red,  i have learned to be cautious when taking either of the HD admins words as "gospel".

but, in this case,  the question seems so simple and straightforward and easily answerable,  that yes, i do believe them when they say that there there are no secret or hidden numbers that would explain the apparent anomolies that seem to occur with these under and over achievers.

i think in most cases where admin's answers have seemed to be misleading or confusing or just plain wrong.... the question or issue was a bit more complex and maybe they didnt understand the question  (or, as i have speculated, do not understand the simengine as well as some of thier uber-users).  i cant recall where i felt they outright lied with no possibility of misunderstanding.  and cant see where they would benefit from lying in this case.... i dont think anyone would care that there IS a hidden attribute... might even been a cool thing... but if its there... just say so.

i agree oldave, with those issues with the two admin's comments on the game. however, i think you left out a major part :) i agree that a huge part is the "level" of the response - often veterans will ask questions and are not looking for the easy, simplified answer - which is the kind of answer admin's often gave, not assuming the veteran was asking the question in a highly competitive context. but i believe this problem is on both sides -  admins may fail to understand the detail of the question, or something along those lines - but users do the same with their answers.

also, i believe context is everything, and one of the biggest problems is admins will often answer a question in the context provided by the user - and give a correct answer - and then users jump to all these conclusions with respect to different situations. also, you often here people quote the "short hand" of the comment by the admins, not their specific statement, which makes it even more likely to put the comment out of context or to add confusion. anyway, its definitely on both sides in my view, i think the admins contribute substantially, but i feel the users do, too.

i believe in this context, there are many times people asked about hidden attributes, and i believe this is really tied to players. there are no "season level" stats or ratings for players that we don't see, that factor into the outcome of the game. so i agree with how you portrayed those comments.

however, i think there is a major difference between hidden ratings tied to players and team, and having team-level computations within the sim, such as the overall chemistry of the offense, or how the defense may focus on other players - which is along the lines of what rednation is commenting on. i think those kinds of things most likely do exist, and we know there are team wide assessments for rebounding, ball control (turnover prevention), how well the team can work together to get players open more often (or to a greater degree). its kind of funny timing, i have been half losing in the last 2 months with the two guys i co-coach with - because of things like the senior slump or under performers have caused me to really want to know the underlying causes.

anyway, my belief is that there are some macro, team level decisions that factor substantially into the performance of individuals (other than the ones we know about, like team reb, team turnover propensity, etc). i am falling asleep at my desk so i won't go into my theories on the details now, as when i have explained them to the guys i coach with recently, wide awake, they were at best borderline coherent :) but more important than my feelings on the various possibilities is that there are non-intuitive elements that play into things like offensive efficiency, that are not simply based on the ratings of the player. if true, this has a number of ramifications, for example, it would suggest even perfect mastery of the impact of the individual ratings of a player may not be enough - you may still need to adjust something like distro based on actual performance (there has long been a debate on this exact issue - some go by ratings, citing low sample size - others go by performance - citing uncertainty in what causes that performance.

I dont think there are any hidden variables

BUT, I think there are utterly nonobvious interactions between variables.  In one offense or another, it may well be that PASS or BH or that plus SPD of the other players or of the guards or the frontcourt players may have an effect where a player can get the ball and how "well" he gets it.  His odds of success may depend in complex ways on who else is with him on the floor and the settings. And, they may depend on nonobvious aspects of the ratings and settings of the opponent.

I think that most apparent under and over performance is a result of nonobvious or complex interactions or small (relatively) sample sizes.

I agree with Mets.

Absolutely with mets on this one. I believe the combination of players on the court at any given time, combined with the defense played, can radically change the outcome. I think this is even more pronounced offensively in triangle and flex offenses, and zone defenses (one of the reasons I avoid them on most of my teams).

We also tend to focus upon FG%, rebounds, steals and blocked shots when evaluating player performance, There are a number of performance measures that we tend to overlook - they are either show up in the box score or are only available through PBP, that affect the bottom line performance.

There are also a whole lot of factors each coach controls that could contribute to underperforming FG%, including:

• Shot distribution - is the player forcing shots when passing would make more sense?
• Defensive matchup - is he playing against the team's best defender? Does the defender have obvious advantages in ATH, SPD?
• Who is feeding the ball - is there a passer on the team that hits the player with a good pass when he is in position to make a play?
• Pace of play - is running a fast-paced offense creating more poor shots?
• Fatigue - are the pace or the fatigue settings affecting their production?
• Three-point setting (though this one is obvious)

Of course, 14,000 games later I am still trying to figure all of this out myself.