Page 20 of 388 FirstFirst ... 1015161718192021222324253070120 ... LastLast
Results 381 to 400 of 7759

Thread: Online Virtual Coach Simulation

  1. #381
    PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
    PhDeac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    101,466
    Thanks. 48 of the 82 players who are Top 75 so far were on my list.

    I only ran this with the Season 62-65 you sent me. I'll rerun it with data since Season 46 later to see which is more accurate. There are a lot of CPU heavy seasons in there.

  2. #382
    I am shocked and excited that only 2 of mine are in the top 75:

    Erin Atkins
    Michael Gonzalez
    Rene Naquin (1) - No surprise here.
    Mo Poisson (71)


    Honestly, I expected all 4 to be somewhere in the top 75, but have to like my chances with Atkins and Gonzalez in small ties.

    Still only 2 of my net in the top 75 as well.
    Last edited by Stormfury; 06-25-2011 at 11:31 PM.

  3. #383
    PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
    PhDeac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    101,466
    It takes time for players to slide into the Top 75. The Top 75 is just based on the total RPE points a player has.

    So after Week 1, net players have 16 points and maxed players have 32 points. That means a player netted by 4 coaches has as many points as a player maxed by 2. During Week 2, that ratio changes and more and more players who were maxed, but not netted show up.

    That's why during Week 2 and 3, max players who weren't Top 75 all of a sudden end up at in the 30-50 range in the Top 75 but they're only in the 1/1 or 2/2 range. Getting to 66 points puts some players over the edge.

  4. #384
    There are some players who are such obvious maxes, that it doesn't make sense to put just one point on them. That's what happens to folks like Via or Kenneth Busch (r32). They're 5/5s or 6/6s that show up in the middle of the top 75 because they only have 5 or 6 teams total recruiting them. It's interesting how much recruiting has changed in the last 10 seasons or so with lots fewer computer coaches.

    Cason jumped into the top 75 to #32 and Via is now #12. Hope my net has some stuff to work with. Only one of them is on the Top 75, but that doesn't mean much right now.

  5. #385
    After the last 7-8 seasons in Flagstaff where I have been a very established team it's a lot of fun to rebuild a program like I am in St. Louis in league 7.

    After having no talent at all really on the team when I took over in the middle of a season 2 cycles ago, it's fun to know that any player at all that I pull in will instantly upgrade my program. This current recruiting cycle looks really good for me currently, as I have several guys looking like winnable ties at most, if not clear leads. One of them is a NR SG prospect that is in the top 15 in scoring of the HS class and is only increasing his 25 ppg scoring average. Playing good defense on studs during scrimmages as well. Would be a real program changer if he was somehow clear. He's at most a 2/2 which I will take, because I feel that he's a 1/1 or CL. Would love that. Really enjoy this aspect of the game, being a program builder. Hope I can have a second Flagstaff type of program on the way

  6. #386
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDeac View Post
    It takes time for players to slide into the Top 75. The Top 75 is just based on the total RPE points a player has.

    So after Week 1, net players have 16 points and maxed players have 32 points. That means a player netted by 4 coaches has as many points as a player maxed by 2. During Week 2, that ratio changes and more and more players who were maxed, but not netted show up.

    That's why during Week 2 and 3, max players who weren't Top 75 all of a sudden end up at in the 30-50 range in the Top 75 but they're only in the 1/1 or 2/2 range. Getting to 66 points puts some players over the edge.
    Yep, which is why it's good to max your not rated recruits Friday night/Saturday morning. Speaking of, here is how Frankfort's recruits went:

    Orlando Vance (30)
    Marvin Haynes NR - yeah! hope it holds </dreaming>
    Bob Lindstrom NR - either I snuck in on this guy, or I fooled myself. SSC has him valued at -1.5.

    DiV is very observant re how our league is filling up.

  7. #387
    Flagstaff's recruiting is looking okay.

    Rene Naquin (1)
    Earl Doucette (18)
    Jeffrey Yi (24)
    Troy Deaver (NR)

    Happy Deaver is NR, should be a solid +4 that can play the 3 or 4 at 6'7. Would love if he comes out clear. Knew Naquin would be a huge tie, Expected Yi to be about where he is, and Doucette is higher than I thought he'd be, but as I've stated he has to be a Flagstaff lean no matter how big a tie he is.

