Posted by plague on 10/11/2017 12:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 10/11/2017 5:27:00 AM (view original):
"Understanding that and using it to your advantage or passing it off as random and doing nothing can be the difference between success and mediocrity."

Can you explain a bit about how you can use this to your advantage?

I see it where A+ prestige coaches who have preferences going against their favor and in my favor will get into battles with me. In the end they have a 40% chance and I have a 60% chance, obviously each situation varies and the percentages varies with it. You give a gambler a 60% chance of winning and he will lose sometimes but over time he will eventually become a millionaire. You give a gambler a 40% chance and he will win sometimes but over time he will become broke. I know if I have a 60% chance I will lose sometimes, but over time I will have the advantage over someone who wins 40% of the time.

There will be examples of coaches losing more EE's than the norm and the percentages going against them, and there will times be times where the percentages go in thier favor. Same goes with winning recruits. Over time the percentages will hit their percentages. If you continue to not understand that the percentages over time will hit their percentages and pass it off as random then your unlikely to ever have the success you desire.

When I hear someone call it random that to me means they don't understand.

Good post. And if you recruits dudes who are #6 #8 and #14 at their position, gambling on them not leaving early, it's pathetic to criticize the casino if you lose that bet.

Posted by kcsundevil on 10/11/2017 11:54:00 AM (view original):
Funny how nobody ever complains about the lack of technical fouls and intentional fouls in HD. Any realism argument would start there, not with a young man choosing between two reasonable options.

If you recruit top tier talent, they might leave early. It's a strategic choice.

Yeah I've brought that up when people talk about realism. Even the sim engine itself isn't realistic.

Posted by Benis on 10/11/2017 12:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 10/11/2017 11:54:00 AM (view original):
Funny how nobody ever complains about the lack of technical fouls and intentional fouls in HD. Any realism argument would start there, not with a young man choosing between two reasonable options.

If you recruit top tier talent, they might leave early. It's a strategic choice.

Yeah I've brought that up when people talk about realism. Even the sim engine itself isn't realistic.

HD is never going to be 100% "realistic." For people who can't accept that, they should call the local Y and join a full court league.

Posted by kcsundevil on 10/11/2017 12:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 10/11/2017 12:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 10/11/2017 11:54:00 AM (view original):
Funny how nobody ever complains about the lack of technical fouls and intentional fouls in HD. Any realism argument would start there, not with a young man choosing between two reasonable options.

If you recruit top tier talent, they might leave early. It's a strategic choice.

Yeah I've brought that up when people talk about realism. Even the sim engine itself isn't realistic.

HD is never going to be 100% "realistic." For people who can't accept that, they should call the local Y and join a full court league.

Yeah I agree.

Posted by kcsundevil on 10/11/2017 12:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by plague on 10/11/2017 12:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 10/11/2017 5:27:00 AM (view original):
"Understanding that and using it to your advantage or passing it off as random and doing nothing can be the difference between success and mediocrity."

Can you explain a bit about how you can use this to your advantage?

I see it where A+ prestige coaches who have preferences going against their favor and in my favor will get into battles with me. In the end they have a 40% chance and I have a 60% chance, obviously each situation varies and the percentages varies with it. You give a gambler a 60% chance of winning and he will lose sometimes but over time he will eventually become a millionaire. You give a gambler a 40% chance and he will win sometimes but over time he will become broke. I know if I have a 60% chance I will lose sometimes, but over time I will have the advantage over someone who wins 40% of the time.

There will be examples of coaches losing more EE's than the norm and the percentages going against them, and there will times be times where the percentages go in thier favor. Same goes with winning recruits. Over time the percentages will hit their percentages. If you continue to not understand that the percentages over time will hit their percentages and pass it off as random then your unlikely to ever have the success you desire.

When I hear someone call it random that to me means they don't understand.

Good post. And if you recruits dudes who are #6 #8 and #14 at their position, gambling on them not leaving early, it's pathetic to criticize the casino if you lose that bet.

Yeah I'm basically saying the opposite.

I understand the percentages. I think percentages *should* be adjusted to remove huge swings.

Team A keeps #9, #12, #49 while Team B loses a guy not on board. Those aren't probabilities that should even be possible in my opinion. You could play 1,000 seasons as Team B and still never see that probability balance out.

Also, at least in the way recruiting works now, you can influence the probabilities quite a bit - go for better preferences, use promises, use x% of your budget, etc etc. I'm fine with the way that works (for the most part).

Basically something like this would be better in my opinion

Top 25 on big board all leave - 100%
No player not on big board ever leaves early.

I think getting rid of those two ends of the spectrum would make a lot of sense. Just my 2 cents.

