it's the bunny one

Posted by copernicus on 9/19/2019 12:30:00 PM (view original):
it's the bunny one

All I know is that I am officially a middle-aged dad once I start using words like that.

Posted by robusk on 9/19/2019 12:29:00 PM (view original):
Also, I am wondering... it is probably hare-brained and not hair-brained eh? I don't know that I have ever typed it out before. Hare-brained makes more sense I guess...

I agree with this.

Posted by robusk on 9/19/2019 12:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 12:15:00 PM (view original):
See, it's when you use words like "hairbrained" that really tick me off. This is a discussion. If you don't want to have it, opt out.

I guess my point is that if you are using TS% and usage, everything useful about FTs is already included in those metrics and thus, yes, you can ignore FTAs.

......if the SIM will give you FGAs in the box score to make up for it.

Does it?

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 1:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 9/19/2019 12:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 12:15:00 PM (view original):
See, it's when you use words like "hairbrained" that really tick me off. This is a discussion. If you don't want to have it, opt out.

I guess my point is that if you are using TS% and usage, everything useful about FTs is already included in those metrics and thus, yes, you can ignore FTAs.

......if the SIM will give you FGAs in the box score to make up for it.

Does it?

Um what?

maybe: if you draft 99-00 Shaq and run him through a sim season and put his end result sim stats through the usage equation the resulting usage number is unlikely to match his IRL usage number (in no small part because FTAs are under-generated) but I'm not sure what impact that has on game to game results

Posted by robusk on 9/19/2019 12:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by copernicus on 9/19/2019 12:30:00 PM (view original):
it's the bunny one

All I know is that I am officially a middle-aged dad once I start using words like that.

Now you just need some sort of hare based pun for your team name!

Posted by robusk on 9/19/2019 1:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 1:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 9/19/2019 12:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 12:15:00 PM (view original):
See, it's when you use words like "hairbrained" that really tick me off. This is a discussion. If you don't want to have it, opt out.

I guess my point is that if you are using TS% and usage, everything useful about FTs is already included in those metrics and thus, yes, you can ignore FTAs.

......if the SIM will give you FGAs in the box score to make up for it.

Does it?

Um what?

What’s the highest FGA total you’ve seen by a team in a draft league box score? Or in any league, if it wasn’t an assist bump/open league super team?

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 1:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 9/19/2019 1:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 1:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 9/19/2019 12:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 12:15:00 PM (view original):
See, it's when you use words like "hairbrained" that really tick me off. This is a discussion. If you don't want to have it, opt out.

I guess my point is that if you are using TS% and usage, everything useful about FTs is already included in those metrics and thus, yes, you can ignore FTAs.

......if the SIM will give you FGAs in the box score to make up for it.

Does it?

Um what?

What’s the highest FGA total you’ve seen by a team in a draft league box score? Or in any league, if it wasn’t an assist bump/open league super team?

I have a damngood memory but if you are asking me to recall 26,625 box scores well... that seems like a big ask.

if two teams combined to take over 200 shots in regulation time that would be like 4 attempts per minute which seems like alot

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 10:09:00 AM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 9/19/2019 9:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bds9992 on 9/19/2019 6:02:00 AM (view original):
Walt gets to the line a lot for the shots he takes and probably rebounds better than the guys you’re thinking of, rob. His per minute price really isn’t that bad, and I tend to think that low foul guards are very important. If he can afford Frazier, he’s getting 37ish minutes of 90 D, .47 FTA/FGA and 20+ Ast%, and I love not wasting usage on guys who don’t score well.

RL FTAs don't translate very well in the SIM and are usually a waste of money.

True, because the other team may have more and there are only so many in a given game. I've definitely seen evidence of FTr (i.e. FTA/FGA ratio) though, which is why Dwight and DeAndre can get to the line more than they take a field goal attempt. If there only so many shots the SIM will give you in any given game, there are only so many free throw attempts that will come from those shots. If you have a guy who takes a lot of shots but rarely gets to the line, there will be less shots (and hence less FTAs) for players who would get to the line in real life. There's no question that Tyson and DeAndre get to the line a lot for players with such low usage, and there's no doubt that Magic and Shaq will get to the line. The question is if you've allotted enough usage for guys to get enough shots to go to the line. It's nice to add a guy like Shawn Kemp or Buck Williams, because they make up for their fouls with FTAs. If you don't draft a lot of fouls, I don't think you need free throws as much.

Similar to robusk, I'll say that while it's fun for people to test out new theories in the SIM, most of this makes zero sense.

I don’t want to do this anymore, but let’s just say that’s it’s possible that some of the SIM’s logic was never discovered. I think some owners are good because they know what works for them, and build similar teams with a lot of the same players year after year. I think this is an element of it, but, I also don’t care enough to help anyone through their shock and disbelief. It’s all good.

I have trouble with the phrasing "only so many shots the sim will give you" - while there is a theoretical upper limit on attempts just because there are only 48 sim minutes in a game, the number of shots taken is likely to be determined by tempo settings (and other factors) - the very reason that the usage penalty exists is because you can draft a bunch of Deandres (low usage, high efg dudes) and force feed them shots and without the penalty there would be no reason not to (this was a proved problem that the implementation of the penalty sought to address)

Posted by pharrop on 9/19/2019 4:39:00 AM (view original):
It doesn’t matter for WIS purposes, but, Clyde could/can dress like no other....and the “Clydemobile” (bright burgundy and antelope Rolls) the man is/was king of cool

and it should matter, it really should - seble needs to program in some sort of style point system...

Posted by copernicus on 9/19/2019 3:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by pharrop on 9/19/2019 4:39:00 AM (view original):
It doesn’t matter for WIS purposes, but, Clyde could/can dress like no other....and the “Clydemobile” (bright burgundy and antelope Rolls) the man is/was king of cool

and it should matter, it really should - seble needs to program in some sort of style point system...

Clyde would be a top 3 pick, Magic and Doc would go in the top 10