Been playing this series for a long time, don't usually post on the board but I am thoroughly confused about a few things that seem to change with each iteration of the game, or things that just flat out defy logic and make the game unplayable. Was hoping someone would have some input on these two areas because I think I'm about finished with this game and future ones as well.

1. Scoring ability - So if Im not mistaken, this rating (in practice) is not actually rating their ability to score (which I think most people would associate with the term "scoring ability"), but instead is their willingness to shoot the ball? First of all, I'm no college hoops expert, but how does this make even the slightest bit of sense? If I have a guy that is 10/10 inside shooting, 10/10 outside shooting, but 1/10 "scoring", I would probably tell him to get over his stage fright and share his incredible shooting gift with the world, instead of "looking to make a pass" every single time because he just can't quite find the courage to get a shot up, and vice versa. In my current league, I play as Arizona and have an 8/10 scorer on my team, 1/10 inside shooting (like almost every guard/SF in this game, which is equally ridiculous), 9/10 outside shooting, who averages a whopping 24% shooting from the field, inside and out, has completely run our squad into the ground this season, but is far and away the "best" player on my team according to scouting with 4.5/5 stars overall. The game clearly values "scoring ability" in the overall rating but I run into this problem with nearly every team I run - that problem being that my "best" player is just a guy who is DETERMINED to shoot 20 times a game at a 20% clip, despite having absolutely no inside or outside game whatsoever. I mean, if all we do is go off of "willingness to shoot the ball" in determining who the best players in the league are, I personally might still have a shot at my once-forgotten hoop dreams if all I have to do is chuck 3's all day whether they go in or not, because above all, I am down. to. shoot. Just doesn't make much sense to me. Who the hell cares about how willing a guy is to shoot if hes absolutely terrible at...shooting the ball, he belongs on the bench, 9/10 scoring or not.

2. The inside shooting thing - Every time I start a league, why does half of my squad have a 1/10 rating on inside shots? I play as (supposedly) good teams, so why are they all F- on layups? I find that very hard to believe. I haven't checked the numbers, but getting blocked 10+ times a game seems like a regular occurrence, as we just continue to pound the ball inside, but in reality we have about a 50% success rate on breakaway layups. Are my players THAT bad? I, in real life, never having played at the collegiate level, appear to be MUCH better than every one of my G/Fs when it comes to shooting within 3 feet of the basket. That's a game ruiner. I've played with all the settings I can think of, etc. so if anyone else has ever had this problem please share what worked for you. Also, a 1/10 inside shooting rating with a 5/10 potential in that same rating or something, what's up with that? "True, the guy airballs layups now but if he really works hard, I bet in a couple years if he really works hard I can see him hitting one every once in a while"...how does that work? And going back to the scoring thing, if a guy has 3 scoring ability now but 10 potential is that like a "man, this guy is absolutely HORRIFIED by the thought of hoisting a jumper against U-Green Bay, but I bet in a few years he will be chucking 30 3-pters with his eyes closed in the natty against duke... i just hope he makes one"?

Am I missing the idea of the ratings? That's what my hope is, because if thats just how it works, this game isn't worth the space its icon takes up on the desktop

There are so many factors that go into scoring, and shooting %, and this game does an incredible job of putting them all together. Guys rated high in scoring ARE more likely to put points on the board, but it's not an automatic process. Separating scoring from shooting in ratings does make sense although a guy with high scoring AND high shooting marks is certainly dangerous! Consider certain types of players in real life (and in CB19, for that matter). You may have a center that shoots at a high percentage, but doesn't score much, simply because he primarily scores on offensive putbacks, but rarely looks to score out of the offense. You may have a point guard who is deadly from beyond the 3 point arc, but isn't capable of creating his own shot off the dribble. He's dependent on getting the ball from his teammates in position to shoot, and have enough time to set himself for the shot. You might want him to put the ball up more often, but he just doesn't have the talent to do it.

