Creating a coaching identity

[SteveVictory]

I am enjoying this game so far, at least when I have a chance to play (darn jobs!) ...

I find myself frustrated, though, because I want to create a certain identity as a coach, and I want to be able to find the players that fit my identity as much as possible. I know you can set your sliders to reflect your philosophy, but how the heck do you implement that philosophy with practice plans and strategy? And how do you find the right players, especially when you are playing low prestige team and you can't trust your assistants' evaluations?

I feel like everything is a crap shoot.

For instance, I want to be up-tempo, heavy on the boards, strong man-to-man, play inside-out ... how do I know which offensive sets to pick, how to find the right players for my system, etc.? When I am recruiting players, I can find out about whether playing time or conference prestige is important to them, but I don't know how to find out about what skills they possess/systems they understand. I only get the occasional hints on that. How do I develop guys? Thanks, sorry to ramble ... just want to be good at this game!

[SteveVictory]

Maybe a better way to sum up all my ramblings: Could someone in the know connect the various coaching philosophies (what we select in our sliders when creating a coach) to the best offensive/defensive sets that match that philosophy? And what traits in players to most look for when we adopt a certain philosophy?

For example: If I want to be a Princeton offense guy: how to set my sliders, which sets to choose, best traits in my players, etc.
Example 2: If I want to be like former UNC coach Roy Williams: loved tempo and transition, played through his bigs, liked to half-court trap, wanted to dominate the boards, etc.
Example 3: If want to be like former UVA coach Tony Bennett: pack-line defense, methodical offense (though not Princeton), slow tempo: best sets, player characteristics?

Thanks!!

[Wildcat18]

I’ll try to answer what you’re asking to the best of my understanding;

You have several levers to pull to affect how your players play: sets, pace, crash boards, offensive freedom for offense, and defensive set, crash boards, and full court for defense

The biggest effect of sets is what you need to recruit, particularly when it comes to your bigs. Motion offenses for examples needs everyone to be able to pass and handle the ball well, but your center doesn’t need to be able to shoot jumpers. Shuffle offenses, on the other hand, work best when your 4s and 5s can shoot threes because they spend some time at the top of the arc, while the guards need to not be zeros in the post because they set themselves up there. The game should have a decent description of the sets on the strategy page, for more information.

Unless things have changed since the 2022 version when creating a coach, the sliders when you create your coach don’t really matter too much - you can change the percentages on zone defense and pace from the strategy page, and the veteran/young players slider only actually matters for AI coaches AFAIK. I’m not sure what the ambition, discipline, and temperament sliders do, if anything.

For developing guys, playing time and coaching staff ability are your two main levers - players develop best when they have at least some playing time, and I’m pretty sure they learn sets faster when they play more.When you recruit freshman or JUCO players, they’re going to come in with at most 10 “rating” in a set, so whether they knew a set from high school isn’t something I’d ever worry about.

I’m going to finish by explaining my philosophy and how I go about recruiting, and hope that my thought process is helpful to you. So I look to run a faster version of the Villanova offense under Jay Wright. Since a 4-out/1-in motion offense isn’t in the game, I go with the 3-2 Motion offense as my main set instead. I run that 60% of the time, then run 5-out and Princeton the rest in a ratio that changes depending on my team. For 1-4, I look for outside shooting, ball-handling, and passing, and at the 5 I look for inside shooting, passing, and rebounding. For everybody, I want defense to at least be a C.When recruiting, I tend to try to recruit starters in “bunches” - I’ll try to recruit 3 guys who will start 4 years in the same year, particularly when I just join a team, in the hopes the guys develop together and are a quality veteran squad capable of making a deep tournament run in year 4.

[ZorbaGarp]

My question and only issue with the game has always been that there really isn't a strategy to the game since the ratings are not accurate, they reflect the scouting ability of the coach assigned to that task. I understand the fog of war concept, but anyone who watches basketball can see whether a player can shoot or not, whether he can rebound or not, whether he can pass or not. Future potential I can see being dependent on a coach's talent level. But that's different. I can create a strategy based on the skill levels on see for my players but if those skill levels aren't real then my strategy doesn't matter. Same with scouting my opponents. What's the point of crafting a game strategy around an opposing team's ratings if those ratings are a fiction?

