So I just played a game against a sim team in my conference and I'm wondering how I lost by double digit points. I think that I have a pretty good team ( all my average ratings are brought down by my stupid walk on) and simmys team as usual has terrible defensive numbers. I had been playing with my under classmen because my conference is terrible except for one really good human, but I switched It up for this game because i was only favored by 6 points. I did not however change the minutes from about even targeted Minutes for everybody to fatigue stuff (maybe that was it, idrk). I also didn't individually game plan but I didn't really think I needed too. Can someone explain to me what I should have done. https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/GameResults/BoxScore.aspx?gid=12485968

Well, first of all, your team is better than the Sim AI team overall.  You should always game plan .. which in its most basic form is setting your defensive positioning in Team Game Plan.  For all most all Sim AI teams, I set defensive positioning between 0 to +2.  I would have done 0 based on Washington's previous stats.  Your team was set at 0 and adjusted to +1 for the second half.  So no real issues there.

As far as their main scorers go, looking at just attributes I would have thought their major scorers would be PG Francis Bradway (#1 option) and PF Christopher Whitehead (#2). 

Based on that, I would likely not have started Mark Ross with a SPD of 59 and DEF of 44 at PG against Bradway (who has a SPD of 92 and 64 for BH).  I would normally start Ross at the PG, just not in a game where their PG is the #1 scorer with great speed.  So I would have probably played Jason Brown at PG even tough his passing sucks (for this matchup against Bradway).

So my normal lineup for your team would be:

PG:  Ross, Hedlund, <blank>, Spaulding
SG:  Brown, Hedlund, Spaulding, Hoppe
SF:  Gay, Harris, SIngh, Hedlund
PF:  Morris, Harris, <blank>, Singh
C:    Thomas, Harris, Singh, Oliver

But in this game I would have switched Ross and Brown to SG and PG respectively.

I also would have played 0 for Defensive positioning and double teamed Francis Bradway.

As far as your offense goes, based only on attributes, Brown is your best scorer and Thomas is #2.  Then Hedlund, Ross, Spaulding, Gay, and Morris are all about the same.   But based on results, Ross gets a bit of a bump up.

So for distro, I would likely have had :

Brown:  15
Thomas:  10
Ross:  7
Hedlund:  4
Spaulding:  4
Gay:  4
Morris:  4
Singh:  3

Everyone else at 1 (except Kiikland at 0)

I see it as a victory for your team.

BTW .. I can also see Morris as SF and Harris at PF with this rotation:


PG:  Ross, Hedlund, Spaulding, <blank>
SG:  Brown, Hedlund, Gay, Hoppe
SF:  Morris, Gay, SIngh, Hedlund
PF:  Harris, Gay, Singh, Oliver
C:    Thomas,  Singh, Gay, Oliver

Posted by hughesjr on 10/25/2015 1:35:00 PM (view original):
Well, first of all, your team is better than the Sim AI team overall.  You should always game plan .. which in its most basic form is setting your defensive positioning in Team Game Plan.  For all most all Sim AI teams, I set defensive positioning between 0 to +2.  I would have done 0 based on Washington's previous stats.  Your team was set at 0 and adjusted to +1 for the second half.  So no real issues there.

As far as their main scorers go, looking at just attributes I would have thought their major scorers would be PG Francis Bradway (#1 option) and PF Christopher Whitehead (#2). 

Based on that, I would likely not have started Mark Ross with a SPD of 59 and DEF of 44 at PG against Bradway (who has a SPD of 92 and 64 for BH).  I would normally start Ross at the PG, just not in a game where their PG is the #1 scorer with great speed.  So I would have probably played Jason Brown at PG even tough his passing sucks (for this matchup against Bradway).

So my normal lineup for your team would be:

PG:  Ross, Hedlund, <blank>, Spaulding
SG:  Brown, Hedlund, Spaulding, Hoppe
SF:  Gay, Harris, SIngh, Hedlund
PF:  Morris, Harris, <blank>, Singh
C:    Thomas, Harris, Singh, Oliver

But in this game I would have switched Ross and Brown to SG and PG respectively.

I also would have played 0 for Defensive positioning and double teamed Francis Bradway.

As far as your offense goes, based only on attributes, Brown is your best scorer and Thomas is #2.  Then Hedlund, Ross, Spaulding, Gay, and Morris are all about the same.   But based on results, Ross gets a bit of a bump up.

So for distro, I would likely have had :

Brown:  15
Thomas:  10
Ross:  7
Hedlund:  4
Spaulding:  4
Gay:  4
Morris:  4
Singh:  3

Everyone else at 1 (except Kiikland at 0)

I see it as a victory for your team.

What about hoppe? I promised him a start because i was in a battle and running out of money, I've been starting brown at the 1 and Hoppe at the 2, but if you think it would be better to start Ross at the 1 and then hoppe or brown at the 3 and then Morris or Harris at the 4 and Thomas at the 5. Plus I would think Hoppe's distro would be higher than 1 because he's 80 something in peremeter. But As far as I understand you only have to start him 80% of the time to keep him happy so I can adjust it for big games. Thx for all of the help.

