CJBL Advanced Stats Extraction Framework

From Play-by-Play to Actionable Intelligence

Overview

Ratings tell you what a player should do. Advanced stats tell you what they actually do. This framework extracts metrics that predict wins better than raw ratings.

Core Principle: Volume × Efficiency = Actual Impact

Data Structure (PBP Format)

Each possession contains:

[Time] [Team] [Score] [Event description]
[Play sequence] > [Action] > [Zone] > [Result]
Set: [Play call]
Closest Defender: [Name], [contestedness]
Defensive Set: [Man/Zone type]
Coverage: [Guard coverage] Big: [Roll coverage] (assignments)

Key extractable fields: - Shot location (distance + zone) - Play type (ISO, PnR BH, PnR RM, Spot-Up, Transition, Post-Up, Off Screen, Hand Off, Cut) - Defender closeness (wide open, open, guarded, tight, v tight) - Defensive scheme faced (Man, 2-3 Zone, 1-2-2 Zone, etc.) - Make/Miss/Turnover outcome - Foul drawn (yes/no)

Tier 1: Efficiency Metrics (Most Predictive)

Effective Field Goal % (eFG%)

Formula: (FGM + 0.5 × 3PM) / FGA

Why it matters: Weights three-pointers appropriately. A 40% 3PT shooter (1.2 PPP) beats a 50% 2PT shooter (1.0 PPP).

Extraction method:

For each shot attempt:
- Parse "made/missed X-foot [shot type]"
- Track 3PT vs 2PT via "three pointer" in description
- Calculate: (2PT_makes + 1.5 × 3PT_makes) / total_FGA

Morey Ball target: eFG% > 52%

True Shooting % (TS%)

Formula: PTS / (2 × (FGA + 0.44 × FTA))

Why it matters: Incorporates free throws. Critical for evaluating volume scorers who draw fouls.

Extraction method:

Track per player:
- Total points (from "X PTS" in parentheses)
- FGA (shot attempts)
- FTA (from free throw lines)

Benchmark: TS% > 55% = efficient scorer

Points Per Possession (PPP) by Play Type

Why it matters: THE efficiency measure. Identifies what actions work vs. what's wasted motion.

Extraction method:

For each play sequence ending in shot/turnover/foul:
1. Parse play type from action chain (e.g., "P&R Ball Handler > High P&R")
2. Track outcome: Points scored (0, 2, or 3) + FTA × 0.75
3. Calculate: Total_points / Total_possessions_of_type

Benchmarks by play type:

Tier 2: Usage & Volume Metrics

3PT Attempt Rate (3PAr)

Formula: 3PA / FGA

Why it matters for Morey Ball: A player with great 3PT rating who takes 2 threes per game is useless. This measures whether they actually shoot.

Extraction method:

Count "three pointer" in shot descriptions
Divide by total shot attempts

Morey Ball target: 3PAr > 40% for perimeter players

Rim Attempt Rate (RimAr)

Formula: Rim_attempts / FGA

Why it matters: Morey Ball wants 3s and rim attacks. This confirms players are attacking paint, not settling for mid-range.

Extraction method:

Count shots ≤ 4 feet ("layup", "dunk", "1-foot", "2-foot", "3-foot", "4-foot")
Divide by total FGA

Target: RimAr > 25% for guards, > 50% for bigs

Mid-Range Attempt Rate (MidAr)

Formula: Mid_range_attempts / FGA

Why it matters: Should approach zero in Morey Ball. Identifies players who can't adapt.

Extraction method:

Count shots 10-22 feet that aren't three-pointers
Includes: "jump shot" without "three pointer" at 10+ feet

Morey Ball target: MidAr < 15%

Turnover Rate (TOV%)

Formula: TOV / (FGA + 0.44 × FTA + TOV)

Why it matters: High ratings mean nothing if the player bleeds possessions.

Extraction method:

Parse "turnover (lost ball/bad pass/offensive foul)" events
Calculate per 100 possessions

Benchmark: TOV% < 15% = reliable, > 20% = liability

Assist-to-Turnover Ratio (AST/TOV)

Formula: AST / TOV

Why it matters: Measures ball security and playmaking efficiency.

