Posted by gvsujulius on 5/13/2012 10:40:00 AM (view original):
girt - I think that 20 games could be a meaningful sample because in his 20 games this year he has shot as many threes as he did all of last year through 35 games. I just threw him out there because I had wondered the same thing if I should be trying to get him to the free throw line rather than jacking up threes because I had seen people talk about speed when drawing fouls. 

I would say that the most common mistake/misconception -- probably by far -- that I see on the boards is people attempting to read too heavily into numbers from the small sample sizes we have. Even a full season is too small to really draw any meaningful, insightful conclusions. It's just one of the things about this game that you have to accept. 

Posted by tbird9423 on 5/13/2012 8:14:00 PM (view original):

That is a very true statement in my opinion.  If you get caught up trying to over-analyze, it makes it frustrating and difficult.  I had guy A set at 15 distro and guy B at 18 and guy A kept putting up way more shots than B.  So changed Guy A to 11 and Guy B to 22 and the gap the next game doubled in favor of A???  This use to really frustrate me but I agree with whoever said its 80% recruiting and 20% gameplay because you can (to some degree) control the recruiting.  Thanks for the thread guys as I have had the same dilemma and your insights were very helpful. 

its really not 80% recruiting and 20% game play, i concede that if your team is very well set up, you don't need to do that much in the way of game to game adjustment (it helps, but its a smaller factor). however, probably at least half the teams out there are leaving 5+ points per game on the table based on their base setup, which is very significant. and its probably more like 80% of teams that is true for, i would guess.

So how would you set up your team to maximize success coach?

it depends on the team... im just saying, there are so many teams out there, who could be say a top 10 team, who are 30th, because they have the wrong lineup, distro, play the wrong tempo, or whatever. i was really just disputing that its 80% recruiting and 20% game play. you can take a championship team and give them one coach, and they might win that championship 10% of the time, with at least a regular top 5 finish, and give them to another coach, and they might win that championship 2% of the time, with a standard 25th type finish. happens all the time. you really see it more with lower end teams, you see a team with RPIs in the 100s, then a great coach moves up, and immediately takes them to the NT, with no better players.

i guess to me, i would say its like, 25-30% recruiting, 25-30% team planning (building your team right, putting the talent in the right places, this is a bigger factor at higher levels of play but is very important everywhere), its tough to say maybe 15-30% team setup, 10-20% scheduling, and maybe 5-10% game to game adjustments.

edit: maybe 5% or so, practice planning? this used to be a lot more important but its not too important. i mean its really tough to try to put %s on these because the reality is, if you ROYALLY F any one of them up, you can screw your team over. even practice planning, although its unlikely you will practice the wrong O and D, it happens - and you can easily have a couple players flunk out for the NT, which can be huge. and doing any 1 thing right, without the others, doesn't get you far. you can have great talent, but if its all big men, no guards, and you set your team up poorly, your team is going to suck. doesn't matter much that you have 6 of the most talented big men in the country if thats all you did right, you know what i mean?

Yeah>  Seems that way, because right now I don't know what the heck is wrong with my team, so I kinda figure its gotta be me. So, its not just the recruits ...