Distribution too rigid? Topic

kujayhawk
Posts: 396 (0)
Hall of Famer
203 89
Rookie
I haven't been reading every forum thread but it seems like folks like the new distribution system -- at least in how it really seems to be giving the percentage of shots to the players the way you want it to be.

I'm not sure how realistic that is. (Although I'm not sure the old engine was realistic either since that took things to a different extreme.)

One problem that I am having with the new system is that I'm getting crushed by (-) defenses. Deservedly so since my team is pretty awful in terms of roster construction. My team has no perimeter shooters so it makes sense for teams to fill the paint and try to stop one of my two players with low post games.

I'm not really complaining how this strategy is effective, it very well should be when it goes up against a team with such glaring weaknesses.

That said ...

(1) If my power forward is going up against a -3, -4, or -5 defense, should is distribution not change at all? It seems to be that there should be a bit more flexibility in the distribution. If I'm going up against a -4 defense, I'd like to think my guards might shoot the ball at least a tiny bit more but that doesn't seem to be happening.

(2) Ignoring the percentage of a particular player shots, shouldn't the percentage of three point shots be a bit higher than the proscribed settings when going up against a (-) defense? Despite playing almost exclusively against those types of defenses, my six roster players that have a zero +/- 3 point setting are only taking threes 24% of the time. That seems low in general and even worse since they are going up against teams that are abandoning the perimeter.

It really seems that you can run a -5 against my team and have no real downside to doing it. My post players are going to continue to put it up just as much and my perimeter players aren't going to take more threes to try to penalize you for ignoring the perimeter.


There are massive sample size problems in coming to conclusions after just seven games but I figured I'd post to see if there are any other teams that might help in building up a better sample.
6/1/2010 4:45 PM
mjp8
Posts: 274 (0)
Hall of Famer
68 1
Rookie
I agree there should be some flexability with the distro.

I really like the way the new distro is set up and have no complaints, but I worried about the same situation in a game last night. I was playing a pressing team so gave most the distro to my guards with high BH/P/SPD but then i started to wonder, what if he just plays a +3 or something along those lines.

Maybe a setting that can say play this distro against -1, -2, -3, -4, -5 etc...that could get really tedious to set up and be optional but there are some games where I might prefer it.
6/1/2010 4:54 PM
dalter
Posts: 71 (0)
All Star
25
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By kujayhawk on 6/01/2010




(1) If my power forward is going up against a -3, -4, or -5 defense, should is distribution not change at all? It seems to be that there should be a bit more flexibility in the distribution. If I'm going up against a -4 defense, I'd like to think my guards might shoot the ball at least a tiny bit more but that doesn't seem to be happening.

This isn't any different than the previous engine ... if you're expecting a -3/4/5 defense, you should adjust your distro accordingly.

(2) Ignoring the percentage of a particular player shots, shouldn't the percentage of three point shots be a bit higher than the proscribed settings when going up against a (-) defense?

They do. The same player with the same setting will take more 3p's against a -3 than he would against a +3 (for example).

Despite playing almost exclusively against those types of defenses, my six roster players that have a zero +/- 3 point setting are only taking threes 24% of the time. That seems low in general and even worse since they are going up against teams that are abandoning the perimeter.

It's largely because they have low pe ratings. Also, remember that is only for 3p fg's, they can (and likely are) taking perimeter jumpers inside the 3pt line.

It really seems that you can run a -5 against my team and have no real downside to doing it. My post players are going to continue to put it up just as much and my perimeter players aren't going to take more threes to try to penalize you for ignoring the perimeter.

I haven't seen a -5 to know exactly how it plays in this engine. But what you're describing -- a team with no real perimeter threats -- was completely susceptible to this strategy in the old engine.


There are massive sample size problems in coming to conclusions after just seven games but I figured I'd post to see if there are any other teams that might help in building up a better sample.

Was going to say this myself -- sample size. Even taking that into account, I don't really see anything wrong w. what you're describing.