That's just the tip of the iceberg though. One thing you have to understand is that most of the ratings in the game are relative to position. when a guard doesn't have a high inside shooting rating(and few do), it doesn't mean he won't drive to the basket and be very effective at it. A guard with a high defensive rebounding rating isn't going to grab as many boards as a Center with the same rating. There are guards with high block ratings, who maybe will get 2 or 3 blocks a game against other guards. You probably wouldn't want to assign him to guard one of the opponents big men though. A center with a high outside shooting rating, probably isn't going to be very effective playing the SG. Etc, etc, etc.

One of the reasons that i've always played games out, and almost never sim, is that you can't see the nuances of the game from the stat sheet. I've seen a lot of players who when they get the ball on the baseline, e.g., are usually going to put the ball up and either get fouled, or make the shot at a high percentage of the time. THe same player may NEVER put up a shot in the lane, however, even though it's about the same range. In other words, individual players have sweet spots on the court they prefer, and it's not strictly a matter of the type of shots they prefer in their pie charts, or in the shooting page of stats. For them to be great scorers they have to get the ball enough times where they want it. That depends on how good the passers are they have around them, the sets you are running, and just how good everyone is at those sets. A player with a high scoring mentality (and that's what the scoring rating really represents) is going to be a lot more effective playing in a set that he and his teammates have learned well, than the same player spending a lot of time playing "playground style" with a lot of offensive freedom. The foul drawing rating and freethrow shooting abilities matter of course as well. A guy doesn't have to be a great shooter to be a good scorer if he's going 14/15 from the freethrow line.

Also, some of the guys with high scoring ability can be annoying because they don't play within themselves. I remember one association where I had recruited an elite shooting guard who killed me his freshman year, because he fell in love with the 3pt shot which he was horrible at. I wound up having to bench him. Calling him numerous times over the first couple of seasons asking him to shoot fewer 3s eventually paid off, but it was a slow process. By the time he was a junior though, he had stopped living downtown, and had learned the sets well enough to be a monster.

The scoring ability is relative to the other players on the floor as well. If you have 5 players with 10 scoring on the floor, obviously they can't all take a shot each time down the floor. If one guys a 10 and the others are 1s though, he's obviously going to look to take a high percentage of the teams shots. Also don't disregard the ability of the other team on defense. A guy who is normally a prolific scorer, may be completely shut down against certain teams, where he never seems to get touches at places on the floor where he normally looks to score. The AI does make subtle adjustments on defense as well.

At any rate, I look at the scoring rating as the players "scorer's mentality". How well that exhibits itself in the game in terms of points is dependent on a host of other factors.


With regard to your regards to your question about inside shooting, see the part above about it being relative to position. Also, on breakaways, and sometimes even on drives to the basket, remember that they are out ahead of the defense, or have avoided the defenders, which makes anyone a better shooter.

You certainly want to recruit players with the best ratings relative to their positions, but on court, how well, or poorly, those ratings manifest on the court depends a ton of different facctors.

CHOPPA1 wrote:Been playing this series for a long time, don't usually post on the board but I am thoroughly confused about a few things that seem to change with each iteration of the game, or things that just flat out defy logic and make the game unplayable. Was hoping someone would have some input on these two areas because I think I'm about finished with this game and future ones as well.

