another way to look at it - James played 2966 minutes - of those, there were only 150 or so in which none of the following 3 players were on the court - Mo Williams, Delonte West, Daniel Gibson - no doubt that if any of those 3 are on the court, LJ is not the PG

so a player who spent 5% of his minutes *possibly* at PG should be 100% there

c'mon people

In the end, if we need to make a few manual exceptions we can, but I'd like to avoid that if at all possible.  Once we've settled on a salary formula I'll bring out some position effectiveness numbers for review.

can you make some manual exceptions with the salaries too?

id love to see rodman and moses cost wilt like money....would solve a lot of problems right there

Just released an updated spreadsheet.  Take a look and post your thoughts in the salary thread up top.

Posted by longtallbrad on 8/26/2010 7:53:00 AM (view original):
I think that's exactly right, but I'd add the dimension of those facets of the game that are favored by a given edition of the sim.  Looking at the list of heavily used players, you can say that Rodman and Rice should be more expensive, and/or that the impact of rebounding and threes is overblown by the simulation engine.

indeed but I imagine it is easier to dicker about with salary calibrations than it is to change certain fundamental aspects of how the engine works

Posted by tracyr on 8/26/2010 3:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ashamael on 8/24/2010 9:50:00 PM (view original):
09-10 Lebron should be 100% at PG because he started 15 games of the season there.
I think many Pippens should be simply because he often defended the team's PG.  He defended every position except for center, in fact, so that should be considered.
I don't reckon Bird ever played either guard spot offensively or defensively.


If you're working towards a more open PE (sounds like it), I think ast% is a bad way to say who could/couldn't play PG.  66-67 & 67-68 Wilt are prime examples.

I think it should be based more on listed position, height & weight. 
Charles Barkley, for example, is a 6'4" power forward.  100% pf, 100% sf and that's it. 
Paul Gasol is a 7'0" pf.  100% at pf & c. 
Reggie Miller is a 6'7" sg.  100% at sg & sf. 
O.J. Mayo is a 6'4" sg.  100% at sg & pg.
all pgs 100% at pg & sg.
all cs 100% at c & pf.
Then you do the exceptions (Magic, Oscar, Jordan (for 88-89), Lebron, Rasheed, Garnett, Michael Ray Richardson, Pippen to name a few (though there isn't going to be many more than this).

your first sentence is completely false

09-10 Lebron started 76 games, all 76 were at Forward (this is official and totally undisputable as it is Cleveland and the NBA's entry)
in those 76, 64 times Mo Williams started at Point Guard - so no way possible LeBron *started* at PG in any of those games
the remaining 12 - 10 times the starting backcourt was Daniel Gibson (PG) and Anthony Parker (SG)
the remaning 2 - 1 time it was Delonte West (PG) and Anthony Parker (SG)
the remaining 1 - the only possible game in which he could have started at PG, despite being listed as a starting Forward (NBA does not distinguish between PG and SG, and SF and PF - just G and F - the starting lineup at G was Anthony Parker and Jawad Williams, at F was LeBron and JJ

no way LeBron should be 100% at PG - NONE - he should be 97% PG, 100% SG, 100%SF, 97% PF and 80% C

I guess I listen to commentators too much.  I should know better, but I guess I don't...

After PE is adjusted will defensive rating be tweaked? Looking through the spread sheet i've noticed some players def ratings have dropped. Example 08-09 Boris Diaw his current def rating is 53 however it is 36 on the spread sheet also his 09-10 def rating is 25. I believe 09-10 was his best def year of his career. I would think he should be in the 50 to 60 range.

Is PE factored into the salary? (i.e. 100% at 3 positions is way more beneficial than a guy who can just play 1 position on both sides of the ball)

Posted by tracyr on 8/26/2010 3:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ashamael on 8/24/2010 9:50:00 PM (view original):
09-10 Lebron should be 100% at PG because he started 15 games of the season there.
I think many Pippens should be simply because he often defended the team's PG.  He defended every position except for center, in fact, so that should be considered.
I don't reckon Bird ever played either guard spot offensively or defensively.


If you're working towards a more open PE (sounds like it), I think ast% is a bad way to say who could/couldn't play PG.  66-67 & 67-68 Wilt are prime examples.

