Near future plans Topic

seble
Posts: 880 (0)
Hall of Famer
24 44 35 306 121 183
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by ewohlson on 8/10/2008I have to say that some of the fun was drafting teams were different.  Now it seems that they are all molding players to be the same.  If S. Haywood is the same type of rebounder as D Robinson....what good is that......If you lower Bayor rebounds and boost his fg%.....won't that just make him the same as any other player.....Kinda every team shoots the same rebound the same....This kinda sucks  this might be my last year in some draft leagues
We're not lowering rebounds based on normalization. FG% is the only thing we normalize. Everything else is simply pace adjusted, which just means that we use percentages instead of per minute numbers. That's to even the playing field so that guys who played more uptempo aren't inflated just because they had more opportunities per minute.

And the FG% normalization isn't drastic. In fact, we use a weighted approach using the normalized FG% and the actual FG%, so there isn't as much affect as what happens in baseball.
8/10/2008 7:47 PM
seble
Posts: 880 (0)
Hall of Famer
24 44 35 306 121 183
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by colonels19 on 8/10/2008You SHOULD know at least the roundabout number, after all this is YOUR lovechild, not ours...we shouldn't need to figure a vital statistic for YOUR NBA sim.  It seems to be a very important stat given the recent FG%+ number release and you don't know it...it makes me question your passion you have for YOUR game and it makes you look even more ignorant/aloof in my book.
Clearly you just want to argue and don't even understand what you're arguing. I would guess the historic average is about 48%-49% for 2 pointers, and 32% or so for 3 pointers.
8/10/2008 7:53 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Clearly, you don't understand what's being discussed here.

People want to know the league average FG% (which you don't know and are just guessing at) because without it, its hard to gauge how important/unimportant FG%+ is...and like I said...FG%+ is worthless without FG%#, which would show us the ADJUSTED/NORMALIZED FG% for each player season.

Arguing just to argue? Hardly...Calling a spade a spade? Precisely...
8/10/2008 7:59 PM
seble
Posts: 880 (0)
Hall of Famer
24 44 35 306 121 183
Prospect
Ok, you're going to have to sort this one out yourself unless somebody else wants to take a different angle to explain.
8/10/2008 8:30 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
There's nothing to explain, I understand the situation completely
8/10/2008 8:53 PM
monkee
Posts: 0 (0)
Hall of Famer
8 192 7 7
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By seble on 8/10/2008
Quote: Originally posted by ewohlson on 8/10/2008 I have to say that some of the fun was drafting teams were different. Now it seems that they are all molding players to be the same. If S. Haywood is the same type of rebounder as D Robinson....what good is that......If you lower Bayor rebounds and boost his fg%.....won't that just make him the same as any other player.....Kinda every team shoots the same rebound the same....This kinda sucks this might be my last year in some draft leagues
We're not lowering rebounds based on normalization. FG% is the only thing we normalize. Everything else is simply pace adjusted, which just means that we use percentages instead of per minute numbers. That's to even the playing field so that guys who played more uptempo aren't inflated just because they had more opportunities per minute.


now explain how you allotted guestimated rdb%s to 60s players and achieved exactly the opposite of all this by giving them ridiculously inflated numbers anyway

(and while you are at it maybe explain what other significant factor for normalziation there might be aside from pace)
8/10/2008 11:26 PM
seble
Posts: 880 (0)
Hall of Famer
24 44 35 306 121 183
Prospect
Normalization has nothing to do with pace. It has to do with adjusting for different eras. FG% is the aspect of the game that differs the most among eras, which is why we decided to normalize that.

The inflated rebound numbers were due to having to estimate team stats. Having now acquired the actual stats, rebound% for those players falls much more in line with everyone else.
8/11/2008 10:51 AM
badja
Posts: 1343 (0)
All Star
43 1
Prospect
So what number is in use now? What # is used for 2pt and 3 pt? thx.

8/11/2008 5:43 PM
jakotay
Posts: 608 (0)
Hall of Famer
14 342 38 8 15 24 24 1
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By badja on 8/11/2008So what number is in use now? What # is used for 2pt and 3 pt? thx.

they aren't used currently. they are there "for future use" (i.e., if needed). seble noted this in a post above (a bit).
8/11/2008 6:46 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Well if that's the case, then what the hell does FG%+ mean?
8/11/2008 6:48 PM
jakotay
Posts: 608 (0)
Hall of Famer
14 342 38 8 15 24 24 1
Prospect
I may be completely missing things but IIRC its an indicator of that player's FG% relative to the league average for that season.
8/11/2008 6:53 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
So why is that stat listed if it has no bearing on anything? Talk about misleading...
8/11/2008 7:03 PM
jakotay
Posts: 608 (0)
Hall of Famer
14 342 38 8 15 24 24 1
Prospect
To pi$$ you off and fuel your witch hunt I guess.
8/11/2008 7:43 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Well I blew $10 on a team that went 23-59 because I mistakenly thought that FG%+ meant something...what a shame, huh?
8/11/2008 8:06 PM
jakotay
Posts: 608 (0)
Hall of Famer
14 342 38 8 15 24 24 1
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 8/11/2008Well I blew $10 on a team that went 23-59 because I mistakenly thought that I understood how the sim works...what a shame, huh
You could really pick any searchable stat item and blame a 23 win season on it, can't you? Has any team you ever built ever stunk because you assembled it poorly? Its always someone or something other than you, isn't it?

The team I built that focused on FG%+ won 51 games. I am befuddled as much as you are (as to why the team did well).
8/11/2008 10:15 PM
◂ Prev 1...5|6|7|8|9...18 Next ▸
Near future plans Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2025 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.