Seems ridiculous to me.

https://www.whatifsports.com/hd/GameResults/BoxScore.aspx?gid=13345409

Both teams ran uptempo, so lots of possessions in this game. Overall, I'd chalk this one up to a fairly unlucky sim, especially give you have an A+ HCA and a better team on paper.

A combination of things. He was efficient with points off turnovers, 15 offensive rebounds. Scored from the foul line. 44% from 3. And the obvious one, as darnoc mentioned, both teams playing uptempo.

its somewhat luck, but its rarely all luck, and as such i refuse to label it as such unless it actually is - especially being a home game vs a+ hca. this game is WAY more consistent than most folks give it credit for, i don't think people realize that seble's feedback loop was a massive, massive change, when taken over the course of the game in, in terms of reducing major upsets. so, major upsets are really pretty rare these days, probably far less than they should be. ill stop rambling now but the point is, with the large majority of these kind of posts, there is a serious flaw in the team composition of the more talented team, which means they aren't the favorite they appear to be at a glance, or there is a serious flaw in the game plan, or both, so studious coaches should be seriously reluctant to go with the luck factor.

so, to answer... why in gods name would you run a -3? if you just got caught with your pants down (no game plan), then ok. if not, you need to seriously rethink your approach to +/-. huge mistake, probably justifies the entire scope of the loss just on that 1 issue. you wouldn't be asking why they scored 86 if you'd won by 1, but 86 and 93 aren't really that far apart. also, if you aren't going to game plan, or if you thought -3 made sense, either way, you should have adjusted at half. maybe you allowed it and the sim didn't, i didn't look closely enough to rule that out, but assuming that isn't the case, consider tweaking your halftime adjustment option on +/- as well. most likely the sim would have went -1 which still would have been a poor choice but far better than -3.

the other part is you did get unlucky on fouls, and on FT shooting, which is a pretty significant factor. well, at least in terms of how it contributes to the final score, maybe a bunch came at the end, but that rate of fouling and FT shooting can't really be justified, even assuming a handful came late. that contributes several points as well. but again, your -3 really did not help you on that front, you'd have fouled less if you played a reasonable +2/+3, so part of that, also goes back to the same issue (which is kind of a coincidence but still - i mean, its unlucky they hit a bunch of 3s AND nailed you on fouls, those were independent, but you increased the odds of both with the very poor -3 choice).

Seems like most surprising upsets you just need to look at the FT %'s. It is how they "engineer" unlikely results.

Posted by phalla on 7/6/2016 5:42:00 PM (view original):
Seems like most surprising upsets you just need to look at the FT %'s. It is how they "engineer" unlikely results.

ummm...what??

Posted by yanks250125 on 7/6/2016 8:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by phalla on 7/6/2016 5:42:00 PM (view original):
Seems like most surprising upsets you just need to look at the FT %'s. It is how they "engineer" unlikely results.

ummm...what??

i don't think the game intentionally builds losses through FTs, but phalla is right that a lot of upsets are heavily FT driven in major advantage situations. its not intentional, but the reason it works like that is, you build this whole team, that is way better than the opponent on many fronts, which combine and multiply and give you huge advantages in areas like 3 point shooting, rebounding, defense, etc... but FT grades are basically no higher on average for high-rating players than low-rating players, and the FT equation, unlike most other equations, is very simple rating wise - its just FT (there are non ratings like fatigue, health, probably HCA). so its really hard to build up much of a FT advantage, where as in a shooting equation heavily factoring in spd, per, and bh, you can be way ahead of your opponent in 3/3. also, there is no feedback on FT shooting, while there is on many other core areas of the game. so, it just makes logical sense that FTs would play an outsizes role in causing major upsets.