Well Hoppe is not very good right now.  He is going to cause issues.  His passing is 27, there is no way he can start at PG.  PE is only one piece of the pie .. BH, SPD, and ATH, and Offensive IQ also impact Offense.  I do not like to give anyone at C or lower anything other than one 1.

I guess with Hoppe at SG, I would play Ross at PG and Brown at SF.  But that line up means your Defense for 1 and 2 is terrible.  But Brown at 42 passing is not going to be good at the point, so it is what it is.  Starting Hoope is costing you games though.

Also keep in mind you only have to meet a start promise 80% of the time. So you have 5 games (I believe the promise doesn't carry over to post season) where you can bring him in off the bench. Just make those 5 games count if you go that route. Save it for games you think could swing on a couple posessions.

Yeah I should not have given him the garunteed start, he's going to be 99 PE though so that will be good, plus he will improve Defense to about 60. I will start brown at the 2 and Hoppe at the 3 cause hoppe has higher LP and usually the best offensive player is the SG. I'm going to bench hoppe when I play the other good human in my league (western Oregon) the two and probably 3 times I play them.

Hughesjr what does the blank in the rotation do for you?
Soory to high jack your thread monster

Posted by cmac4567 on 10/25/2015 8:39:00 PM (view original):
Hughesjr what does the blank in the rotation do for you?
Soory to high jack your thread monster

Say the 1st person listed in each spot on the depth chart is assigned a rating of 1, the backup is a 2, and so on.  The engine will always play the lineup (based on your depth chart) to have the lowest #s in the game at all times.  

Using hughes' example, if Hedlund, Ross, and Brown all came out at once or were of equal fatigue, the sim would put Spaulding in at SG (rating of 3) before PG (rating of 4).  If you listed Spaulding in the 3rd depth chart slot at the PG and SG positions, the sim would randomly assign him to either PG or SG with no rhyme or reason.  I like using the <blank> if I have a really good backup big and want to maximize minutes.  If my starters are A and B, C is a top-notch backup, and D is worse than C, I'll often go:

PF: A C, D
C:   B <blank> C, D
In that example, A's stamina would be less than B's.  Basically, setting the depth chart that way maximizes C's minutes and only brings D in if A, B, and C are all fatigued.  

Thanks Daanoc never knew that. Time to experiment.

Posted by darnoc29099 on 10/25/2015 10:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cmac4567 on 10/25/2015 8:39:00 PM (view original):
Hughesjr what does the blank in the rotation do for you?
Soory to high jack your thread monster

Say the 1st person listed in each spot on the depth chart is assigned a rating of 1, the backup is a 2, and so on.  The engine will always play the lineup (based on your depth chart) to have the lowest #s in the game at all times.  

Using hughes' example, if Hedlund, Ross, and Brown all came out at once or were of equal fatigue, the sim would put Spaulding in at SG (rating of 3) before PG (rating of 4).  If you listed Spaulding in the 3rd depth chart slot at the PG and SG positions, the sim would randomly assign him to either PG or SG with no rhyme or reason.  I like using the <blank> if I have a really good backup big and want to maximize minutes.  If my starters are A and B, C is a top-notch backup, and D is worse than C, I'll often go:

PF: A C, D
C:   B <blank> C, D
In that example, A's stamina would be less than B's.  Basically, setting the depth chart that way maximizes C's minutes and only brings D in if A, B, and C are all fatigued.  

Exactly why I do it .. (what darnoc29099 said)

Which is why it would be nice to get a couple more spots in the lineup instead of just 4 .. 6 would be ideal.

You can have much finer control with blanks.

So, lets say you have a guy who is better at PG than SG, and you want him at PG every time your starter is not there.  But you also want him to backup your SG before anyone else .. so: A is staring PG, B is starting SG, C is the guard you want to play most at PG/SG as a backup.  D and E are your final two guards.

The scenario is that C is a good backup PG and also good at SG, and between D and E, D is the guy you would want at PG if they were the only 2 available.  You would set up this as your lineup.

PG:  A, C, <blank>, D
SG:  B, C, D, E

Then if A is tired, C comes in .. he plays point.  If B and A are both out, C and D are in and C is always at PG.  If A and B and C come out, D and E are in and D is at point while E is at SG. 

In this linuep the playing time would be A and B most, then C (at both PG and SG), then D (at both PG and SG), then E with the least (at SG only). 

If you were to switch E and D on the SG .. so, it looked like this:

PG:  A, C, <blank>, D
SG:  B, C, E, D

Then the only difference is that E would get more playing time (a similar amount of playing time as D now) .. and most (if not all) of D's time would be at PG (instead of split between PG and SG). All of E's time is still at SG, he just gets a little more SG time than scenario 1.

bump