I think it should be based more on listed position, height & weight. 
Charles Barkley, for example, is a 6'4" power forward.  100% pf, 100% sf and that's it. 
Paul Gasol is a 7'0" pf.  100% at pf & c. 
Reggie Miller is a 6'7" sg.  100% at sg & sf. 
O.J. Mayo is a 6'4" sg.  100% at sg & pg.
all pgs 100% at pg & sg.
all cs 100% at c & pf.
Then you do the exceptions (Magic, Oscar, Jordan (for 88-89), Lebron, Rasheed, Garnett, Michael Ray Richardson, Pippen to name a few (though there isn't going to be many more than this).

your first sentence is completely false

09-10 Lebron started 76 games, all 76 were at Forward (this is official and totally undisputable as it is Cleveland and the NBA's entry)
in those 76, 64 times Mo Williams started at Point Guard - so no way possible LeBron *started* at PG in any of those games
the remaining 12 - 10 times the starting backcourt was Daniel Gibson (PG) and Anthony Parker (SG)
the remaning 2 - 1 time it was Delonte West (PG) and Anthony Parker (SG)
the remaining 1 - the only possible game in which he could have started at PG, despite being listed as a starting Forward (NBA does not distinguish between PG and SG, and SF and PF - just G and F - the starting lineup at G was Anthony Parker and Jawad Williams, at F was LeBron and JJ

no way LeBron should be 100% at PG - NONE - he should be 97% PG, 100% SG, 100%SF, 97% PF and 80% C

Dude, you're really griping about 3%?  If you're going to put him at 97% PG...why not just put him at 100%?

Pippen is not a PG and would not realistically play at 100% effectiveness there.  Yes, he occasionally defended PG's in real life - bigger, slower PG's.  That doesn't mean he could defend the quicker, faster sort.  Besides, the sim already allows for him to cover a PG on occasion though he won't do it as well as he defends SF's, which is reasonable.  Just because a player plays a certain position for a few minutes each game doesn't mean that they play it as well as they do their normal position.  If anything the sim has gotten already a bit over - generous in allowing such flexibility, and I don't think that the flexibility has been reflected in salaries though it should be.  (It obviously has value in the sim.)

Does anyone think Tyreke Evans should be 100% at PG, SG and SF?

I vote for leniency, particularly in agreement with Seble's point that it's better to have a player 100% where he shouldn't be than less than 100% where he should be.  I remember how much it drove everyone crazy when the 32-8-8 Jordan was only 92% at the point.  The same applies to other players, just my opinion. 

For example, does anyone doubt that Lebron has the skillset to play point guard if called upon?  Just look at the fourth quarter of virtually every game he's played, particularly in the playoffs.  He set up the offense because he WAS the offense.  Mo, Gibson, and the crazy guy, whichever one of them was in the game at the time, became wing spot up shooters, not point guards, as Lebron broke down the D and made decisions.  Those guys might have started at point, but Lebron finished it.

Besides, it's part of the fun of What If to be able to put together amazing combos, within reason of course.  If Don Nelson was a What If GM, you know he'd be lobbying to have some 6'3" guy play center.  In any event, if the desire is not to have to make a bunch of individual exceptions, I wouldn't mind having guys be able to play a wider range of positions than they might otherwise deserve.

P.S. Seble, just curious, are Rodman and Moses still programmers for WIS?  I'd always wondered what they were doing in retirement.

Is Pippen 100% at SG more often now? For some reason he was far too often pegged at 100% at SF and PF instead of SF and SG especially early in his career.

hey look it's that guy that doesn't play the sim yet always has an opinion opposite of many people who do play the sim as if he knows better than everyone. (edit: nabo)

Posted by abrondon on 8/27/2010 11:07:00 PM (view original):
I vote for leniency, particularly in agreement with Seble's point that it's better to have a player 100% where he shouldn't be than less than 100% where he should be.  I remember how much it drove everyone crazy when the 32-8-8 Jordan was only 92% at the point.  The same applies to other players, just my opinion. 

For example, does anyone doubt that Lebron has the skillset to play point guard if called upon?  Just look at the fourth quarter of virtually every game he's played, particularly in the playoffs.  He set up the offense because he WAS the offense.  Mo, Gibson, and the crazy guy, whichever one of them was in the game at the time, became wing spot up shooters, not point guards, as Lebron broke down the D and made decisions.  Those guys might have started at point, but Lebron finished it.

Besides, it's part of the fun of What If to be able to put together amazing combos, within reason of course.  If Don Nelson was a What If GM, you know he'd be lobbying to have some 6'3" guy play center.  In any event, if the desire is not to have to make a bunch of individual exceptions, I wouldn't mind having guys be able to play a wider range of positions than they might otherwise deserve.

P.S. Seble, just curious, are Rodman and Moses still programmers for WIS?  I'd always wondered what they were doing in retirement.

abordon great point this is a What If SIM. So what if Kareem and Shaq played on the same team?  I'm sure one of them can have the skill set to play PF.