Extraction method:

Count "assisted by [Player]" occurrences
Divide by turnover count

Benchmark: > 2.0 = excellent, < 1.0 = concerning

Tier 3: Shot Quality Metrics

Contested Shot Breakdown

Formula: Track makes by defender closeness

Why it matters: Identifies shot selection quality and ability to create separation.

Extraction method:

Parse "Closest Defender: [Name], [level]"
Levels: wide open, open, guarded, tight, v tight
Track FG% at each level

Analysis: - High "wide open" % = good off-ball movement or team creating looks - High "v tight" volume + low % = poor shot selection - High "v tight" volume + high % = elite shot maker (rare)

Shot Zone Efficiency

Why it matters: Identifies where each player is most/least effective.

Extraction method:

Parse shot distance and location from action chains
Zones:
- Rim (0-4 feet)
- Paint non-rim (5-9 feet)
- Short mid-range (10-15 feet)
- Long mid-range (16-22 feet, non-3PT)
- Corner 3 (extracted from "corner" in description)
- Above-break 3 (all other 3PT)

Morey Ball priority: Rim > Corner 3 > Above-break 3 > Everything else

Tier 4: Defensive & Hustle Metrics

Defensive Rebounding Rate (DRB%)

Formula: DRB / (DRB + Opp_ORB)

Why it matters: Per-possession rebounding shows actual impact vs. playing more minutes.

Extraction method:

Track "Defensive rebound by [Player]"
Calculate as % of available defensive rebounds when player on court

Benchmark: > 20% = elite rebounder

Steal + Block Rate

Formula: (STL + BLK) / Minutes × 40

Why it matters: Per-40-minute disruption rate.

Extraction method:

Count "stolen by [Player]" and "blocked by [Player]"
Normalize to per-40 minutes

Benchmark: > 4.0 combined = disruptive defender

Opponent Shot Quality Allowed

Why it matters: Measures defensive impact beyond counting stats.

Extraction method:

When player listed as "Closest Defender":
- Track opponent FG% when guarded
- Track shot distance distribution forced
- Track contestedness level achieved

Analysis: Good defenders force: - Lower FG% than team average - Longer shots (further from rim) - Higher "tight/v tight" contest rate

Tier 5: Scheme-Specific (Morey Ball Critical)

Zone Defense Efficiency Differential

Formula: PPP_vs_zone - PPP_vs_man

Why it matters: Zone efficiency differentials reveal scheme-specific weaknesses. (Note: SIUE's originally reported -32% was a parsing error; v2-corrected value is -0.5%. Specific zone types like 2-1-2 (0.794 PPP) and 2-3 Matchup (0.714 PPP) are the real vulnerabilities.)

Extraction method:

Parse "Defensive Set: [type]" for each possession
Track PPP when facing:
- Man-to-man
- 2-3 Zone
- 1-2-2 Zone
- 3-2 Zone
- Other

Red flag: > 0.15 PPP drop vs zone = spacing problem

Spot-Up Efficiency

Why it matters: Morey Ball depends on spot-up shooters punishing defensive collapses.

Extraction method:

Filter plays containing "Spot-Up" in action chain
Calculate PPP and eFG%

Morey Ball requirement: Spot-up eFG% > 50%

PnR Ball Handler Efficiency

Why it matters: Primary action in Morey Ball offense.

Extraction method:

Filter plays containing "P&R Ball Handler"
Track:
- PPP
- % going to basket vs. pull-up vs. pass
- Efficiency by coverage type (Drop, Hedge, Switch, etc.)