1. Scoring ability - So if Im not mistaken, this rating (in practice) is not actually rating their ability to score (which I think most people would associate with the term "scoring ability"), but instead is their willingness to shoot the ball? First of all, I'm no college hoops expert, but how does this make even the slightest bit of sense? If I have a guy that is 10/10 inside shooting, 10/10 outside shooting, but 1/10 "scoring", I would probably tell him to get over his stage fright and share his incredible shooting gift with the world, instead of "looking to make a pass" every single time because he just can't quite find the courage to get a shot up, and vice versa. In my current league, I play as Arizona and have an 8/10 scorer on my team, 1/10 inside shooting (like almost every guard/SF in this game, which is equally ridiculous), 9/10 outside shooting, who averages a whopping 24% shooting from the field, inside and out, has completely run our squad into the ground this season, but is far and away the "best" player on my team according to scouting with 4.5/5 stars overall. The game clearly values "scoring ability" in the overall rating but I run into this problem with nearly every team I run - that problem being that my "best" player is just a guy who is DETERMINED to shoot 20 times a game at a 20% clip, despite having absolutely no inside or outside game whatsoever. I mean, if all we do is go off of "willingness to shoot the ball" in determining who the best players in the league are, I personally might still have a shot at my once-forgotten hoop dreams if all I have to do is chuck 3's all day whether they go in or not, because above all, I am down. to. shoot. Just doesn't make much sense to me. Who the hell cares about how willing a guy is to shoot if hes absolutely terrible at...shooting the ball, he belongs on the bench, 9/10 scoring or not.

2. The inside shooting thing - Every time I start a league, why does half of my squad have a 1/10 rating on inside shots? I play as (supposedly) good teams, so why are they all F- on layups? I find that very hard to believe. I haven't checked the numbers, but getting blocked 10+ times a game seems like a regular occurrence, as we just continue to pound the ball inside, but in reality we have about a 50% success rate on breakaway layups. Are my players THAT bad? I, in real life, never having played at the collegiate level, appear to be MUCH better than every one of my G/Fs when it comes to shooting within 3 feet of the basket. That's a game ruiner. I've played with all the settings I can think of, etc. so if anyone else has ever had this problem please share what worked for you. Also, a 1/10 inside shooting rating with a 5/10 potential in that same rating or something, what's up with that? "True, the guy airballs layups now but if he really works hard, I bet in a couple years if he really works hard I can see him hitting one every once in a while"...how does that work? And going back to the scoring thing, if a guy has 3 scoring ability now but 10 potential is that like a "man, this guy is absolutely HORRIFIED by the thought of hoisting a jumper against U-Green Bay, but I bet in a few years he will be chucking 30 3-pters with his eyes closed in the natty against duke... i just hope he makes one"?

Am I missing the idea of the ratings? That's what my hope is, because if thats just how it works, this game isn't worth the space its icon takes up on the desktop

Man this post had me laughing so hard lol Not because i'm laughing at you but because the frustrated and sarcastic way in which you described what you're experiencing with this game. This issue has been brought up MANY times by myself and others so i feel your pain so to speak. You are absolutely correct in that it is ridiculous for that guy to be shooting 24% as a highly rated recruit. But the "regulars" on this board are gonna ALWAYS defend this game with the ole' tried and true " what sets are you running", "your teammates have to be good passers", "scouting error"...blah, blah, blah, when the reality is the majority of the 4 and 5 star recruits in this game are horrendous shooters and completely bring down the efficiency of the team and get there stats through nothing more than volume. In reality, Top recruits are Top recruits for a reason ... they can put the ball in the damn hoop (as well as other things). I'm not saying every Top 100 player should shoot like Steph Curry but this game takes it waaaaayyyyy to far to the other end of the spectrum. Let's take last year's Duke team as a quick example. Most of the time they didn't run an offensive set per se because they didn't need to...why? Because Barrett, Zion and Cam were SCORERS and Freshmen who were destined to be one and done so you let the talent play out rather than try to structure it too much. Same with Kentucky. When you're playing as an Arizona, Duke, Michigan State or any other high prestige school you don't have time to get everyone highly proficient in the offensive sets because there is so much roster turnover via the draft and transfers. Then to compound the problem is the scouting "fog of war" which again is a little unrealistic. I've played with all different level of prestige schools with high rated scouting coaches, medium and low and guess what? There's not that much difference. They ALL will rate 70% of the Guards and Wings in the game as an A or B shooter while recruiting then when they get on your roster it's like " oops my bad he can't hit the side of a barn". Happens consistently. Also, you'll hear this a lot on this board " you gotta recruit players that fit the offense". Well guess what? That's easier said then done when it takes waaaay too many game films and scouting live games to even get information on their actual style of play. Sometimes you won't get any information at all. How does this even remotely make sense? A coach is gonna sit down watch a game tape and/or go to a live game and the only thing he walks away from it with is that the kid " is familiar with the Princeton offense" or " familiar with the 2-3 zone"? It doesn't take long to recognize who likes to shoot threes, likes to drive, can score around the rim, etc. It just doesn't. And the cherry on this cake is ....even THIS part of the scouting is included in the "fog of war". In my recent recruiting class i wrote down the play style comments/notes on a couple of my recruits and when they got to my team their play styles didn't match the comments. My "rarely looks to put up a jumper" SG turned out to have 58% mid-range in his pie chart. Makes no sense for play style to be subjected to scouting error to that extent otherwise you're almost recruiting and putting teams together blind if you can't trust rankings, ratings or assessment of style of play. I say all this to say please stop chalking everything up to "user error" so to speak because the OP clearly stated he tried all different kinds of strategies. That player was basically destined to be a three times worse version of Allen Iverson and this game is littered with them. It makes for a not so enjoyable experience when playing at the higher schools. Will you win? Yep. But unless you have a a dominant post scorer on your team to balance things out your offensive stats are gonna be very subpar. It's enough posts/complaints on this issue that it's time to stop defending this aspect of the game and viewing it as outlier experiences

