My question is: would you rather play with lousy players on your team in a league of similarly lousy players, or would you like to play with a team with some talent on the roster in a league of similarly talented players? Do you see why relativity doesn't matter here matter here? I don't give a rat's *** about relativity. It is a red herring in this context, introduced to avoid responding to my point. The answer is obvious, and I am confident that WIS understands that they cannot dry up all the talent in D3 because if they do, they cannot retain new D3 coaches. Period.

As to a different point: "As long as they define a recruiting pool and and everyone in every division has equal access to a given set of recruits that they need to evaluate and get the best of on their team ..the best coaches will find the best methods to get the best recruits most of the time." I think that is true and I agree with hughes. If they have sufficient talent to work with it will be fun; if not, not.

Hughes - i dont want to quote the whole string as its getting a bit long, but:

-I think I agree with you here in most regards
-"The only way that changes is that there are NOT enough good players to go around. There see to be enough so it does not matter." I'm not so sure about this point. There are always enough good recruits due to the relativity. Even if all the recruits are lousy, there are still some that are less lousy than others, and thus they are "good" recruits for that division
-"So, not allowing D1 guys to filter down. but allowing D2 guys who are better than the D1 guys to filter down (if they fall through the cracks) offset each other." Strictly speaking, I don't think this offsets, as in one case you have D1 and D2 guys filtering down and in the other you only have D2 guys filtering down.
-"As long as they define a recruiting pool and and everyone in every division has equal access to a given set of recruits that they need to evaluate and get the best of on their team ..the best coaches will find the best methods to get the best recruits most of the time." I think the issue that I see with this is that there is the distribution of players. Sure, no matter the recruiting pool, you will always have some A's and some F's, and the best coaches will probably always get the A's. The issue that I can see as a potential problem is the distribution of quality players. If you think of the distribution of recruits across my letter grades as a normal distribution, I wonder if allowing D1 recruits to fall to D3 basically just extends the right hand tail of the curve, to the point where the players who are rated as an A are SO much better than the players rated a C that the games are barely even contests.



And Coach Spud:
-I still think you dont understand the relativity idea, and so I have some follow up questions. Do you understand that in a league with all lousy players, your players, although lousy themselves, may be relatively good? Do you understand that in a league with all talented players, your players, although talented themselves, may be relatively bad? And thus do you understand why its important to have that context in your question?
-No, i do not see why relativity doesnt matter here as you haven't clarified your point at all. You simply restated your question. Please explain what I am not understanding.
-I still think the answer to your question is: I dont care, as it doesnt matter due to relativity. If I am coaching a D3 team under the old HD and I have 2 guys rated in the 700s with good core stats, I know that those players are good relative to the division. Sure, they may be lousy relative to D1, and i would get trampled by the Dukes and Mich Sts of the world, but that doesnt matter to me as I am in a different division. Just because my players are rated below Duke's players, and thus are "lousy", doesnt mean the game is less fun. Although my team is filled with "lousy" players, they will still do well against the other D3 schools, I am still proud of having recruited them, and I'm still winning (probably tightly contested) games, and thus I am still having fun. This isn't a red herring - this is saying that due to the relativity, the question you asked is missing some context. And when that context is added, it makes your question irrelevant.



In my opinion, i dont know if D1 players should be recruitable from D3 or not. Maybe being able to better differentiate yourself through recruiting is a good thing? I think it would relatively devalue the importance of creating a game plan, though.

I DO NOT, however, want to have the top 150 auto populate on my D3 recruiting list. It adds clutter that i dont want. Lets say i scout Florida D1 and it has 50 recruits in it (5 of which are top 150). I want my assistant to now go out and further scout the players in Florida. The assistant search is picking from a total of 195 recruits, only 45 of which are outside the top 150, so i would expect about 75% of his evaluations to be of top 150 players. but if the top 150 is not automatically populated, it is now a 90% chance that the players he evaluates are outside the top 150. I would rather my assistant not waste his time on the top 150 recruits and target some slightly lower D1 prospects.

Spud = Troll. I have been saying that for a long time. You only need to look at the mass of postings versus seasons or wins to realize that his goal is to torch the forums and not to compete. Stop attempting to respond to him.

The primary accomplishment of this game is to have an engine that can take a variety of ratings inputs and simulate real college basketball games to a fairly convincing degree; whether it is comparing 95 to 85 or 50 to 25 across an array of different ratings. To be sure, there is some weirdness (e.g. that D3 teams can target ATH/DEF monster lineups that can overwhelm normal D3 opponents with significantly better "skill" ratings). However, the measure should be whether the simulation produces convincing results over time.

Once veteran D3 coaches figure out how to sign recruits that ought to be going to low-D1 sim & user teams, then D3 will become unplayable for new users. The question isn't whether D3 coaches should be able to sign D1 recruits (they should not), but whether the changes to the division classification of recruits are appropriate. My view is that the 3.0 classifications are too restrictive (too many bad players are being labeled D1 and too few good ones are being identified as D3), but once that was dialed in a little better, then D3 should be blocked from the D1 market altogether.

I really don't have a problem with not allowing people to only sign guys labelled in their own division. I also have no problem letting people sign anyone they can across divisions.

My whole point is that you only compete against teams in your division and the best coaches will recruit the best players and have the best teams and will win the most games.

Whether the best players come from Div-1 (after everyone else had their picks) or Div-2 or even only Div-3 .. I am not sure it matters.

Except for the one thing that rogelio mentioned .. obviously we can't have D3 teams completely full of players that should be in Mid-Major Div-1 teams. So, I am OK with whatever everyone wants to do in this case.