    My net is not as great as a lot of you guys, but still have some options. The lack of guys ranked in you all's nets leads me to believe one of two things: Either A) lots of people or maxing the same people, and the top 75 will be larger than normal ties, or B) lots of people went conservative with their maxes and the a lot of guys in your nets will be 1/1s or so. Not sure which it is, but i'm hoping option B for my sake

  8. #388
    PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
    PhDeac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    101,466
    I think it's B. Sometimes I'll net guys I think will end up in the +3 range so I'll make sure I don't have to settle for walk-ons. This time I netted every player who looked good in my scrimmages or looked like they could be a +3 or better EGG score (Sht + Def + Hands).

  9. #389
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDeac View Post
    I think it's B. Sometimes I'll net guys I think will end up in the +3 range so I'll make sure I don't have to settle for walk-ons. This time I netted every player who looked good in my scrimmages or looked like they could be a +3 or better EGG score (Sht + Def + Hands).
    My problem seems to be, I'll net those guys and they are almost universally maxed by someone else.

  10. #390
    Dickie Hemric
    DaDeacs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Hudson River
    Posts
    15,730
    Question about strategy - I have been itching to switch to a bigger lineup because I am running 6'8" at both PF & C. But, I am 3-0, so I am hesitant to make the switch. What I want to do is switch out my starting PF (FGFGFE), moving my starting Center to PF, and bringing in my backup Center, 6'11" (FFFGGF). I am worried about losing defense and an excellent athlete from my starting lineup - but the team I am playing has a 6'10" center. During the exhibition games, my starting PF outplayed my backup center when I had the lineup I mentioned above, but since the switch (and beginning of the season) my backup C has been outplaying my PF - seems weird, but true.

  11. #391
    PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
    PhDeac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    101,466
    Quote Originally Posted by DeacInVermont View Post
    My problem seems to be, I'll net those guys and they are almost universally maxed by someone else.
    The key is almost. If you can get 1 or 2 of those guys out of the net, you're in good shape. My last few net players have been serviceable players in the GGGFFF range.

  12. #392
    Quote Originally Posted by DaDeacs View Post
    Question about strategy - I have been itching to switch to a bigger lineup because I am running 6'8" at both PF & C. But, I am 3-0, so I am hesitant to make the switch. What I want to do is switch out my starting PF (FGFGFE), moving my starting Center to PF, and bringing in my backup Center, 6'11" (FFFGGF). I am worried about losing defense and an excellent athlete from my starting lineup - but the team I am playing has a 6'10" center. During the exhibition games, my starting PF outplayed my backup center when I had the lineup I mentioned above, but since the switch (and beginning of the season) my backup C has been outplaying my PF - seems weird, but true.
    If you are considering this change due to the 2" height differential, I wouldn't bother. An Exc athlete, esp among bigs, is rare and easily compensates for height. Think of him as being stronger, quicker, and with more "ups." warak won an NTT with a team whose tallest player was 6'8 - but they were very athletic. Coaches tend to emphasize height disparity more than the game engine goes.

    I'd also advise not to let playing match-ups keep you from putting your best team on the floor. You should acknowledge match-ups when you can, but with limitations.

    Otherwise, what you're asking is really going to be special to the individual players involved, as each player has his preferred role and position. Some like to start, some like coming off the bench. Some like C; some like being a forward. Unfortunately, scrimmages and trial and error will answer those questions.

    Congrats on the fast start.

  13. #393
    PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
    PhDeac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    101,466
    The FAQ on the SimSports website actually says that they used to have the height and weight for players, but the Athl tells us what we need to know about weight.

    Not fully sure what that means.

  14. #394
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDeac View Post
    The FAQ on the SimSports website actually says that they used to have the height and weight for players, but the Athl tells us what we need to know about weight.

    Not fully sure what that means.
    Yeah, I read that, too. I took it to mean that it was too subjective in interpreting a recruit's weight to his athleticism (too fat? too skinny? what weight is "strong?" or "jumps high?"), so they changed it. Not sure, though.

  15. #395
    +1 to awaken...they took away the weights because of the confusion and complaints about how the weights correlated to athleticism. at least that was my understanding.

    Dearborn is on the verge of a rebuilding period after back-2-back underwhelming recruiting classes that left us with holes in our lineup. we no longer have the athleticism to compete with the elite L7 teams and have nobody to sure up the SF position. we will make it work and will hopefully continue as a top 1-2 team in Conference 15 and make the NTT.

    we have scorers but as with many that have to rely on their net for players, can't seem to win a tie, they are mostly specialists and do not have the full range of skills to get us to the next level. i have maxed players that are most needed in this class, PF and PG, and most of them are now in the top 75...

