well my team is 31-36. the strategy didnt work out well for me. i dont have enough rebounding. my teams scores only 108.6ppg on 52.6 fg% but more importantly im tied for last in rebounds per game with 43.5. in my defense i am in one of the toughest divisions ive ever played in. all the owners are good and my team is in last place despite being only 5 games under .500. it was a fun concept nonetheless.

ok so from what i've read here, it sounds like there is a bump in fg% that takes effect when you reach about combined 110%+ in assists.

in the leagues that I'm in, doesn't seem like there is much of a different whether you draft 75% or 100%.

my question is, is there a minimum amount of assists to draft where if you fall below this threshold, it becomes detrimental to your team and its fg%? About what do you notice this minimum assists% is?

I have done a bit of experimentation with this (but nowhere near as much as some other people here), and this is what I have found:
<60% (2 studies): substantial decrease of efg%, large leap in turnovers, small increase in fouls
60%-90% (4 studies): everything holds about normal, maybe small increase in turnovers. My results varied a lot, but not any significant increase/decrease
90%-120%(5 studies): small increase in efg% and smaller increase in turnovers
120%+ (1 study): large increase in efg% and turnovers. However, in smaller caps (sub-$50 mil) and draft leagues, getting to 120% means sacrificing on other things, mainly rebounds, so these teams generally get slaughtered on the boards.
These numbers are only for my starters, as it is difficult to find a bench that mirrors the qualities of my starting 5, even when platooning. There are a lot of other variables that go into this as well, such as usage, IRL efg%, fatigue levels, even predisposition to certain qualities, such as high/low turnovers or fouls

turnovers are likely going up because many high ast% players also have high tov%.

Are you using consistent usage?  Usage is going to effect both efg% & turnovers greatly.

Like I said, I find it hard to find consistency btwn my starters and my bench, but looking back on some of my teams, my most common positional lineups (ones I still use regularly for $42 mil leagues) feature players who have usg% within 5% of each other. The largest differential is 11.3%, while the smallest is only 2.6% 

i'm talking about cumulative usage, not consistency between starters & benches.

Oh... Right. Cumulative usage was all over the board. I had higher than usual usage for -60% and lower than usual for 120+%. The middle two ast% tiers I mentioned had around the same amount of cumulative usage, considering I had the same rotation at 4 positions for all my teams, and just varied 1 position at a time.

Obviously I made a mistake. I'm still learning the ins and outs of the sim. Another reson why these results may contain error is that they were all 10-game exhibition league teams, so a smaller sample size.

yah.  makes a huge difference.  Many different coaching options in the real thing as opposed to the exhibition.

And there's a lot of tricks I have learned over my 40+ exhibitions that when applied to an 82 game season, led to a very disappointing season. It's just another monster that I have to conquer.

I know that you have recently turned to experimenting with what is "too much" usage, but did you discover an approximate number for ast% that keeps shooting percentages around the IRL numbers while doing ast% testing?

extremely hard to test with all of the variables.  I believe (but am not sure) that the penalty occurs at below 50% ast on the floor.  I used to try and get 67-68 Wilt to average a triple double and ran as low as 51% ast% without ever seeing a hit to my shooting.  I didn't try less than that because I figured 50% as the minimum (with a basis on nothing).

I firmly believe it all starts with getting the right usage out there... so once I get that nailed down further, I can do more ast% tests.

Do you all (the more experienced owners, would love ash's opinion.....AND SMOKEYS LOL) think the assist bump happens in a cumulative total or a tier system (like usage).

cumulative total is like each players assist% added up to a cumulative total on the floor at that point, versus a tier system similar to usage%.

I've always assumed cumulative and have seen no language to the contrary from seble

fyi, I haven't updated this, but I used this strategy in my double season progressive team.  Harder to do in a prog league, but was still able to routinely run 80-100+ on the floor.

It has been quite effective.

bump