Benchmark: PnR BH PPP > 0.85 = usable

Implementation: Python Parser Template

import re
from collections import defaultdict

def parse_pbp(filename):
    """Extract advanced stats from CJBL play-by-play file."""

    player_stats = defaultdict(lambda: {
        'fga': 0, 'fgm': 0, '3pa': 0, '3pm': 0,
        'fta': 0, 'ftm': 0, 'pts': 0,
        'rim_att': 0, 'rim_make': 0,
        'mid_att': 0, 'mid_make': 0,
        'tov': 0, 'ast': 0,
        'drb': 0, 'orb': 0,
        'stl': 0, 'blk': 0,
        'play_types': defaultdict(lambda: {'pos': 0, 'pts': 0}),
        'vs_zone': {'pos': 0, 'pts': 0},
        'vs_man': {'pos': 0, 'pts': 0},
        'contest_levels': defaultdict(lambda: {'att': 0, 'make': 0})
    })

    current_possession = {}

    with open(filename, 'r') as f:
        for line in f:
            # Shot made
            if match := re.search(r'(\w+ \w+) made (\d+)-foot (.+?) \((\d+) PTS', line):
                player, distance, shot_type, pts = match.groups()
                distance = int(distance)
                pts = int(pts)

                stats = player_stats[player]
                stats['fgm'] += 1
                stats['fga'] += 1
                stats['pts'] = pts  # Update running total

                if 'three pointer' in shot_type:
                    stats['3pm'] += 1
                    stats['3pa'] += 1
                elif distance <= 4:
                    stats['rim_make'] += 1
                    stats['rim_att'] += 1
                elif 10 <= distance <= 22:
                    stats['mid_make'] += 1
                    stats['mid_att'] += 1

                current_possession['shooter'] = player
                current_possession['made'] = True
                current_possession['pts'] = 3 if 'three' in shot_type else 2

            # Shot missed
            elif match := re.search(r'(\w+ \w+) missed (\d+)-foot (.+)', line):
                player, distance, shot_type = match.groups()
                distance = int(distance)

                stats = player_stats[player]
                stats['fga'] += 1

                if 'three pointer' in shot_type:
                    stats['3pa'] += 1
                elif distance <= 4:
                    stats['rim_att'] += 1
                elif 10 <= distance <= 22:
                    stats['mid_att'] += 1

                current_possession['shooter'] = player
                current_possession['made'] = False
                current_possession['pts'] = 0

            # Assist
            elif match := re.search(r'assisted by (\w+ \w+)', line):
                player_stats[match.group(1)]['ast'] += 1

            # Turnover
            elif match := re.search(r'(\w+ \w+) turnover', line):
                player_stats[match.group(1)]['tov'] += 1

            # Defensive set
            elif match := re.search(r'Defensive Set: (.+)', line):
                def_set = match.group(1)
                current_possession['vs_zone'] = 'Zone' in def_set

            # Play type
            elif any(pt in line for pt in ['P&R Ball Handler', 'Spot-Up', 'ISO',
                                            'Transition', 'Post-Up', 'Off Screen']):
                for pt in ['P&R Ball Handler', 'Spot-Up', 'ISO', 'Transition',
                          'Post-Up', 'Off Screen', 'Hand Off', 'Cut']:
                    if pt in line:
                        current_possession['play_type'] = pt
                        break

            # Closest defender
            elif match := re.search(r'Closest Defender: .+?, (\w+ ?\w*)', line):
                current_possession['contest'] = match.group(1).strip()

    return player_stats


def calculate_advanced(stats):
    """Calculate advanced metrics from raw stats."""

    advanced = {}

    # eFG%
    if stats['fga'] > 0:
        advanced['eFG%'] = (stats['fgm'] + 0.5 * stats['3pm']) / stats['fga']

    # TS%
    possessions = stats['fga'] + 0.44 * stats['fta']
    if possessions > 0:
        advanced['TS%'] = stats['pts'] / (2 * possessions)

    # Shot distribution
    if stats['fga'] > 0:
        advanced['3PAr'] = stats['3pa'] / stats['fga']
        advanced['RimAr'] = stats['rim_att'] / stats['fga']
        advanced['MidAr'] = stats['mid_att'] / stats['fga']

    # Turnover rate
    usage_possessions = stats['fga'] + 0.44 * stats['fta'] + stats['tov']
    if usage_possessions > 0:
        advanced['TOV%'] = stats['tov'] / usage_possessions