Ok, off my soapbox. The game is a blast. Just frustrating to me in this one regard (and something that has kept me from investing in recent updates).

[C-Bailey24]

My question and only issue with the game has always been that there really isn't a strategy to the game since the ratings are not accurate, they reflect the scouting ability of the coach assigned to that task. I understand the fog of war concept, but anyone who watches basketball can see whether a player can shoot or not, whether he can rebound or not, whether he can pass or not. Future potential I can see being dependent on a coach's talent level. But that's different. I can create a strategy based on the skill levels on see for my players but if those skill levels aren't real then my strategy doesn't matter. Same with scouting my opponents. What's the point of crafting a game strategy around an opposing team's ratings if those ratings are a fiction?

Ok, off my soapbox. The game is a blast. Just frustrating to me in this one regard (and something that has kept me from investing in recent updates).

I agree. Made a similar post some time back about this. For example, I see a lot of newbies to the game being told things like "recruit players for your system". Well its not easy to do that with so much fog of war and scout error involved. Too many recruits get scouted as "A" and "A+" shooters only to get to your team and be rated 4's and 5's. Thats a steep drop and error in evaluation especially if you're trying to build a perimeter oriented team. I usually have to craft the strategy to my team from year to year as oppose to build a system.

[NCAAhoops]

I had just mentioned this in another post. There are more things than just your scout that you need to understand. An A or A+ rating by your scout during recruiting is the kids potential that your scout is giving you, not his current rating, thus the 5 rating when he arrives on your team is his current rating, not a 10. Also if you are on a low level team like Citadel an A rating in shooting would probably be a C on a team like Duke as that guy is the best your team can get so you see him as an A and the real A shooters go to much better teams than your team because an A to to Citadel is not an A to Duke. This is where the Camps can give you a real feel where the player really is if you compare him to the top players. If he didn't stand out then his current ratings when he comes in on your team will show he is not ready compared to the real A's and needs time to develop and will probably never be a 10. If you get the MVP of the camp then yes his A will be an A or close when he comes on your team. Again why upper teams with a lot of money can go to all the camps and will find the real A's and lower teams are limited by money to go to all the camps and and what info your scout is giving you is base on what is assumed as great shooter because he is the best shooter that Citadel can get. If he was really an A+ he would not go to Citadel as many better teams would be after him. The only chance you would have is he is in state and wants to stay local. But more than likely he would end up at a better school than yours. Another hint would be those upper teams are not on his list is a good sign he's not really an A+ and is not going to be a 9 or 10 when he arrives.

[C-Bailey24]

I had just mentioned this in another post. There are more things than just your scout that you need to understand. An A or A+ rating by your scout during recruiting is the kids potential that your scout is giving you, not his current rating, thus the 5 rating when he arrives on your team is his current rating, not a 10. Also if you are on a low level team like Citadel an A rating in shooting would probably be a C on a team like Duke as that guy is the best your team can get so you see him as an A and the real A shooters go to much better teams than your team because an A to to Citadel is not an A to Duke. This is where the Camps can give you a real feel where the player really is if you compare him to the top players. If he didn't stand out then his current ratings when he comes in on your team will show he is not ready compared to the real A's and needs time to develop and will probably never be a 10. If you get the MVP of the camp then yes his A will be an A or close when he comes on your team. Again why upper teams with a lot of money can go to all the camps and will find the real A's and lower teams are limited by money to go to all the camps and and what info your scout is giving you is base on what is assumed as great shooter because he is the best shooter that Citadel can get. If he was really an A+ he would not go to Citadel as many better teams would be after him. The only chance you would have is he is in state and wants to stay local. But more than likely he would end up at a better school than yours. Another hint would be those upper teams are not on his list is a good sign he's not really an A+ and is not going to be a 9 or 10 when he arrives.