Posted by Benis on 10/11/2017 12:49:00 PM (view original):
Basically something like this would be better in my opinion

Top 25 on big board all leave - 100%
No player not on big board ever leaves early.

I think getting rid of those two ends of the spectrum would make a lot of sense. Just my 2 cents.

Yes! How many leave early anyways?

I lost 18, 39, 58, 82 on the big board... will 82 be even drafted?

Posted by Benis on 10/11/2017 12:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 10/11/2017 12:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by plague on 10/11/2017 12:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 10/11/2017 5:27:00 AM (view original):
"Understanding that and using it to your advantage or passing it off as random and doing nothing can be the difference between success and mediocrity."

Can you explain a bit about how you can use this to your advantage?

I see it where A+ prestige coaches who have preferences going against their favor and in my favor will get into battles with me. In the end they have a 40% chance and I have a 60% chance, obviously each situation varies and the percentages varies with it. You give a gambler a 60% chance of winning and he will lose sometimes but over time he will eventually become a millionaire. You give a gambler a 40% chance and he will win sometimes but over time he will become broke. I know if I have a 60% chance I will lose sometimes, but over time I will have the advantage over someone who wins 40% of the time.

There will be examples of coaches losing more EE's than the norm and the percentages going against them, and there will times be times where the percentages go in thier favor. Same goes with winning recruits. Over time the percentages will hit their percentages. If you continue to not understand that the percentages over time will hit their percentages and pass it off as random then your unlikely to ever have the success you desire.

When I hear someone call it random that to me means they don't understand.

Good post. And if you recruits dudes who are #6 #8 and #14 at their position, gambling on them not leaving early, it's pathetic to criticize the casino if you lose that bet.

Yeah I'm basically saying the opposite.

I understand the percentages. I think percentages *should* be adjusted to remove huge swings.

Team A keeps #9, #12, #49 while Team B loses a guy not on board. Those aren't probabilities that should even be possible in my opinion. You could play 1,000 seasons as Team B and still never see that probability balance out.

Also, at least in the way recruiting works now, you can influence the probabilities quite a bit - go for better preferences, use promises, use x% of your budget, etc etc. I'm fine with the way that works (for the most part).

Don't know what your objection is in the Team A / Team B example. It's entirely plausible things could play out that way. That's how probability works, and it's exactly what the game is designed to make possible

Posted by Benis on 10/11/2017 12:49:00 PM (view original):
Basically something like this would be better in my opinion

Top 25 on big board all leave - 100%
No player not on big board ever leaves early.

I think getting rid of those two ends of the spectrum would make a lot of sense. Just my 2 cents.

While we are at it why not just say the best team wins every game.

There needs to be some fixes to the game but in my opinion making absolutes is not the way to go.

I understand my #2 player on the draft board is almost surely going pro but I like the thrill and disappointment leading up to the day that players declare.

In real life usually 40 to 70 players a year leave early and declare for the pros.

Posted by zorzii on 10/11/2017 12:59:00 PM (view original):
I lost 18, 39, 58, 82 on the big board... will 82 be even drafted?

if 82 left early he will def be drafted. all EE are drafted. if he's a graduating senior, then it's a maybe

Posted by zorzii on 10/10/2017 3:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by l80r20 on 10/10/2017 3:21:00 PM (view original):
"You seem to prefer determinism-based games rather than probabilistic, which is fine. There are lots of those out there. But this game wants to be a competitive multi-player game; determinism too quickly becomes formulaic, and sacrifices competitiveness."

zorzii, when you're not asking someone obviously a lot smarter than you if he went to college, you seem genuinely befuddled. Here's a starting point: do you understand the quote above? Can you restate it in your own words? And if you can, then can you explain the difference between "deterministic" and "probabilistic" in your own words? If you cannot, then I suggest you get off your self-pity trip and start to listen.

I doubt he is more intelligent or more educated, he just has more time. I understand his explication, I know is argument would be right if he was attacking a the problem or seeing the problem Spud. What is writing can impress anybody cause it's good bla-bla but it's beside the subject.

Thank you, that answers my question better than if you had tried to address the matters at hand. Time for you to "get off your self-pity trip and start to listen."

And by the way, take your buddy Benis with you. This thread makes it clear that he doesn't understand it any better than you, he's just better at covering it up with his self-righteous posture.

Posted by plague on 10/11/2017 1:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 10/11/2017 12:49:00 PM (view original):
Basically something like this would be better in my opinion

Top 25 on big board all leave - 100%
No player not on big board ever leaves early.

I think getting rid of those two ends of the spectrum would make a lot of sense. Just my 2 cents.

While we are at it why not just say the best team wins every game.

