1. If you had a team that had these passing number, 60, 40, 40, 40, 40, would it be better at passing than a team with, 90, 60, 30, 20, 10? Is there more weight on the PG's passing ability, and less on the C's passing ability?

2. Is it better to have more BH or P if you want to limit turnovers? For instance, if I had a team with 50 BH and 30 P ratings, would this team have more or less turnovers than a team with 30 BH and 50 P ratings?

1. Yes.
2. I don't know. I think Bh is more important in preventing turnovers an passing is more important in fg%.

I think #2 would depend more on the offense you run.  Motion seems to run smoother with more BH, flex and triangle seem to favor P, and I don't have much experience with FB but I'd guess you'd want a mix of both.

1.i think the example is subject to the weight placed on the importance of passing by position, but I'm not sure of any multiplier for say a pg vs a sf. I do agree that passing is still averaged across the board.

2. I def believe BH has the greater value for the individual especially against press teams - I've seen guys with 90+ Bh and 60-70 ish PER just go bananas from downtown - But also agree high passing team averages = greater fg%.

Trenton, Is that a yes to the first team has better passing, or a yes to their is more weight on the PG's passing.

More weight on the PG.  Sorry.

Posted by carson333 on 2/10/2014 9:48:00 AM (view original):
Trenton, Is that a yes to the first team has better passing, or a yes to their is more weight on the PG's passing.

both (doesn't it sort of have to be both?)

its unclear on the turnover portion. before the new engine, after many back and forths with seble, he convinced me that no team mate impacted the ability of another team mate. so, the passing of your pg neither effected the fg% nor turnover rate of your SG. so, all passing did was impact turnovers - while ball handling clearly had a hand in scoring. i would say before the new engine, most likely, passing was most important in limiting turnover rate.

nobody really knows how seble changed things in the new engine, except that the conversations centered around, how could a PG's great passing not get players more open looks, and seble agreed so we have good reason to believe passing of the PG increases team mates' scoring. also i believe myself and a number of other coaches have stated they have seen this effect their own teams. i personally believe its team passing (weighted, like everything else) that results in better looks for scorers, not just PG passing. its not clear to me if this is only passing, or also, ball handling. its probably worth asking seble, i never have, and he might be willing to disclose some general information on the nature of how a player can improve their team mates. 

anyway, i haven't really paid attention to turnovers to see if bh and passing have different weights than they used to, so i don't really know how it works today. its very possible seble would reduce the impact of passing there, if he was increasing the importance of passing elsewhere. its also very possible he would not, passing was not important enough in the old engine as a whole. so, it could go either way, but i think both are pretty important. this is one of those things where a regression analysis would probably have a great deal of relevance.

edit: i sent a sitemail, will see if seble provides any info

i sent that ticket in, and got a response, which i included here
http://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?TopicID=475007&TopicsTimeframe=30

i started a new thread because i think its very interesting info from seble and didn't want it to get burried :(

Thanks gillispie! I just finished reading your other thread, and it was very informational.