6/1/2010 5:08 PM
kujayhawk
Posts: 396 (0)
Hall of Famer
203 89
Rookie
These are the two games that I find most frustrating. Both against the -4 defense:

Game 1
Game 2

And on my roster, this is the player that I really am shocked at how little he shoots the three, he's my starting SG and set to 0 for 3 point frequency:

James Orr


I know I took a bad sample size and just made it worse.
6/1/2010 5:41 PM
mjp8
Posts: 274 (0)
Hall of Famer
68 1
Rookie
Dalter I think the big difference was the past engine seemed to have a bit more sim control over distro which was bad in a lot of ways but good in ways like this.

With the old engine if I set a SG to 8 and a PF to 12 they might even it out to about 10/10 based on the flow of the game. With the new engine your SG will be 8 and your PF will be 12 no matter what.

At least that is the impression I have gotten through a few games.
6/1/2010 5:43 PM
hughesjr
Posts: 3175 (0)
Hall of Famer
492 154 8 2
Prospect
Well, personally I would rather the computer not ignore my input for distribution and just do what it wants regardless of how I set it.

If I did not set up my game plan correctly, I still want the computer to follow it. They have added an auto adjust for tempo and for positioning. I guess they could allow you to have variable distros based on positioning...
6/1/2010 5:44 PM
kujayhawk
Posts: 396 (0)
Hall of Famer
203 89
Rookie
Dalter -- I really, really hesitate to get into any argument with you because you're 10x the coach I am in every sense of it ... quality, knowledge, experience.

That said, are you really sure that this isn't any different than the previous engine? I'm not sure how you can argue that is the same. This is a new distribution system that stays quite true to our settings. The old one adjusted quite a bit to take "the best shot". That in itself makes it hard for to accept that there is no difference. If I ran -5 or had the -5 run against me in the old engine, I'd see a higher than normal distribution given to my guards and I'd see a higher percentage of three point shots.

I'm not questioning the following, just asking follow up. Are you sure that a low PE rating will lead to lower three point frequency? If so, that's news to me but it would explain an awful lot about my team not taking the three as frequently as I like. I always thought the +/- setting for three point shooting along with the position on the court was what determined how frequent a player launches three point shots.
6/1/2010 5:47 PM
kujayhawk
Posts: 396 (0)
Hall of Famer
203 89
Rookie
Hughesjr -- when I'm saying too rigid, it's a degree of scale. I want the sim to follow my game plan as well. That said, just like you note I want it to auto adjust tempo and make halftime adjustments, I'd also like it to make some tweaks to distribution if needed.

As a general rule, I want my power forward Matthew Ardoin to take the most shots on my team because he's the only offensive threat on the entire roster. But pretend I have my team set to 1's across the board. Doesn't it make sense that he'd take a few more shots going up against a (+) defense? And if he was a guard a few more against a (-) defense.


To be clear, I'm not advocating that my team should be going trigger happy from downtown simply because I'm going up against a (-) defense. That said, I do think there should be a moderate adjustment. Emphasis on moderate but to not have any adjustments to the distribution regardless of facing a +5, 0, or -5 seems a bit off.
6/1/2010 5:54 PM
kujayhawk
Posts: 396 (0)
Hall of Famer
203 89
Rookie
Or to perhaps put it a better way, there were times in the old engine where I was awfully tempted to run the -5 as a gimmick. The other team wouldn't see it coming and I'd benefit from the surprise factor. I typically didn't follow through on that because I knew that the benefits from the shock of going up against the -5 would be tempered the guards shooting more threes and shooting them relatively undefended.

It seems a bit silly that you can run a gimmick like that and the other team not reacting at all to it. There's having an initial distribution chart and being bullheaded and sticking to it regardless of circumstance.
6/1/2010 5:58 PM
dalter
Posts: 71 (0)
All Star
25
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By mjp8 on 6/01/2010
Dalter I think the big difference was the past engine seemed to have a bit more sim control over distro which was bad in a lot of ways but good in ways like this.

With the old engine if I set a SG to 8 and a PF to 12 they might even it out to about 10/10 based on the flow of the game. With the new engine your SG will be 8 and your PF will be 12 no matter what.

No offense, but I think that is totally wrong.

