kmason - what i think OR meant, and i agree, is that the performance of the teams is more important than each individual stat. in the fg/assist comparison, if individual players have whack assist numbers (which, everybody agrees is the case), but the players and team are scoring appropriately, does it matter much if assists are doled out correctly? we have also been told assists are window dressing, the ratings that should go into assists are in the formulas in totally different ways than the raw assist figures we end up seeing.

anyway, i do agree with you that assists and blocks etc. should be more aligned with real life. i still have yet to see a "defensive superstar" and that sucks. but, the fact that they are wrong does not in any way make it ok that FG% is wrong. and besides - if you look at the positive correlation between any stat on the box score and winning, for example, if you win fg%, how often do you win the game? i would guess fg% and rebounding were by a good margin the stats with the highest correlation. so i feel you need to get the most important stuff right first, and then move on down the line...

Posted by kmasonbx on 10/9/2010 5:22:00 PM (view original):
My point still stands, there is still no proof that shooting percentages against teams that are good defensively are out of whack. If somebody could show in games between 2 BCS schools the FG% is much higher than real life then it's something that has legs, but just looking at overall team FG% is not enough.

Just looked at the 72 teams in the big six conferences in Allen.  over 110,000 fga
Numbers changed by a percent ot two but I'd guess they're within a point of two of being accurate for BigSix teams across all worlds.

In HD
Big Six teams against non big six conf teams shot 53% overall (57% on twos, 42% on threes)
Against big six conf teams it was 48% overall (52% on twos, 37% on threes)

In a RL sampling of about 7300 games, teams from big six conf:
Against non big six conf teams the big six teams shot about 48% overall (53% on twos, 36% on threes)
Against big six conf teams it was a bit lower around 43.7% overall (48% on twos, 34% on threes)

Thanks Iguana, that's the type of numbers I was suggesting would be a good barometer. Definitely shooting higher than real life, and the #s you have for BCS matchups is right in line with the #s I came up with in BE vs. BE games in Tark.

Posted by kmasonbx on 10/9/2010 7:45:00 PM (view original):
Your last point where you say how about bad teams playing good defensive teams, nobody is looking at those teams FG% and that doesn't even things out because nobody is talking about overall shooting % they are pointing out the best teams and saying they are shooting too well, nobody has any clue what the overall shooting % in HD is. The argument is good teams shoot too high %, and my point is at D2 and D3 even good teams have poor defensive teams. You pointed out my game against SW Baptist and talked about how my bigs shot but what you didn't look at was how poor of defenders they're big men are and I purposely targeted that. I had my leading scorer who is 66ath/44sp/84lp/41bh/AIQ matched up against his 48ath/31sp/42D/A-IQ, are you telling me my guy isn't supposed to shoot well in that matchup? My other starting big man took 1 shot and made it and my SW Baptist bigs both have 52D ratings one with a B+ IQ and the other with a C+ IQ. Again why shouldn't my bigs shoot very well against his big men when 3 of his 4 bigs are poor defenders? And this is on possibly the best team in Tark D2, and 75% of his big man rotation aren't very good defenders. That's the point I have been trying to make, even some of the very best teams in D2 and D3 have poor defensive teams so just saying you're playing against a very tough schedule doesn't mean you are playing against very good defensive teams. This is why I've been saying the only way to see if this is out of whack is to compare BCS teams because for the most part all BCS teams are pretty good defensively. I even look at your SIUE team and even they aren't a very good defensive teamn, I mean you have 1 perimeter player who is above 53 D and 5 of the 7 are below 50. I'm actually surprised considering the schedule you've played you're only giving up 46% shooting.

For a long time now coaches have neglected the D rating when recruiting because in the old engine as long as you had very athletic and fast players it didn't matter, now in the new engine it does matter and coaches aren't adjusting and recruiting better defenders, you are a prime example, it seems you almost completely ignore defense when it comes to recruiting with your SIUE team judging from how weak your D ratings are. I remember Emy/Dcy constantly saying how the D rating was nearly meaningless now it seems like it's very meaningful and everybody is ignoring that and just assming the engine isn't working right when in fact it could be working perfectly and people just haven't adjusted and have poor defensive teams and are wondering why teams are shooting so well.

As far as saying Iguana's example was irrelevant, I can't believe a #s guy like yourself doesn't understand why the example he used is meaningless. He said he looked at the top 12 offensive teams in a world and looked at their FG% and then compared it to every BCS school in real life. The only way it could possibly be accurate is if you compare the top 12 teams in HD to the top 12 teams in real life, when you compare every BCS team in real life you're including the bad teams that could be the 250th best offensive team in the country. So how can his example be anything but inaccurate and meaningless when he's including some of the worst teams in real life and only comparing them to the best teams in HD? What if to disprove it I looked at the 12 worst offensive teams in BCS conferences in HD and compared it to all the BCS teams in real life, wouldn't you have said my example was meaningless? It's the same thing just reversed.

Next time you think your team is shooting too high of a precentage I want you to focus on the individual matchups and look at the D ratings and IQ of your opponent and another thing that I think is underrated is that team gameplanning may mean a lot more in this engine then in the old. My Truman St. team from a ratings standpoint is not a very good defensive team, however I think I gameplan well and because of that in my 6 games against top 100 RPI teams including 3 games against top 11 teams only your team has shot over 50% against me.  When you look at the matchups it's really no surprise you shot 54% when you look at the individual matchups, you had the more athletic and faster player at every position and on top of that I only had 2 players in the starting lineup above 55D.