    # AST/TOV
    if stats['tov'] > 0:
        advanced['AST/TOV'] = stats['ast'] / stats['tov']

    return advanced

Quick Reference: Red Flags

Quick Reference: Green Flags

Next Steps

1. Parse all 36 games into consolidated player stat lines
2. Build comparative rankings vs. OVC averages
3. Identify scheme fit scores based on shot distribution + efficiency
4. Create scouting templates for transfer targets using same metrics

CJBL Assistant AD - Project Instructions

Role

You are my Assistant Athletic Director for the CJBL simulation basketball league. Your job is to provide strategic recommendations. You never make decisions autonomously—all actions require my approval.

Interaction Modes

Chat Mode

When I ask questions, provide: - Direct answer first - Supporting reasoning - Risk assessment (what could go wrong) - Alternative options if applicable

Check-In Mode

When I paste new data (roster changes, portal updates, phase announcements), immediately: 1. Identify what changed 2. Flag urgent items requiring action 3. Flag opportunities worth considering 4. Note any conflicts with current strategy

Trigger phrases: "Check-in:" or "Update:" at the start of my message.

Response Format

For Player Evaluations

[Name] | [Position] | [Year] | [Rating if known]
- Scheme fit: [1-5 score with brief reason]
- Risk level: [Low/Medium/High with reason]
- Recommendation: [Action]

For Recommendations

Action: [What to do]
Rationale: [Why]
Downside: [What could go wrong]
Confidence: [Low/Medium/High]

For Phase Transitions

1. Priority actions (ranked)
2. Deadlines
3. Dependencies (what must happen before what)

Constraints

• Be specific with numbers (not "several" — say "3")
• Flag when you need data you don't have
• Distinguish between confirmed mechanics and community speculation
• Default to conservative recommendations when uncertain
• Never recommend breaking promises unless tournament implications are clear

Knowledge Hierarchy

When information conflicts: 1. Commish announcements > Community consensus 2. Recent information > Older information 3. Confirmed mechanics > Speculation

Current Context

Refer to Team_Context document for current team state. I will update this document as the season progresses.

Check-In Template

When I start a session, I may paste something like:

Check-in:

Phase: [Current phase]
Days remaining: [X]

Recent changes:
- [What happened]

Current concerns:
- [What I'm worried about]

Questions:
- [Specific questions]

Respond by: 1. Acknowledging the phase and timeline 2. Analyzing changes and their implications 3. Addressing concerns with specific recommendations 4. Answering questions directly 5. Proactively flagging anything I should know

Philosophy Awareness

Always consider my team's offensive philosophy when making recommendations. A great player who doesn't fit the system is worse than a good player who does.

Prestige Awareness

Scale recommendations to prestige tier: - High+ prestige: Win-now pressure, can under-promise playing time - Average: Balance development and winning - Low: Long-term development focus, over-promise to attract talent

Red Flags to Always Call Out

• Promises that seem unsustainable given depth chart
• Transfer targets that don't fit philosophy
• Scheduling decisions that don't match roster strength
• Recruiting players at positions where we have depth
• Any action that risks AD Trust unnecessarily

CJBL Core Rules & Mechanics

Prestige System

9-tier system (lowest to highest): 1. Extremely Low (EL) 2. Very Low 3. Low 4. Below Average 5. Average 6. Above Average 7. High 8. Very High 9. Extremely High

How prestige increases: - Tournament runs (deeper = bigger boost) - Conference titles - Players drafted to JBL (pro league)

How prestige decreases: - Missing tournament (penalty scaled to current prestige tier) - Losing conference record - Sustained underperformance

Prestige affects: - Recruiting access (higher prestige = access to better recruits) - Hot seat pressure (higher prestige = stricter expectations) - Transfer market leverage (players accept less playing time at higher prestige schools) - Coach hiring (some coaches won't accept low prestige offers)

Hot Seat Mechanics

Contract structure: - 6-season initial contracts - Evaluated on: tournament performance, conference finish, W-L record, prestige maintenance

Risk by prestige tier: - High/Very High/Extremely High = highest hot seat risk - Average = moderate risk - Low/Very Low/EL = minimal risk (safe to rebuild)

Contract extensions: - Championship = 6-year extension - Meeting expectations = 3-year extension - Underperforming = 1-year extension

Job security: - Other ADs can apply for your job if you're on hot seat - Hot seat determined by performance vs expectations (prestige-adjusted)

Philosophy System

Core rule: You MUST play your head coach's offensive philosophy. Cannot change without firing coach (offseason only).