There needs to be some fixes to the game but in my opinion making absolutes is not the way to go.

I understand my #2 player on the draft board is almost surely going pro but I like the thrill and disappointment leading up to the day that players declare.

In real life usually 40 to 70 players a year leave early and declare for the pros.

I guess its a difference of opinion on what is thrilling or disappointing.

I like the "thrill" of going on deep run in the tourney because I feel like it was my success and I influenced how it played out. I know that probabilities were involved and maybe I did get lucky but it still feels like I made the right choices along the way.

And conversely the disappointment of losing works the same way. I could at least understand what I did wrong or what I could have done differently to improve my chances of winning.

When players declare I would never get the same type of experience. If a top guy stays, I'd think well that was super lucky. Or if a scrub leaves, I'd think well that was super unlucky. It wouldn't really produce much enjoyment for me either way.

Posted by shoe3 on 10/11/2017 11:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by lakevin on 10/11/2017 11:45:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/11/2017 11:38:00 AM (view original):
You may be a nice guy. I don't know you.
You are NOT objective when it comes to HD. I can bump threads you created and we'll find many are when a result didn't go your way.

I think the mind of 19/20 y/o kids is hard to quantify. I've pointed out Tim Duncan staying 4 years and I could, if I chose to, find dozen of example of kids declaring early and going undrafted. They don't like school, they have people in their ear telling them they're a 1st rounder, they have a potential legal matter, etc, etc. Skill is not the only determining factor of when kids declare early. Many scream for "realism" but, when that "realism" bites them in the ***, they say how stupid the system is. You can't pick and choose then expect to be taken seriously.

I had an ineligible not show up at D2. Some show, some don't. How is that any different than an unexpected EE?

Because you will have resources from day 1 next year. On an unexpected EE you don't get the resources until the second cycle. That's EXACTLY the discrepancy that has us all frustrated with the structure.

If you decline to recruit and/or sign a replacement for an unexpected EE, you get the resources at exactly the same time the team losing an ineligible to juco gets resources. Next year.

And that's fine for a single player. But when it's 3 or 4 guys, you can't just gut it out. This isn't the NCAA with 15 man rosters where 3 empty spots are a non-issue. Here if you have only 8 players you have a problem. God forbid you already have an ineligible in the pipeline or whatever and are down to 7.

Remember, walk-ons aren't viable talents for DI contenders even in a bench role.

Posted by kcsundevil on 10/11/2017 1:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 10/11/2017 12:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kcsundevil on 10/11/2017 12:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by plague on 10/11/2017 12:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 10/11/2017 5:27:00 AM (view original):
"Understanding that and using it to your advantage or passing it off as random and doing nothing can be the difference between success and mediocrity."

Can you explain a bit about how you can use this to your advantage?

I see it where A+ prestige coaches who have preferences going against their favor and in my favor will get into battles with me. In the end they have a 40% chance and I have a 60% chance, obviously each situation varies and the percentages varies with it. You give a gambler a 60% chance of winning and he will lose sometimes but over time he will eventually become a millionaire. You give a gambler a 40% chance and he will win sometimes but over time he will become broke. I know if I have a 60% chance I will lose sometimes, but over time I will have the advantage over someone who wins 40% of the time.

There will be examples of coaches losing more EE's than the norm and the percentages going against them, and there will times be times where the percentages go in thier favor. Same goes with winning recruits. Over time the percentages will hit their percentages. If you continue to not understand that the percentages over time will hit their percentages and pass it off as random then your unlikely to ever have the success you desire.

When I hear someone call it random that to me means they don't understand.

Good post. And if you recruits dudes who are #6 #8 and #14 at their position, gambling on them not leaving early, it's pathetic to criticize the casino if you lose that bet.

Yeah I'm basically saying the opposite.

I understand the percentages. I think percentages *should* be adjusted to remove huge swings.

Team A keeps #9, #12, #49 while Team B loses a guy not on board. Those aren't probabilities that should even be possible in my opinion. You could play 1,000 seasons as Team B and still never see that probability balance out.

Also, at least in the way recruiting works now, you can influence the probabilities quite a bit - go for better preferences, use promises, use x% of your budget, etc etc. I'm fine with the way that works (for the most part).

Don't know what your objection is in the Team A / Team B example. It's entirely plausible things could play out that way. That's how probability works, and it's exactly what the game is designed to make possible

A probabilistic model works perfect if the same person gets to the sane events at least over 100 times, but we all know it's as a whole so some experience median probalistic event, the majority, some are caught in the extremes.. low spectrum, high spectrum... and it's treated as a whole. It is where the game is flawed wherher it's in recruiting or in ees.