What is HD’s “White Whale”? Topic

Posted by gillispie on 9/12/2021 11:41:00 AM (view original):
Posted by Baums_away on 9/12/2021 10:58:00 AM (view original):
Has anyone built a team with 80+ PER at every position? It’s something I’ve always wanted to do but don’t think there are enough bigs out there that can shoot.
i'm curious what you'd be looking to get out of such a scheme?

i don't know if its been done, but i imagine it would not go very well. i tried pretty hard to advance a 4-guard lineup scheme under press and was unsuccessful. i'm sure someone could build a good program with it or whatever, that sort of thing, but it was always meaningfully worse than equally talented, more balanced lineups, for me. with crappier teams especially fb/fcp, i do find that small ball route to be more viable, like 4 guard or 3 guard sf, i have definitely gotten good mileage from that from low prestige d1 type of situations. but its not a good strategy for high end teams. anyway, i had thought the extra TOs generated at the 4 would pay for the reb, but if you have good TO generation from the 1-3 already, you just don't get much more. and then the extra per scoring, i found i was just spreading it around, but it wasn't really raising the quality.

also my opinion of per bigs is poor. i think using a bit of 3pt scoring in your bigs can help offset lack of 3pt scoring on the team in general, and sometimes that can be a valuable strategy really. but when you face 3pt defenses and quality teams, 3pt scoring bigs just aren't that efficient, and now they take all those pesky long 2s which are just really bad under HD. so combining them with quality per scoring guards just doesn't make sense IMO.
My most successful D1 teams were with 4 starters all with 85+ per. We jacked 3s and won a title and went to multiple final fours. Hard to recruit, but that offense was insanely efficient. I think we had 7 or 8 guys over 80 per.
9/17/2021 6:39 PM
I haven't seen it a ton, but how does the engine work against +5 defense
9/18/2021 4:00 AM
Make the Sweet 16/Elite 8 with no players on the Draft board.
9/18/2021 11:43 PM
Posted by mullycj on 9/18/2021 11:43:00 PM (view original):
Make the Sweet 16/Elite 8 with no players on the Draft board.
trivial?

i guess maybe not with the 150 board... with the 100 board this had to happen all the time?
9/19/2021 11:39 AM (edited)
Posted by gillispie on 9/12/2021 11:41:00 AM (view original):
Posted by Baums_away on 9/12/2021 10:58:00 AM (view original):
Has anyone built a team with 80+ PER at every position? It’s something I’ve always wanted to do but don’t think there are enough bigs out there that can shoot.
i'm curious what you'd be looking to get out of such a scheme?

i don't know if its been done, but i imagine it would not go very well. i tried pretty hard to advance a 4-guard lineup scheme under press and was unsuccessful. i'm sure someone could build a good program with it or whatever, that sort of thing, but it was always meaningfully worse than equally talented, more balanced lineups, for me. with crappier teams especially fb/fcp, i do find that small ball route to be more viable, like 4 guard or 3 guard sf, i have definitely gotten good mileage from that from low prestige d1 type of situations. but its not a good strategy for high end teams. anyway, i had thought the extra TOs generated at the 4 would pay for the reb, but if you have good TO generation from the 1-3 already, you just don't get much more. and then the extra per scoring, i found i was just spreading it around, but it wasn't really raising the quality.

also my opinion of per bigs is poor. i think using a bit of 3pt scoring in your bigs can help offset lack of 3pt scoring on the team in general, and sometimes that can be a valuable strategy really. but when you face 3pt defenses and quality teams, 3pt scoring bigs just aren't that efficient, and now they take all those pesky long 2s which are just really bad under HD. so combining them with quality per scoring guards just doesn't make sense IMO.
I just like the idea of building to an extreme that I haven’t seen much and trying to win. Also like picturing a real life team spreading the floor with 45% three point shooters at every spot.
9/21/2021 11:30 AM
Posted by Baums_away on 9/21/2021 11:30:00 AM (view original):
Posted by gillispie on 9/12/2021 11:41:00 AM (view original):
Posted by Baums_away on 9/12/2021 10:58:00 AM (view original):
Has anyone built a team with 80+ PER at every position? It’s something I’ve always wanted to do but don’t think there are enough bigs out there that can shoot.
i'm curious what you'd be looking to get out of such a scheme?

