Couple of questions

[C-Bailey24]

I've played every version of this game and i have a couple of issues that just popped in my head while playing. It's mainly directed at Gary or the beta testers because i'd guess they'd be the best ones to answer:

1. Why are 90% of the Guards and Small Forwards in the game rated so extremely low in Inside Shooting? When i think of college basketball driving to the lane and finishing at the rim is a part of any good half court offense and is not relegated to just post players. It pretty much pigeon-holes the guards and small forwards into being heavily perimeter orientated players with no diversity. And yes, i know i can train MY players to slash more but what about the A.I. teams. Is this by game design?

2. Where's the "Princeton" in the Princeton offense?. When using this offense and watching it play out in 2D no i do not expect an exact replica but there are never any occasional pass-to-cutter near the rim type scoring plays and this is even with a heavily proficient team. The only time the ball gets passed near the rim or the lane is to the Center.

[Gary Gorski]

1. I guess I never considered them to be too low - I would have to really take a deep dive into it comparing the ratings, their outputs and real world stats and then make adjustments to not only them but probably the entire game engine to make sure things were coming out correctly. I have it noted in my list of things to continue to look at for the future now.

2. What is a heavily proficient team? Do you mean every player in the lineup has 90+ proficiency in the offense? I will take a look at the progression code in the offense but the problem is that if someone "messes up" in the logic tree it breaks the offensive pattern and the players just sort of figure out something else to do instead so even if most of the team is really good at it one low guy can constantly ruin the offensive set.

[C-Bailey24]

1. I guess I never considered them to be too low - I would have to really take a deep dive into it comparing the ratings, their outputs and real world stats and then make adjustments to not only them but probably the entire game engine to make sure things were coming out correctly. I have it noted in my list of things to continue to look at for the future now.

2. What is a heavily proficient team? Do you mean every player in the lineup has 90+ proficiency in the offense? I will take a look at the progression code in the offense but the problem is that if someone "messes up" in the logic tree it breaks the offensive pattern and the players just sort of figure out something else to do instead so even if most of the team is really good at it one low guy can constantly ruin the offensive set.

I guess my idea of heavily proficient would be 70 and up. I would think at that level and good passing ratings a cutter could be found here and there. As it is like i said the only interior opportunities come from a post up by the Center but if this was intended or players need to be all 90 and up then so be it.

[Gary Gorski]

90 isn't a set thing I was just asking to see what your definition of proficient was. It's possible the game's requirements are too stringent and that maybe I should lower them.

[C-Bailey24]

90 isn't a set thing I was just asking to see what your definition of proficient was. It's possible the game's requirements are too stringent and that maybe I should lower them.

Thanks

[Fredrocker]

I thought the exact same thing first time I looked at the ratings... but in game, I found a 25 Inside shooting got fouled alot as a guard... thou it is frustrating to see the little guy 'all alone at the basket and miss' but the visual I hope is not tied to the game 100%... Though I believe the Guards that drive should have a little better inside number... Just my opinion

[C-Bailey24]

I thought the exact same thing first time I looked at the ratings... but in game, I found a 25 Inside shooting got fouled alot as a guard... thou it is frustrating to see the little guy 'all alone at the basket and miss' but the visual I hope is not tied to the game 100%... Though I believe the Guards that drive should have a little better inside number... Just my opinion

Getting fouled and what i'm talking about are different things. I'm not saying guards should shoot a substantial amount of more shots in the lane per se, but i'm saying they should have the ABILITY when they get there to convert better. Right now as it stands it seems t be uniformed "cap" on that rating when it comes to guards and small forwards which leaves no diversity in those players. My opinion is that the cap seems low. The Shot Preference is what controls how many times they try to shoot inside the paint not the inside shooting rating itself.

[Magic Bird]

I have found that the Inside Shooting and Outside Shooting ratings that display on a player's card are unreliable. From my observations, a fair number of guards and SFs are good at making shots after driving the lane. On the other hand, some guards with high Outside Shooting ratings are awful outside and three point shooters.

The Inside Shooting and Outside Shooting ratings are an amalgamation of not just the FGJ, FGI, FGD, and FG3 ratings in the database, but also of the Player Floor Range and Action Preferences ratings.

If you want to look at reliable shooting ratings, you will have to either right click on players in the Commissioner's Office or export and view your league's database.

The system a player plays in also can affect their shooting performance. Sometimes players who should be good shooters don't shoot well because they aren't used in a way that gets them good, easy looks at the basket.

The shot chart in a player's card and the 3-10 ft. attempts and percentage and 10-16 ft. attempts and percentage stats from the shooting section of the team's player statistics page would indicate whether or not a player is getting to or near the lane and whether or not that player is able convert shots once he gets there.

While I have witnessed guards who are talented at converting shots after driving into the paint, I do not have any hard evidence indicating whether or not the game generates enough of these types of players. I'll have to think about how one could compile this data.