So we all know that 6 graduating seniors will keep any EEs from leaving. We also know that EEs, 5th/Srs with low gpa's, and players with broken promises all leave after the NT is completed.

But is there an actual order? As in milliseconds? And if so, do we think the engine has any type of "competitive balance" involved in any of that?

In other words, let's say for an example that a team has 4 Srs graduating, a 5th/Sr that's going to leave because of low grades, AND two freshmen that will be leaving due to promises...... is that team less likely to lose their EEs based on nothing at all, other than a gutted roster?

I ask because I've never had a completely decimated roster by EEs. I've lost 3 guys +100 on the big board in my somewhat limited time playing D1. But each time, I've kept a player that I should've likely lost (I even kept #2 on the board in one of those seasons). So I was curious if others felt there was some sort of unwritten balance that takes place at times. (Yes I know sometimes we get shafted and nothing can be done about it)


Edit...... after some research much later, it was only 2 players +100. Not 3. I misspoke when making this thread originally

I don't think so.

I am actually curious about the story of the three 100+ recruits you lost. It doesn't look like you have had that many players drafted altogether, so that sounds like a high % .....

Exactly. I haven't. One was Timothy blansett on my Missouri team in Crum. I was fresh off my first D1 championship, and I kept #2 and lost Blansett at #126. Ruined me for the next season because I had been recruiting guards to replace the expected departure of #2. While blansett was a C and I never expected him to leave!

Hang tight and I'll find the other ones. I know one isn't credited to my name, due to a team change. But let me look them up real quick

add on..... I take that back. It was 2 +100 guys. I remember the 3rd player I'm thinking of wasn't +100. He was a freshman. And he was fairly high up the board. It was after I won my title with Louisville and Mr John Anderson went pro after just one season. He ended up getting drafted at #14 but be was down maybe in the 40s or so when the NT started (this part is just a guess). And then he made a huge jump after winning out.

the 2nd was either Louis Burns or Thomas Wright from Louisville possibly. I've got screenshots somewhere. So I'll do some digging at some point and post the pics. Can't at the moment

I have never lost any players outside of 100. I've released a spreadsheet onto the forums that allows you to figure out whether it's a possibility. Definitely isn't random at all, but very easy to control.

I've lost a couple outside the top 100 but usually after a deep run in the NT.

Posted by cubcub113 on 1/8/2022 12:21:00 PM (view original):
I have never lost any players outside of 100. I've released a spreadsheet onto the forums that allows you to figure out whether it's a possibility. Definitely isn't random at all, but very easy to control.

I'm not much concerned with what a spreadsheet says. It happened. There's good info to follow on a spreadsheet. But there's always outliers at times. Maybe the definition of "random" is what's important. For example with Blansett, he was a C. And maybe there weren't many Cs high on the draft board that season. And that played a part. But I also think it's well known here that tourney success plays into SOME players decision to leave early. Which I'm sure was the case here, as it was a title season. Sometimes you just get the shaft. I'm clearly not the only person it's happened to.

To me, random would mean if blansett left at 126, and ANY Center above 126 stays, that's random. (For the record, blansett was a Jr, not a star studded freshman). I don't remember the case with Blansett, he might have been my first ever EE so I wasn't even thinking about reasons why he left, or anything like that.

I know in the discord that Doc (_theprofesso) has kept some info in the discord on draft data. The only reason I'm bringing that up is because there's more +100 players leaving. But it's only in the worlds he plays in.

As far as "random" I kept #18 in Rupp last season. As a Soph. Other Sophs below him left for the NBA, and other PFs left below him for the NBA. There IS some randomness to it all. But again, maybe it depends on what "random" means to each of us.

Posted by gillispie on 1/8/2022 10:17:00 PM (view original):
i actually still don't follow the original question. how does the order affect the competitive balance / anything?

i think of those things, the only one that is relevant to the EE decision is the graduating seniors. didn't seble add something that makes the 3rd+ EE less likely or something? or the 4th+? but i don't think that is really affected by this either?

The question was, in lightning speed, which happens first.... EE leaves, broken promise leaves, or an inel with 2.2 gpa leaves? (Even tho it all actually happens at the "same time", is there an order?).

And if there is an order, is there an impact from a broken promise or inel leaving, that may cause an EE to stay? Like if a team breaks a bunch of promises, while also having 4 Srs graduate, is the system going to say "geez this roster will only have 4 players after all these guys are gone. So we'll let him keep #26 on the board so at least he has 5 players still"

(Obviously without the sympathy involved. That was just to paint the picture)

I agree with this for the most part. But cub mentioned that "it's very easy to control". If you're player is in the 100s on the board, how can you control that everyone else at his position doesn't leave? I didn't understand that part. And I know he's aware that players leave +100.

I always had the impression it was the opposite. And that post season success was a HUGE factor. I also lost a freshman on the board at #24 that said likely staying after winning my Louisville title. And I remember seeing devilowl lose a freshman that said flat out 'staying' after winning a title at Colorado. And HE was +100 as well. That one was brutal

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/18nFVaen7of4a3eOftUYXtBtV7sgvVPnIdtnQVWqGp4w/edit?usp=sharing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mtj_wx6etjY&ab_channel=HDcubcub113

if anyone is interested in "The Sheet"

Posted by topdogggbm on 1/9/2022 3:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by gillispie on 1/8/2022 10:17:00 PM (view original):
i actually still don't follow the original question. how does the order affect the competitive balance / anything?

i think of those things, the only one that is relevant to the EE decision is the graduating seniors. didn't seble add something that makes the 3rd+ EE less likely or something? or the 4th+? but i don't think that is really affected by this either?

The question was, in lightning speed, which happens first.... EE leaves, broken promise leaves, or an inel with 2.2 gpa leaves? (Even tho it all actually happens at the "same time", is there an order?).

And if there is an order, is there an impact from a broken promise or inel leaving, that may cause an EE to stay? Like if a team breaks a bunch of promises, while also having 4 Srs graduate, is the system going to say "geez this roster will only have 4 players after all these guys are gone. So we'll let him keep #26 on the board so at least he has 5 players still"

(Obviously without the sympathy involved. That was just to paint the picture)

for the promises, i don't think so. broken promises don't count towards graduating players or impact EEs, as far as i know. i don't know about the ineligible with 2.2 gpa, i am still questioning if that is even still a thing. i honestly don't even know if in 2.0, if you lost an ineligible to juco, if that counted towards the 6 openings or not! but my thinking is, most likely, those don't / didn't impact EEs, either. it was only graduating seniors.

so, i don't know about the order, but i am also thinking it doesn't matter? but i'm not sure about that...

Posted by topdogggbm on 1/9/2022 3:56:00 AM (view original):
I agree with this for the most part. But cub mentioned that "it's very easy to control". If you're player is in the 100s on the board, how can you control that everyone else at his position doesn't leave? I didn't understand that part. And I know he's aware that players leave +100.

I always had the impression it was the opposite. And that post season success was a HUGE factor. I also lost a freshman on the board at #24 that said likely staying after winning my Louisville title. And I remember seeing devilowl lose a freshman that said flat out 'staying' after winning a title at Colorado. And HE was +100 as well. That one was brutal

well, i think cub is saying, its easy to know if you are at risk or not, if you look at the sheet. i think he's over-stating the amount of control we have afterwards, though, in a way. but you can definitely get a sense of how much risk you have, and you can work to manage that risk, and the amount of control we have over the situation is pretty substantial.

i don't think the higher players at the same position really matter, i mean, the higher players at all positions matter. it is, as far as i understand it, completely irrelevant if the bigs happened to declare more or the guards, i don't think that is part of the logic.

i think post season success is a significant factor but i have generally felt its about a 10% increase on an on the fence junior. that was my end-of-2.0 understanding on the subject. like a 40% to leave guy becomes 50%, not 44%, in case that wasn't clear. that might be over stating it, i think that is more likely than under stating it. i do not believe post season success is a HUGE factor, but of course, the definition of HUGE is pretty vague here?

I think the impact probably depends on a number factors, most importantly if the player is near “the cusp” of a category change (“likely staying”, “on the fence”, etc).

George Washington in Iba lost an EE that moved up quite a ways after a Sweet 16 run; I was surprised by how far. In the last Big Board, James Gilbertson was listed as the second to last early entry to leave, but in the actual draft, 5 jrs are behind him, and he was drafted at #52, so he moved up considerably. I assumed some small movement for deep runs, but not a Sweet 16.

Yeah, I think postseason deep runs definitely influences the decision to leave early. It would seem for top 60 guys it puts it at a 100%, or near that.

Topdog, did you find the story on Louis Burns or Thomas Wright from Louisville?