    Barclay #46 - it looks like he will be a smaller tie than i originally thought, maybe 4/4. i would be surprised if anyone put him in their net.
    Coyne #47 - i expect around 3/3 and i have great prefs for this outstanding PG.
    Bergeron NL - pleasantly surprised that he has not made the top75 yet and i hope he is no larger than 1/1. i have good prefs for him and my scrimmages indicate that his rebounding is better than his stats appear...not great but better.
    Green #3 - stunned that he is this high, was expecting around 4/4 but now appears closer to 7/7. he is more of a luxury than a need, so i will observe his progression (stats and top75) to determine if it would behoove me to spend his RPE on my net. i do have very nice prefs for him though...

    a class of Coyne, Barclay and Bergeron is what i need but i surely can't put my eggs in any basket that includes winning ties over 1/1.

  16. #396
    PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
    PhDeac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    101,466
    awaken, what are your thoughts about what Athl actually means?

    If I remember correctly, in my analysis, it's a small positive contributor to points, steals, rebounds, and blocks, but very small.

    6-11 Harvey Evans was Poor Athl and he was great at SG, SF, and PF.

  17. #397
    My take on ATH is that it allows your player to "get his" no matter what the competition is. Now getting this differs for everyone. For some it will be putting up 25 ppg as your teams stop scorer or grabbing 10 boards from the PF spot. Could be playing great defense and dishing assist as a glue guy in your starting lineup. It would be different for every skill set. As we all know, it's basically impossible to stop a amazing scorer that has Good+ or EXC athleticism. Doesn't matter who you put on him, he's getting his.

    Being a great athlete obviously will help your players play better than their stats suggest when not playing against athletically similar players, but I think it just leads to a lot more consistency for your guys, allowing them to put up their "averages' against anyone. It certainly is a attribute that we all like to have but as others have suggested, we just don't know that much about it.

  18. #398
    Quote Originally Posted by tau06 View Post
    My take on ATH is that it allows your player to "get his" no matter what the competition is. Now getting this differs for everyone. For some it will be putting up 25 ppg as your teams stop scorer or grabbing 10 boards from the PF spot. Could be playing great defense and dishing assist as a glue guy in your starting lineup. It would be different for every skill set. As we all know, it's basically impossible to stop a amazing scorer that has Good+ or EXC athleticism. Doesn't matter who you put on him, he's getting his.

    Being a great athlete obviously will help your players play better than their stats suggest when not playing against athletically similar players, but I think it just leads to a lot more consistency for your guys, allowing them to put up their "averages' against anyone. It certainly is a attribute that we all like to have but as others have suggested, we just don't know that much about it.
    I also think high ATH teams get to the FT line more

  19. #399
    PM a mod to cement your internet status forever
    PhDeac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    101,466
    Quote Originally Posted by tau06 View Post
    My take on ATH is that it allows your player to "get his" no matter what the competition is. Now getting this differs for everyone. For some it will be putting up 25 ppg as your teams stop scorer or grabbing 10 boards from the PF spot. Could be playing great defense and dishing assist as a glue guy in your starting lineup. It would be different for every skill set. As we all know, it's basically impossible to stop a amazing scorer that has Good+ or EXC athleticism. Doesn't matter who you put on him, he's getting his.

    Being a great athlete obviously will help your players play better than their stats suggest when not playing against athletically similar players, but I think it just leads to a lot more consistency for your guys, allowing them to put up their "averages' against anyone. It certainly is a attribute that we all like to have but as others have suggested, we just don't know that much about it.
    That's the thing. Evans had Poor Athl and got his at 3 positions, regardless of the competition for 4 years. He averaged 20 and 5 for his career and scored single digits in only 5 regular season games. And I've definitely had Good/Good Sht/Athl guys who didn't fit the bill along with ones who did.

  20. #400
    In short, I agree with you that it is a boost to almost every activity a player does. I think of it as speed, strength, and jumping. I think Evans height compensated for his lack of athleticism. He just shot over opposing defenses. Say, athleticism gives +3" in vertical - defending a shot. Against a 6-4 SG or 6-7 SF, it doesn't matter against him. I def agree with Milk that it helps getting to the FT line.

    I made a deep run with a Poor Ath 6-7 SG one year (lost in NTT finals, I think), and he made me nervous every single game. I was waiting on a stud SG to bust him up. It never happened. Maybe he was P+, and we got a string of opposing Fair Ath SG so there was little difference? Maybe coaches like me overrate it? Like Int, it is definitely nice to have when available, but hard to get. And like Int, it may matter more to some positions (PG, C) than others (wings)?

    It can also work against you with a dumb player with a Fair (or less) Shot who won't take a red light, and will shoot you out of games.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •