Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2021 17:51:11 GMT -5
I was curious how age and potential effect blocking TCs for big men. I was also interested how age and potential effect the total TC output for big men.
Setup:
120 simulations of 1 TC of a 5.0 file and assorted rookies from 6.0. Each change in rating was then averaged over 120 simulations. The means of each rating change is what is reported in all of the following charts. Only big men are considered in the following charts.
Charts:
First off, let’s look at AVERAGE blocking change in TC versus the two variables we know to matter most: Age and Potential.
As you can see blocking tends to go down more often when ages are high, and tends to go up more often when potential is high. However, there is a lot of variation here and there are great and horrible results for high/low ages and high/low potentials. So what gives? Can we combine Age and potential somehow to see if we can find a better cutoff for some certainty in a good or bad blocking TC?
The following are two “Wheel Charts”. These show three variables and how they are correlated on a coarse-grained 2 dimensional plot. In this chart age is sorted first, and is shown in blue. You can see it goes from lowest age due north, and then age increases as you go clockwise. Sorted within each age is the players potential, which is shown in grey. You can also see the rating in question shown in orange. One plot shows average change in blocking (over 120 TCs), and the other shows average change over all ratings (over 120 TCs).
As you can see the biggest jumps come from the lowest ages combined with the highest potentials. While these charts are pretty its a little hard to see what’s going on. So I combined two of the variables (age and potential) into one that I will call “Growth Indicator” to make it a little easier to display in 2 dimensions:
These charts are pretty cool! You can see above a certain “Growth Indicator”, it’s almost always good. For blocking, if your growth indicator is above 40, your TC is going to be positive. 9 of the 11 players with agrowth indicator over 30 had positive blocking TCs. This correlation is even more apparent when looking at the sum of all rating changes over a TC. Players with over 30 growth indicator grow positively 10 out of 11 times in our example, on average.
You see some interesting trends and surprisingly the sim seems to hate certain players giving them large negative numbers over multiple TCs, even if they have similar ages and potentials, however this evens out across all the players. However, I think you'd see some less extreme variations (like Paul Krause or Gortat) with a large sim number than 120. You can plug in current draft prospects to get an idea for what their TC will look like overall. For instance Shawn Bradley has a growth indicator of 45, so you can be sure it’ll almost certainly be a net positive, and it is also extremely likely he will grow in blocks. Cheers until next time.
Setup:
120 simulations of 1 TC of a 5.0 file and assorted rookies from 6.0. Each change in rating was then averaged over 120 simulations. The means of each rating change is what is reported in all of the following charts. Only big men are considered in the following charts.
Charts:
First off, let’s look at AVERAGE blocking change in TC versus the two variables we know to matter most: Age and Potential.
As you can see blocking tends to go down more often when ages are high, and tends to go up more often when potential is high. However, there is a lot of variation here and there are great and horrible results for high/low ages and high/low potentials. So what gives? Can we combine Age and potential somehow to see if we can find a better cutoff for some certainty in a good or bad blocking TC?
The following are two “Wheel Charts”. These show three variables and how they are correlated on a coarse-grained 2 dimensional plot. In this chart age is sorted first, and is shown in blue. You can see it goes from lowest age due north, and then age increases as you go clockwise. Sorted within each age is the players potential, which is shown in grey. You can also see the rating in question shown in orange. One plot shows average change in blocking (over 120 TCs), and the other shows average change over all ratings (over 120 TCs).
As you can see the biggest jumps come from the lowest ages combined with the highest potentials. While these charts are pretty its a little hard to see what’s going on. So I combined two of the variables (age and potential) into one that I will call “Growth Indicator” to make it a little easier to display in 2 dimensions:
These charts are pretty cool! You can see above a certain “Growth Indicator”, it’s almost always good. For blocking, if your growth indicator is above 40, your TC is going to be positive. 9 of the 11 players with agrowth indicator over 30 had positive blocking TCs. This correlation is even more apparent when looking at the sum of all rating changes over a TC. Players with over 30 growth indicator grow positively 10 out of 11 times in our example, on average.
However, what we can also see is that if you have questionable potential, or questionable age, your growth can be all over the map. We know this from erics previous posts, but it’s good to see again.
So What?
With so much noise at the lower end, we need to focus on the lack of negative (except for one) TCs for players with a growth indicator over 30. What does a growth indicator over 30 look like in terms of Age and potential? Here is a table of the players with growth indicators over 30 and their changes in TC:
You see some interesting trends and surprisingly the sim seems to hate certain players giving them large negative numbers over multiple TCs, even if they have similar ages and potentials, however this evens out across all the players. However, I think you'd see some less extreme variations (like Paul Krause or Gortat) with a large sim number than 120. You can plug in current draft prospects to get an idea for what their TC will look like overall. For instance Shawn Bradley has a growth indicator of 45, so you can be sure it’ll almost certainly be a net positive, and it is also extremely likely he will grow in blocks. Cheers until next time.