i don't know if its been done, but i imagine it would not go very well. i tried pretty hard to advance a 4-guard lineup scheme under press and was unsuccessful. i'm sure someone could build a good program with it or whatever, that sort of thing, but it was always meaningfully worse than equally talented, more balanced lineups, for me. with crappier teams especially fb/fcp, i do find that small ball route to be more viable, like 4 guard or 3 guard sf, i have definitely gotten good mileage from that from low prestige d1 type of situations. but its not a good strategy for high end teams. anyway, i had thought the extra TOs generated at the 4 would pay for the reb, but if you have good TO generation from the 1-3 already, you just don't get much more. and then the extra per scoring, i found i was just spreading it around, but it wasn't really raising the quality.

also my opinion of per bigs is poor. i think using a bit of 3pt scoring in your bigs can help offset lack of 3pt scoring on the team in general, and sometimes that can be a valuable strategy really. but when you face 3pt defenses and quality teams, 3pt scoring bigs just aren't that efficient, and now they take all those pesky long 2s which are just really bad under HD. so combining them with quality per scoring guards just doesn't make sense IMO.
I just like the idea of building to an extreme that I haven’t seen much and trying to win. Also like picturing a real life team spreading the floor with 45% three point shooters at every spot.
i've always assumed there is a volume penalty for shooting too many 3's
9/21/2021 5:29 PM
Posted by ab90 on 9/21/2021 5:29:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Baums_away on 9/21/2021 11:30:00 AM (view original):
Posted by gillispie on 9/12/2021 11:41:00 AM (view original):
Posted by Baums_away on 9/12/2021 10:58:00 AM (view original):
Has anyone built a team with 80+ PER at every position? It’s something I’ve always wanted to do but don’t think there are enough bigs out there that can shoot.
i'm curious what you'd be looking to get out of such a scheme?

i don't know if its been done, but i imagine it would not go very well. i tried pretty hard to advance a 4-guard lineup scheme under press and was unsuccessful. i'm sure someone could build a good program with it or whatever, that sort of thing, but it was always meaningfully worse than equally talented, more balanced lineups, for me. with crappier teams especially fb/fcp, i do find that small ball route to be more viable, like 4 guard or 3 guard sf, i have definitely gotten good mileage from that from low prestige d1 type of situations. but its not a good strategy for high end teams. anyway, i had thought the extra TOs generated at the 4 would pay for the reb, but if you have good TO generation from the 1-3 already, you just don't get much more. and then the extra per scoring, i found i was just spreading it around, but it wasn't really raising the quality.

also my opinion of per bigs is poor. i think using a bit of 3pt scoring in your bigs can help offset lack of 3pt scoring on the team in general, and sometimes that can be a valuable strategy really. but when you face 3pt defenses and quality teams, 3pt scoring bigs just aren't that efficient, and now they take all those pesky long 2s which are just really bad under HD. so combining them with quality per scoring guards just doesn't make sense IMO.
I just like the idea of building to an extreme that I haven’t seen much and trying to win. Also like picturing a real life team spreading the floor with 45% three point shooters at every spot.
i've always assumed there is a volume penalty for shooting too many 3's
Yeah. Its called all your opponents set their team defensive plan to +5 take away perimeter.
9/21/2021 6:16 PM
Posted by hockey1984 on 9/21/2021 6:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ab90 on 9/21/2021 5:29:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Baums_away on 9/21/2021 11:30:00 AM (view original):
Posted by gillispie on 9/12/2021 11:41:00 AM (view original):
Posted by Baums_away on 9/12/2021 10:58:00 AM (view original):
Has anyone built a team with 80+ PER at every position? It’s something I’ve always wanted to do but don’t think there are enough bigs out there that can shoot.
i'm curious what you'd be looking to get out of such a scheme?

i don't know if its been done, but i imagine it would not go very well. i tried pretty hard to advance a 4-guard lineup scheme under press and was unsuccessful. i'm sure someone could build a good program with it or whatever, that sort of thing, but it was always meaningfully worse than equally talented, more balanced lineups, for me. with crappier teams especially fb/fcp, i do find that small ball route to be more viable, like 4 guard or 3 guard sf, i have definitely gotten good mileage from that from low prestige d1 type of situations. but its not a good strategy for high end teams. anyway, i had thought the extra TOs generated at the 4 would pay for the reb, but if you have good TO generation from the 1-3 already, you just don't get much more. and then the extra per scoring, i found i was just spreading it around, but it wasn't really raising the quality.