I've played every version of the game. I understand how camps and recruiting works. It's STILL a steep amount of error. Those 4's and 5's RARELY improve. I don't play small schools. I play big schools. It's the same no matter what level

Also, when you send a coach to watch a Live Game. What coach worth any penny of his salary, whether small school or major, is gonna watch a recruit play and come back and tell his HC "James has some knowledge of the 1-2-2 Press". There's already fog of war in the ratings. We have to wonder what style of player we're getting too.

[NCAAhoops]

Big school Duke has a player Caleb Foster who was a 4 star recruit in 2023 with a 94 ranking at 247 recruiting which is an average of several national recruiting sites. He is shooting 28% from 3 and average 5 points per game this year.
This was their notes on him.
"He’s a bigger guard with good size, strength, and seemingly long arms. He’s not going to overwhelm you with his athleticism, but he has terrific balance and a versatile attack that allows him to be a multi-level threat while still playing within the flow of the game. He may not have a mechanically pure release on his jumper, but has evolved into an undeniably tough shot-maker with threes, pull-ups, little step-backs, and soft runners all in his bag. He has combo-moves off the dribble, uses his body well once he gets his defender on his hip, and terrific body control in the lane. He’s playing with more of a scoring mentality right now, but has a good natural feel for the game, and is both a capable and willing passer. He also doesn’t get sped-up as a handler and projects as a good pick-and-roll player because of his versatility and ability to make reads. Defensively, it remains to be seen if he’ll have a hard time containing smaller and quicker guards, especially in open space."

Their staff would be one of the best in the country including Jai Lucas who is considered "One of the nation’s most heralded assistant coaches and recruiters". So you cannot say it should never happen. And if you look at college basketball it happens often. Look at Kentucky the 7 years with the highest rated classes nearly every year and they haven't got past the 1st round in the NCAA tournament. Guess their scouts make mistakes just like many more around the league. And no recruit coming in to the game is rated more than 10 out of 100 in proficiency in any set you run so it doesn't help a lot if a kid knows the 1-2-2 Press very well as this player is High School level not college level which is a big leap, he is going to need to learn his coaches system which is going to be much more complex than what he did in High School. I would only care if the player knows 1-2-2 press if he is a transfer as his rating would matter then.

[C-Bailey24]

I don't know where you got "never" cause I never said that. Secondly you basically proved my point with the lack of details in scouting notes in the game. Your last sentence says you would only care if he knows the press if he's a transfer. BINGO. FAR too often you can watch film or Live Game in this game and ALL you'll get is some useless note about him knowing a press breaker. See what you wrote in your first paragraph? It's not REMOTELY like that in this game. Accuracy aside. This aspect has never changed. Been the same in every version since way back

[NCAAhoops]

This will be my last post on this as I don't think it would do much more than what each of us think about the scouting at this point and we can agree to disagree.
But yes my fist paragraph is from 3 professional scouting reports, I don't expect the game to be able to match that type detail. But Caleb Foster performance does not match to what the professional scouts reported. Which was the point I was making and what the game is doing. By that report Foster would have been an A or A+ in shooting but is preforming like a C- maybe a D+. As far as the transfers you can see their proficients while recruiting them and I consider that import as I want him to match up with my coaching style in at least one in offense and one in defense as I expect them to contribute right away. I agree with you that you only get a few scouting messages about what they are Offense/Defense proficient in when recruiting, but the best they will come in first year on that is at a 1o out of 100. So whether he's a 0 in that or an 10 is not really much of a factor to choose to recruit him or not. Colleges are now running NBA style plays which way more complex than High School plays, so the fact they need to learn the system when they are freshman is realist. Some will learn it faster than others which the game reproduces. So I don't have a problem with that being limited as I know what to expect whether he knows 1-2-2 press as he still needs to learn at the college level of play, I want other ratings as I only have so many weeks to make a decision to offer or not when guys start making decisions. A 1-2-2 press rating you se is real not slanted by your scout. if he knows anything per the scout it will be 10 out of 100 or nothing at a 0 out 100. I don't understand the frustration about a high school player not being proficient in your system as its not realistic. That's why teams go at the freshman on the court in real life other than a few exceptions.