has to come with a pretty gigantic grain of salt.

Agreed, but regardless of my schedule we are always in the top 10. I hope I don't need to prove that lol.

I was just quoting my current teams rankings since I have nothing else to go off of.

Quote: Originally posted by zhawks on 12/28/2009gil, take a look at my roster and see what you think in terms of Point 1. I also use 3's at the 4 often, usually as backups but I have started them there in the past.

2) While I agree with added time could result in that I think you addressed this earlier with the quick off the rebound. I don't recruit Cs because none of them measure up to my standards with how WIS currently generates recruits, they are all too slow for me. I find it a very big advantage when I go up against teams with slow big men.

3) When you say this are you implying that my team wouldn't have good enough bh/pa to take time? (I don't think you are) because I don't agree with that, I think that our bh/pa allows us to get a better first shot then if it were poor. ( I think that is a given though)

1) your team is definitely better at rebounding, relative to the strength of your team, than mine tend to be. i wonder also if there is a divisional difference here. in division 2 is where my data points are mostly from. it seems the difference in rebound between my best teams, and the best rebounding team in the country, is smaller than in division 1. maybe that means to some small degree, uptempo should be more viable for my d1 team? i haven't tried it enough there to offer any observation.

2) interesting, i recruit way more centers. in d2/d3, its about 5 to 1, maybe more. in d1, i don't know, more than 50% but less than 75%, i would guess. i think part of it is i play a lot of triangle in the lower divisions, which to me explains the center preference. but i have no idea why in d1, i would think i would recruit almost all power forwards... it just never works out like that.

3) no, i am not saying that. but, i am saying there is a sliding scale. and i am suggesting a 3 guard lineup might better take advantage of the extra time than a 2 guard lineup.

another thing i wonder is about is how defense comes into play. lostmyth once said something to the effect of, he always plays uptempo against the press because the marginal utility from fouls forced is increasing, due to the bonus and double bonus. i play the press, is part of the reason uptempo does not work for me is increasing # of possessions starts to whack me on fouls?

on the other hand, as someone already pointed out in this thread, you get more steals with the fcp, and uptempo theoretically better capitalizes on steals than normal tempo.

i wonder also if certain defenses are better suited to penalize the uptempo team for their quick shot selection. with my quick pressing teams, it seems to have a huge penalty. might a slow zone team force only a marginal penalty?

Any thoughts on the 3 man playing the 4? I have had very solid success with it. IMO it is because of the added ath and reb that can be had recruiting that way. Murphy on my Illini team is my backup 4. I also believe that having bigs who can shoot the ball definitely helps, especially a big with 90+, which I feel combined with his Ath/Spd combo is a very difficult matchup. Just as I feel that Slape (Illini also) is a very difficult matchup for any center.

Another note I value ball handling more then passing in 3 - 5 positions, I feel that will allow any of my players that gets a steal to take control of the offense, obviously some will be better suited then others, but overall the team is able to get the quick bucket points better IMO.

3) I didn't think that is what you meant and I agree with you to an extent, although I think a 3 guard lineup could be very suited to run uptempo at the d2 level also (I did it with my most recent d2 team, granted that was before FSS). With that added spd/ath that I would assume comes at the 3 you would have some very good matchups to run uptempo, especially against teams that use a big at the 3 position.

i have toyed with a 3 man at the 4, i think it is generally hard to pull off because of the rebounding hit, but, a couple of the best all time power forwards ive had were small forwards. my ideal team would have a 3 at the 4, i just don't usually have the luxury of doing so. i actually find sfs more useful for the 4 than the 3.

i don't follow you on the why it is good though... the part about added ath and reb. i see the ath/spd, but reb? isn't that the primary reason not to?

i'm glad you brought up the per in your bigs, i've heard you say it a dozen times and it is definitely a difference between our teams. i virtually ignore per in my big men. also ball handling. however, i do value passing. i like your idea, about any guy who gets the steal being able to take over... also maybe because your big men can shoot, it allows you to get a better look more quickly than me (because you have more options). on the other hand, because i have no bh/per, and generally care about passing, i think it is one more reason a team like mine might make better use of the extra time looking for a shot.

one final point along those lines is, i greatly value reb and def in my bigs over offense. it is because my team reb is weak, and if you can't rebound, it doesn't matter if you can do anything else. so once i focus on the reb, i am generally without great offensive bigs (d2 more than d1, but some of both), so i take good defense at the expense of offense, figuring they are already disadvantaged enough that i may as well let my guards take the shots. so, maybe part of the problem is i have fewer options - again, making the extra time more important to us.

i wonder how many with a lot of uptempo success tend towards balanced vs imbalanced offenses? i play a healthy mix of both, but since potential, i have leaned more towards imbalanced. meaning i only have 2-3 scorers on the floor often instead of 4-5. a couple of the best teams i've ever had were d1 balanced motion teams, but i never gave uptempo a serious try, i regret that now.

gil, what I meant was the added Ath that helps towards rebound, I think a lot of coaches forget that rebounding is more then just the rebounding rating. (ie ath and a very small amount of spd), sorry for not being as specific as i should have been.

I see your point having an imbalance and I get why you wouldn't want to play uptempo if that were the case, when I was at d2 I was imbalanced also, but more so on the defensive end where I let my kids ATH/SPD take over and while sometimes we gave up a lot of easy baskets the added turnovers and easy buckets allowed for us to outscore our opponents (Phoenix Suns like? haha), that was a long time ago when I was at Le Moyne in Rupp.

And as for rebounding, I will give up a little rebounding to get that back in Ath, since Ath is the 2nd biggest component of rebounding and it is used at both ends of the floor.

As for my bigs, I value Per over LP in them, un fortunately with how WIS generates recruits currently I am not able to get the pfs with 70+ per anylonger, which is why i shifted my recruiting to finding 3 men that can play the 4.

I think that post is more suited for the other thread lol, but please don't start that back up.

i don't get it... is that something from the office?

When I can get it, I rather like having some Perimeter in my bigs as well.

Defense uses more energy.

Sometimes, when the uptempo/slowdown affect on tiring is discussed, we need to remember that your own defensive style (man/zone/press) has a bigger affect on your own stamina. Yes, even more more than your tempo on offense.

Developer chat? admin posting in the forum? I'm to lazy to look for it.

There have been 13,528 (or so) tweeks to the engine since then so who knows?

Quote: Originally Posted By jenningss on 12/29/2009Defense uses more energy.

Sometimes, when the uptempo/slowdown affect on tiring is discussed, we need to remember that your own defensive style (man/zone/press) has a bigger affect on your own stamina. Yes, even more more than your tempo on offense.

Developer chat? admin posting in the forum? I'm to lazy to look for it.

There have been 13,528 (or so) tweeks to the engine since then so who knows?

yes indeed, fcp uses more energy than either man or zone for sure - that was not the ?, the ? was can uptempo OFFENSE wear the opponent out effectively, you are seeing 3 top coaches - lostmyth, billyg, and myself not in agreement, which again, just shows there are many different approaches to winning in this game

Not claiming to be a top coach. . but with the fatigue settings instead of Target minutes, my experience is that instead of tiring the other team out, it just makes them play their depth more. I suppose the experiment woudl be to get a few teams playing exhibition games together, have them both use target minutes instead of stamina, and run uptempo. . .