also my opinion of per bigs is poor. i think using a bit of 3pt scoring in your bigs can help offset lack of 3pt scoring on the team in general, and sometimes that can be a valuable strategy really. but when you face 3pt defenses and quality teams, 3pt scoring bigs just aren't that efficient, and now they take all those pesky long 2s which are just really bad under HD. so combining them with quality per scoring guards just doesn't make sense IMO.
I just like the idea of building to an extreme that I haven’t seen much and trying to win. Also like picturing a real life team spreading the floor with 45% three point shooters at every spot.
i've always assumed there is a volume penalty for shooting too many 3's
Yeah. Its called all your opponents set their team defensive plan to +5 take away perimeter.
everybody is so combative and snarky in the forums. forgive me if that wasn't your intention. but, as there is a penalty for one player taking too many shots (beyond him being double teamed), doesn't it seem very logical that there should be a penalty for too many threes (beyond facing a different defense)?
9/21/2021 6:20 PM
We don't want no milquetoast forums 'round here. That would be extremely boring. If I can't beat up on ab in hoops dynasty, I might as well do it here.
9/21/2021 6:39 PM
i don't think there's a 3pta penalty like there is for a single player shooting too much. i mean, if the single player shoots too much, and they are all 3s, they still have the penalty... but i don't think there's any team-wide penalty comparable to the single player 40% penalty. that was added superficially by seble semi-early in 2.0 and isn't indicative of how the rest of the engine works.

there is a nebulous gray area about how the offense and defense react to each other, not the humans, but the in-game coach if you will, and its possible there's some penalty in there for shooting too many 3s - or not having enough points in the paint. but in general, i think there is not much in way of penalty there. its just the +2 to +5 you invite.

on the flip side, i definitely wouldn't call +5 a comparable counter either. its nothing like the -5 is for 0 3pta teams, and its nothing like the 40% penalty on individual scoring. the + side of the +/- just doesn't scale down the shooting % like the - side. from +2 to +5 i think the main impact is reducing 3pta. but if you have a bunch of players on +2 (3pt shooting) and they have all the distro, the +5's impact on their 3pta seems pretty minimal.

tkimble's excellent syracuse teams were a great example of heavy 3pt scoring, i remember when considering game planning against him some time in the NT, which we definitely lost, whether it was worth even going +5 in his case, where he had like 60% 3pta. i almost never go over +2 because it just doesn't do much. i think it depends on the team i have, if i'd +5 a team like that. its hard not to on one hand because its like, if not now, when? but it just doesn't work very well, you give up too much other stuff for too little, in general.

IMO, those super heavy 3pt teams are a pretty effective way to play, especially in the punching above your weight category. tkimble had some fantastic success with some really heavy 3pt shooting with championship contender teams, but i have just not been satisfied personally with the reliability of such a strategy, against top quality d1 opponents. its absolutely a highly effective offensive strategy though, especially for teams who are crappier (not top 5-10) and have a lot more room to tolerate weaknesses. with really good teams, i've never been able to tolerate the weaknesses you have to pay to have like 4 or 5 (??) 3pt scorers on the starting line - because you can build a comparably efficient offense with 2 (an elite offense), if they are really good - and you'll generally have a significant advantage elsewhere as a result (reb?). but 3pt scoring is amazing and i am generally all about it, so it definitely can yield elite offenses and great overall results.

also, today's game is different, you used to see mediocre 850 overall teams in d1, and you just had much less room for unbalanced teams. you had to be great at everything to be the favorite. now fb/fcp teams and 3pt heavy teams and such have a much better chance at things, because just about everyone else has substantial weaknesses, too. overdoing 3pt scoring has always been a viable championship level strategy in d2/d3 and i assume has to remain so today. its more true so in d1 than it ever has been. that doesn't mean... the 5 85 per guys thing... makes much sense. but you can get a really heavy 3pt scoring team without going that far, and i do think that's a solid d1 championship level strategy today.
9/22/2021 9:33 AM (edited)
Posted by mullycj on 9/18/2021 11:43:00 PM (view original):
Make the Sweet 16/Elite 8 with no players on the Draft board.
I did this with Michigan in the conference we share, mully!
9/23/2021 6:51 PM
FWIW, I would take a good 3-2 zone at +2 up against a great perimeter team over either of the other defenses set to +5 (assuming the same talent level).
9/23/2021 7:37 PM
Posted by ab90 on 9/21/2021 6:20:00 PM (view original):
Posted by hockey1984 on 9/21/2021 6:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ab90 on 9/21/2021 5:29:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Baums_away on 9/21/2021 11:30:00 AM (view original):
Posted by gillispie on 9/12/2021 11:41:00 AM (view original):
Posted by Baums_away on 9/12/2021 10:58:00 AM (view original):
Has anyone built a team with 80+ PER at every position? It’s something I’ve always wanted to do but don’t think there are enough bigs out there that can shoot.
i'm curious what you'd be looking to get out of such a scheme?