6/1/2010 6:08 PM
dalter
Posts: 71 (0)
All Star
25
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By kujayhawk on 6/01/2010These are the two games that I find most frustrating. Both against the -4 defense:

Game 1
Game 2

And on my roster, this is the player that I really am shocked at how little he shoots the three, he's my starting SG and set to 0 for 3 point frequency:

James Orr


I know I took a bad sample size and just made it worse
In the old engine, Orr had taken 50 3pt attempts on 313 attempts (16% of his shots from 3p range).

In the new engine, Orr has taken nine 3pt attempt on 64 attempts (14% of his shots from 3p range).

This is a guy with 96 sp and 37 pe. Coming into this season, he was a 28% career 3pt shooter. So not only is he a bad 3pt shooter (which he should be), he's shooting 3p's with basically the same frequency that he did before.

Now, I'm not saying that nothing is different with the current distro. That's obviously not true. I'm just saying that I think you're off base in wanting/expecting guys like this to start throwing up a bunch more threes, and I'm also saying they wouldn't have been putting up a bunch more threes in the old engine, either.
6/1/2010 6:14 PM
dalter
Posts: 71 (0)
All Star
25
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By kujayhawk on 6/01/2010Or to perhaps put it a better way, there were times in the old engine where I was awfully tempted to run the -5 as a gimmick. The other team wouldn't see it coming and I'd benefit from the surprise factor. I typically didn't follow through on that because I knew that the benefits from the shock of going up against the -5 would be tempered the guards shooting more threes and shooting them relatively undefended.

It seems a bit silly that you can run a gimmick like that and the other team not reacting at all to it. There's having an initial distribution chart and being bullheaded and sticking to it regardless of circumstance


kujay, the problem here is that you just don't have the players to properly respond to it. If you had a bunch of perimeter guys who could shoot the 3, they would take more 3's and this would not be an issue.
6/1/2010 6:16 PM
ike1024
Posts: 410 (0)
Hall of Famer
59
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By kujayhawk on 6/01/2010 Are you sure that a low PE rating will lead to lower three point frequency?
I was wondering the same thing after dalter's post. I can't believe that would be true.
6/1/2010 6:19 PM
dahsdebater
Posts: 10041 (0)
Hall of Famer
284 292 18
Pro
I would ideally like the number of shots to be related to distribution factoring in only passing and ball handling. The game info says distribution is the ratio of plays run for a player. I would like a good ball handler to be slightly more likely to shoot when a play is run for him and a good passer to be less likely to shoot with passing have a significantly greater impact on the number of shots. In reality most teams run a huge percentage of plays for their PGs. If I have a great passing PG who can also score and I amp up his distro I'd like him to shoot some but also do a lot of driving and kicking, take up defenders and find the open big man, etc. Not that he'd never go for the layup or shoot the J, but high distro on a good passer should still give him the option of passing if the play leads to an open teammate.
6/1/2010 6:25 PM
kujayhawk
Posts: 396 (0)
Hall of Famer
203 89
Rookie
You sort of helped me out a bit, dalter.

Prior to this season, I wasn't a complete idiot and actually had some perimeter threats. So Orr was set to -1 freshman to junior year. Now I have no perimeter threats so I've set him to 0. He's my best threat to keep defenses honest so I had to crank it up. Again, just seven games, but he's shooting less from three point range as a senior despite going from a -1 to 0 and also facing defenses game in and out that are giving up the outside shot.

As to your statement that I don't have players to properly respond to it. I 110% agree that I don't have the players to *successfully* respond to it. But that's not my issue. Are you saying that simply because I have players that have low perimeter ratings, the game should not adjust accordingly?

I may be dead wrong on this, but if I have my shooting guard set the same for three point frequency, I don't think it should matter if it's a 9 perimeter rating or a 90 when making adjustments. The success rate of the 9 should be brutal -- but if I didn't want him taking shots I could stop that by turning off the distribution and setting him to -2 for threes.

Because I want to try to somewhat keep my opponents honest, I have Orr set to having the 2nd highest (tied with another) distribution on my team and have him set to 0 for threes so that he'll take an open look if it's given to him.

He's being given lots of open looks but the sim should simply ignore that because he's got a bad perimeter rating?
6/1/2010 6:28 PM
123456 Next ▸
Distribution too rigid? Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.