Players that are currently on D3 teams, for the most part, are pretty flawed. But I think that's what makes D3 fun. Taking different role players and forming a good team. You can have a guy who's only a good scorer or good reb or a good defender and you can make it work. Fitting these flawed pieces together is fun. In my opinion, you'd lose a little of this when you start getting more 'complete' players. I could be wrong though.

But I think relativity matters a lot here when we talk about bad players vs good players. Currently at D3 there are plenty of 'bad' players when you put them on D1 teams. But compared to others, they're real good. Studs even. Who cares if a D1 team wouldn't take them, he's playing D3. That's the whole point of having separate divisions.

Now if you say "I want to play with players who have 90s everywhere" and that's how you classify 'good' then play D1. It's an option to work your way there.

And further in relativity, I think, as a whole, teams coaches by humans who are at least decent at recruiting will get better. I think the SIMs will stay the same. So a new person who takes over a SIM coached team will truly inherit a BAD team. They will actually be playing with lousy players at this point. They won't be able to compete with their human coached conference mates. Yes, this already happens in some super conferences and with the elite coaches but the point I'm trying to make is that it now won't be 10-15 coaches crushing sims, it will be 50. I don't see how anyone would think this is a good idea for the game where a new person comes into a situation like this.

I would expect the spread in the lower division to grow in HD 3.0 (i.e. top end teams will be more dominant with better players than were available in 2.0). This will make it even more difficult to retain the new/inexperienced players (which is the whole reason for this damn update). Why make it so that these coaches get even a worse beatdown and get discouraged even more at the expense of the experienced/elite coaches getting their candy per se. Isn't this the exact same complaint most mid-major coaches complain about D1?

Would it even matter if the just split the players into their respective division and just expressed everything in terms of percentage of a capped value? (i.e. if PER actually ranged between 0 and 200 but they made the had caps of 100 for D3, 150 for D2, 200 for D1 and just showed your rating as a percentage of the cap would that make you happy Spud? (i.e. D3 can have a 99 PER player but if pitted versus a 99 PER D1 player the actual ratings are 99 vs 198.

" Please explain what I am not understanding. "
I think my questions were simple and clear, and the only way to fail to understand them is to fail to consider it with an open mind. If you are wedded to the relativity red herring, you probably won't be able to do that.

" I DO NOT, however, want to have the top 150 auto populate on my D3 recruiting list. "
I agree. It is just clutter to have to work around, and does not elevate the game.

" Spud = Troll. I have been saying that for a long time. "
Here I am talking about the game, and there you are with your same old personal attack. *crickets* I realize you cannot follow the points I raised, but your personal attacks are out of place. Grow up.

Colorado in Allen signed 4 D-1 guys. Not sure if that's a good thing or bad thing, but if that's what it's going to take to compete at that level, it certainly changes the dynamics of scouting and recruiting.

Coach spud:
Your questions were simple and clear. They clearly demonstrated your lack of knowledge about the concept of relativity. I have answered your questions, and I have demonstrated how your questions are refuted with the concept of relativity. Now it's your turn-explain why I am incorrect.

And as as a follow up: Do you understand my Duke example? Do you understand my Palm Beach Atlantic and Colorado College example? Do you need me to put it in more simple terms?

Posted by benrudy on 10/25/2016 7:45:00 PM (view original):
Coach spud:
Your questions were simple and clear. They clearly demonstrated your lack of knowledge about the concept of relativity. I have answered your questions, and I have demonstrated how your questions are refuted with the concept of relativity. Now it's your turn-explain why I am incorrect.

And as as a follow up: Do you understand my Duke example? Do you understand my Palm Beach Atlantic and Colorado College example? Do you need me to put it in more simple terms?

Benrudy- we get you. Others have tried what you're attempting here with Mr Spud and all have failed.

One last try, in honor of your first National Championship. Congratulations, by the way.
" And Coach Spud:
-I still think you dont understand the relativity idea, and so I have some follow up questions. Do you understand that in a league with all lousy players, your players, although lousy themselves, may be relatively good? [yes] Do you understand that in a league with all talented players, your players, although talented themselves, may be relatively bad? [yes] And thus do you understand why its important to have that context in your question? "

My point has nothing to do with relativity. You had a good championship team, and presumably had fun this season. Would it have been equally fun to be playing in a division with players (yours and opponents) averaging 150 overall across the board? How about overall 100? 75? My point is simply that my answer to that question is NO, and I believe that would be the answer of most new coaches. Impotency would not be fun; talented players are more fun, no matter if they are relatively good or bad compared to the rest of the division. You don't have to agree, and some people might find it fun to play with unskilled players and try to find an edge, but I am simply not interested in the "relativity" red herring. Thank you for your time.

Edited to add: look at the post immediately below. There's a guy that doesn't get it. He'll probably change or delete the post because I called him out on it and then this edit won't matter, but while it's there it's good for a laugh.

If you want ultra talented players then go to D1

/thread

"My point is simply that my answer to that question is NO, and I believe that would be the answer of most new coaches."

And THAT is why you are incorrect AS USUAL. DIII coaches (new or old), look that their players' shooting %s, # turnovers, team defense FG % allowed, wins/losses, etc. (IE - team and player stats!!)

It DOESN'T matter if the players are all 700 rated players or if they are all 500 rated players. It is all relative to the competition. Once AGAIN, you don't get it and NEVER will.

Several years ago the ADMIN lowered the ratings of ALL recruits being generated because too many were maxing out. Did the entire HD community STOP HAVING FUN because player ratings had suddenly dropped 50 pts across the board? Of course not, that would be stupid, as are your arguments.

Posted by Benis on 11/6/2016 1:17:00 PM (view original):
If you want ultra talented players then go to D1

/thread

This