You are right in that there is no point in listening to the comments on recruit's playstyle comments, C-bailey. That becomes clear when one week you are told the kid never posts up, and the next week you are told he sets up in the post frequently.

As for your other comments, regulars defend the game and offer feedback precisely because we've been where you are, and have figured out how to to make things work. It is your choice to ignore what it is said, and continue blaming it on the game engine.

If CHOPPA1 finds no value in what I posted, that's his prerogative as well. Veterans take time to reply to posts here to try to help, nothing more.

Is the game a perfect reflection of real life? No. Can the game be improved? Sure, as any game can. Has it been improved over time? Yes. Do the "regulars" and "non-regulars" supply suggestions and data and are improvements made because of that? Yes. In fact, quite a long list of suggestions and info was compiled and supplied to the developer for consideration for DDSCB2020.

I appreciate the concerns raised by CHOPPA and C-Bailey. But If someone responds with their opinions and they differ from your opinions, well that's the way of the world, right? Everyone has different experiences and different expectations. That's why this is an open forum. Fortunately it is also a forum where the participants are supportive of each other and provide the best information they can based on their experience with the game.

In the other thread that you posted in, C-Bailey, I suggested:

"If there are things that you want changed about shooting and scoring (or anything else) and have the data for that, then supply that directly to Gary and maybe he can work toward making incremental change to improve things. That would be a good thing."

Have you done that? The more specifics, details, and data based upon actual game results that you can provide, the better the chance that it an be addressed by the developer. I've done that and I know that others have also on a variety of issues...and it does get reviewed and modifications have been made for many issues.

Good post, PG.

Well said, PG. DDS:CB is a great game. There are areas where it is less than fully realistic. I think that's pretty much inevitable. It gets better with every new incarnation. It will never totally reflect "live" coaching unless virtual reality progresses farther than I expect it to progress.

Here's a thread with some comments from Gary about scoring and shooting ratings. While it doesn't go to the exact heart of your concerns, it might at least give you a glimpse into what he's thinking:

viewtopic.php?f=272&t=28591&hilit=scoring+rating

And for further background, here's another thread on shooting rating & percentages:

viewtopic.php?f=272&t=28651&hilit=scoring+rating

CHOPPA1 wrote:Been playing this series for a long time, don't usually post on the board but I am thoroughly confused about a few things that seem to change with each iteration of the game, or things that just flat out defy logic and make the game unplayable. Was hoping someone would have some input on these two areas because I think I'm about finished with this game and future ones as well.