i don't know if its been done, but i imagine it would not go very well. i tried pretty hard to advance a 4-guard lineup scheme under press and was unsuccessful. i'm sure someone could build a good program with it or whatever, that sort of thing, but it was always meaningfully worse than equally talented, more balanced lineups, for me. with crappier teams especially fb/fcp, i do find that small ball route to be more viable, like 4 guard or 3 guard sf, i have definitely gotten good mileage from that from low prestige d1 type of situations. but its not a good strategy for high end teams. anyway, i had thought the extra TOs generated at the 4 would pay for the reb, but if you have good TO generation from the 1-3 already, you just don't get much more. and then the extra per scoring, i found i was just spreading it around, but it wasn't really raising the quality.

also my opinion of per bigs is poor. i think using a bit of 3pt scoring in your bigs can help offset lack of 3pt scoring on the team in general, and sometimes that can be a valuable strategy really. but when you face 3pt defenses and quality teams, 3pt scoring bigs just aren't that efficient, and now they take all those pesky long 2s which are just really bad under HD. so combining them with quality per scoring guards just doesn't make sense IMO.
I just like the idea of building to an extreme that I haven’t seen much and trying to win. Also like picturing a real life team spreading the floor with 45% three point shooters at every spot.
i've always assumed there is a volume penalty for shooting too many 3's
Yeah. Its called all your opponents set their team defensive plan to +5 take away perimeter.
everybody is so combative and snarky in the forums. forgive me if that wasn't your intention. but, as there is a penalty for one player taking too many shots (beyond him being double teamed), doesn't it seem very logical that there should be a penalty for too many threes (beyond facing a different defense)?
I think this is the difference between the forums and the discord. Not meant to be snarky. Just having fun. Hard to have that come across in 1 post. I'm pretty sure there is no penalty for having a player take to many 3's.
9/24/2021 9:49 AM
Posted by shoe3 on 9/23/2021 7:37:00 PM (view original):
FWIW, I would take a good 3-2 zone at +2 up against a great perimeter team over either of the other defenses set to +5 (assuming the same talent level).
agreed
9/24/2021 12:26 PM
Posted by hockey1984 on 9/24/2021 9:49:00 AM (view original):
Posted by ab90 on 9/21/2021 6:20:00 PM (view original):
Posted by hockey1984 on 9/21/2021 6:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ab90 on 9/21/2021 5:29:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Baums_away on 9/21/2021 11:30:00 AM (view original):
Posted by gillispie on 9/12/2021 11:41:00 AM (view original):
Posted by Baums_away on 9/12/2021 10:58:00 AM (view original):
Has anyone built a team with 80+ PER at every position? It’s something I’ve always wanted to do but don’t think there are enough bigs out there that can shoot.
i'm curious what you'd be looking to get out of such a scheme?

i don't know if its been done, but i imagine it would not go very well. i tried pretty hard to advance a 4-guard lineup scheme under press and was unsuccessful. i'm sure someone could build a good program with it or whatever, that sort of thing, but it was always meaningfully worse than equally talented, more balanced lineups, for me. with crappier teams especially fb/fcp, i do find that small ball route to be more viable, like 4 guard or 3 guard sf, i have definitely gotten good mileage from that from low prestige d1 type of situations. but its not a good strategy for high end teams. anyway, i had thought the extra TOs generated at the 4 would pay for the reb, but if you have good TO generation from the 1-3 already, you just don't get much more. and then the extra per scoring, i found i was just spreading it around, but it wasn't really raising the quality.

also my opinion of per bigs is poor. i think using a bit of 3pt scoring in your bigs can help offset lack of 3pt scoring on the team in general, and sometimes that can be a valuable strategy really. but when you face 3pt defenses and quality teams, 3pt scoring bigs just aren't that efficient, and now they take all those pesky long 2s which are just really bad under HD. so combining them with quality per scoring guards just doesn't make sense IMO.
I just like the idea of building to an extreme that I haven’t seen much and trying to win. Also like picturing a real life team spreading the floor with 45% three point shooters at every spot.
i've always assumed there is a volume penalty for shooting too many 3's
Yeah. Its called all your opponents set their team defensive plan to +5 take away perimeter.
everybody is so combative and snarky in the forums. forgive me if that wasn't your intention. but, as there is a penalty for one player taking too many shots (beyond him being double teamed), doesn't it seem very logical that there should be a penalty for too many threes (beyond facing a different defense)?
I think this is the difference between the forums and the discord. Not meant to be snarky. Just having fun. Hard to have that come across in 1 post. I'm pretty sure there is no penalty for having a player take to many 3's.
i think you are generally correct (a player or a team)
9/24/2021 12:27 PM
◂ Prev 1|2|3|4|5|6|7 Next ▸
What is HD’s “White Whale”? Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 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.