I will take the time to respond to your question although I would like to begin by saying just because you don't understand/like how the game does something does not make it unplayable. That's not a fair description to someone else who may be interested in the game and may think it has some major problem that makes it not work. Your post is also dripping with sarcasm and hyperbole - I'm hoping that is from being frustrated that you don't understand how the game is working and that you are do really want to enjoy the game and will take my explanation - straight from the guy who made the game - and it will provide you a more enjoyable experience with the game.

1. Scoring ability - So if Im not mistaken, this rating (in practice) is not actually rating their ability to score (which I think most people would associate with the term "scoring ability"), but instead is their willingness to shoot the ball? First of all, I'm no college hoops expert, but how does this make even the slightest bit of sense? If I have a guy that is 10/10 inside shooting, 10/10 outside shooting, but 1/10 "scoring", I would probably tell him to get over his stage fright and share his incredible shooting gift with the world, instead of "looking to make a pass" every single time because he just can't quite find the courage to get a shot up, and vice versa. In my current league, I play as Arizona and have an 8/10 scorer on my team, 1/10 inside shooting (like almost every guard/SF in this game, which is equally ridiculous), 9/10 outside shooting, who averages a whopping 24% shooting from the field, inside and out, has completely run our squad into the ground this season, but is far and away the "best" player on my team according to scouting with 4.5/5 stars overall. The game clearly values "scoring ability" in the overall rating but I run into this problem with nearly every team I run - that problem being that my "best" player is just a guy who is DETERMINED to shoot 20 times a game at a 20% clip, despite having absolutely no inside or outside game whatsoever. I mean, if all we do is go off of "willingness to shoot the ball" in determining who the best players in the league are, I personally might still have a shot at my once-forgotten hoop dreams if all I have to do is chuck 3's all day whether they go in or not, because above all, I am down. to. shoot. Just doesn't make much sense to me. Who the hell cares about how willing a guy is to shoot if hes absolutely terrible at...shooting the ball, he belongs on the bench, 9/10 scoring or not.

The scoring rating is the ability of a player to have scoring opportunities. A low rated player does not have "stage fright" - he just does not have the ability to create offense for himself. In other words if he's rated low then he is not an offensive threat for one of many reasons except being left with plenty of room to shoot the ball. A low scoring rating means he has little to no aggression on offense. He might be an excellent shooter. I myself was a pretty good shooter - by myself just putting up shot after shot in the gym. However that sadly didn't qualify me to play college basketball either because most everyone was bigger and faster and stronger so to even be able to get open let alone get a shot off at that level would have been a challenge since it was when I did get into a game even in HS. On the other side of the spectrum there are players who are high in scoring rating because they don't have any problem getting shots off. Whether those shots are "good shots" or go in the basket is a different story. The kids who dominate high school basketball usually do so because they are taller, stronger and more aggressive than their weaker counterparts - they rack up points either through sheer volume of attempts or by playing largely against competition that has no business being on the same floor. Scouts don't rate that kid as a two star player - he scores 25 points a game he must be a four star player! Most everyone else rates the kid the same way - they're shocked when he comes to college and all of a sudden what worked at one level doesn't translate but they don't reevaluate in most cases - they say there must be something wrong with the coach or he's not focused on college ball and is looking to the pros or whatever.

I pulled up a random league from CB20 and I looked at Arizona. Not one kid who averages more than 14 MPG in this sim is shooting anywhere close to 24%. The lowest is 42 and 43% - I went to ESPN to look at Arizona in real life. They have three (four if you count Doutrive) players with more than 14 MPG shooting 40-43% and one of them is their second leading scorer Mannion who was a 5 star recruit and ranked #9 in his recruiting class. Next I went to NBADraft.net and looked at their 2020 Mock - guess who is #6? Mannion. He was and continues to be extremely highly rated yet seems to be very inefficient as a scorer.

I happen to have chosen VA Commonwealth in this sim as the team I was in charge of. You say almost every G/SF in the game is a 1/10 inside shooting. Out of the 10 PG/SG/SF on this roster 3 are 1/10, 3 are 2/10, 3 are 3/10 and 1 is 4/10. Any other team I look at that I have scouted in the game has a similar distribution of ratings. There is no place I can find "almost every guard/SF" rated 1/10 for FGI.

You also say that if the kid is shooting 24% that no matter what his scoring rating he belongs on the bench.....well, BINGO! You are the coach so put him on the bench. That's what the entire purpose of the game is. You're working with the information you "think" about a player and you see the cold, hard facts...the results. It's your choice whether or not you continue to go with what the world thinks about the kid or what you are seeing in the results. Look at Arizona - they have a top 10 recruit who is supposed to be a high NBA lottery pick and they're a whopping 16-7 with ONE ranked win (#20 Colorado). Maybe they would be worse without Mannion just like you might be worse sitting your alleged superstar but maybe not. Maybe they would have been better off with a lower rated recruit who actually turns out to be a better player. You seem to want the game to say "Johnny is rated #1 so he's the best player" and have nothing else matter but the game is nowhere near that cut and dry.

2. The inside shooting thing - Every time I start a league, why does half of my squad have a 1/10 rating on inside shots? I play as (supposedly) good teams, so why are they all F- on layups? I find that very hard to believe. I haven't checked the numbers, but getting blocked 10+ times a game seems like a regular occurrence, as we just continue to pound the ball inside, but in reality we have about a 50% success rate on breakaway layups. Are my players THAT bad? I, in real life, never having played at the collegiate level, appear to be MUCH better than every one of my G/Fs when it comes to shooting within 3 feet of the basket. That's a game ruiner. I've played with all the settings I can think of, etc. so if anyone else has ever had this problem please share what worked for you. Also, a 1/10 inside shooting rating with a 5/10 potential in that same rating or something, what's up with that? "True, the guy airballs layups now but if he really works hard, I bet in a couple years if he really works hard I can see him hitting one every once in a while"...how does that work? And going back to the scoring thing, if a guy has 3 scoring ability now but 10 potential is that like a "man, this guy is absolutely HORRIFIED by the thought of hoisting a jumper against U-Green Bay, but I bet in a few years he will be chucking 30 3-pters with his eyes closed in the natty against duke... i just hope he makes one"?

Again, half of your squad does not have a 1/10 on inside shooting. I just troubleshot a CB19 league file and they were using MSU. I pulled it up and they have 4 1/10s out of 15 players. You are also taking this rating FAR to literally (no they are not F- on making a layup) First of all the inside scoring rating takes into account all scoring "inside" aka the paint. You made a number of references to layups - this has nothing to do with making a layup. Every kid at the college level can make a layup at least most of the time. The inside scoring rating is a formula that takes into account their shooting percentage from inside the paint as well as their desire to shoot inside. So when you see a PG with a 1/10 it doesn't mean that he can't make a layup to save his life - it means that he's not going to be an inside scoring threat. He's not going to be a guard that is trying to post up. If he does end up in the paint with the ball unless its a clean layup he's probably not going to score. Short guys who get into the paint often are going to lose FG% points on a shot when challenged by a much taller player - it's suddenly a much more difficult shot. This is why those other ratings are important (and why the game is complex - there's not just one rating you can look at and have an answer). Look at the kid's play style tendencies. Is there anything for post? If not he's going to be a 1 or 2 out of 10 most likely because he's not an inside scorer. A 5/10 potential means he might develop into a better scorer inside. He might learn how to drive better and get to the rim for more layups. He might develop a nice floater when he gets into the paint. This is literally ZERO to do with the ability to make a shot 3 feet from the basket.

The game is a very deep game and I or some of the other vets around here are always happy to answer questions. I can promise you though that if you look at things as they are intended they will make much more sense and provide a more enjoyable experience for you.

Dang Gary...

This kind of support and depth is exactly the kind of stuff that makes this game the best sports sim of any kind on the market. Thanks for all you do.