Philosophy Overview

Philosophy Details

Seven Seconds or Less: - Highest pace = most possessions = best for player development (XP) - Requires: ball handlers, athletes, rim runners, fearless shooters - De-emphasizes: post-up, isolation, hand-off - Risk: depth requirements, fatigue management

Pace & Space: - Modern motion offense, ball movement, drive-and-kick - Requires: shooters, passers, off-ball movement, roll gravity bigs - Recommended for rebuilds (adaptable, multiple attack vectors) - Fast pace still good for development

Morey Ball: - Efficiency-obsessed: rim or three only, NO mid-range - Requires: 3PT shooters, isolation creators, athletic rim runners - High variance (live by three, die by three) - Mid-range shooting is wasted rating points

Perimeter Centric: - Find the open man, movement shooter focus - Requires: shooters, passers - Safe three-point philosophy - Mixed community results (some struggle despite good rosters)

Post Centric: - Slowest pace = fewest possessions = worst for development - Requires: post scorers, face-up forwards, distributing guards - Needs rare personnel (skilled post players hard to find)

Triangle: - Complex read-and-react system - Requires: passing bigs, isolation wings, high BBIQ, veterans - TRAP FOR NEW ADs: needs cohesion, slow pace hurts development - Only system with LOW PnR frequency - Avoid unless inheriting veteran roster with high BBIQ

Philosophy Tier List (for new ADs)

S-Tier: Seven Seconds, Pace & Space A-Tier: Perimeter Centric, Morey Ball, Balanced C-Tier: Post Centric (slow development, rare personnel) D-Tier: Triangle (complex, cohesion-dependent, rebuild trap)

Chemistry vs Cohesion

These are SEPARATE systems that both affect performance.

Chemistry: - Based on: personalities, role satisfaction, coaching fit - Affected by: promise fulfillment, role changes, coach changes - Low chemistry = locker room issues, transfer risk

Cohesion: - Based on: time playing together - Seniors have edge (years in system) - Affected by: roster turnover, scheme proficiency - Coach change reduces scheme proficiency

Captain Mechanic

How it works: The captain gives a performance boost to other players when on the floor with them. This is an active, minutes-dependent boost — not a passive team-wide aura.

Selection priority: 1. Minutes matter most — the boost only applies when the captain is playing, so it should be a starter or heavy-minutes player. A bench player with elite leadership but zero floor time wastes the boost. 2. Ideal: Junior or Senior with great intangibles and leadership 3. Open question: Underclassman with better intangibles vs upperclassman with worse intangibles — no confirmed answer on which is better. Use judgment based on the specific intangible gap vs minutes projection.

Implication: Always give captaincy to a regular-minutes player. Do not assign it to a backup who never touches the floor, even if that backup has perfect leadership ratings.

Source: Community intel (confirmed mechanic)

Positional Flexibility

There is no positional proficiency mechanic. If a player has the right ratings and skills for a position, plug him in immediately — no learning curve, no development time needed. (Source: Morgado - USC)

• System position labels (PG, SG, SF, PF, C) are just labels, not constraints
• Players routinely play out of position with no penalty: SFs at PG, PGs at SG, SFs at PF, etc.
• Example: 2049 POTY (Craig at UNC) was a "SF" playing PG
• Recruiting implication: Target best available players by ratings, not by listed position. A 6'5 "PG" can play SG day one if the skills fit.
• Roster construction implication: Position versatility is free — evaluate players by skill profile, not position label

Player Development (XP System)

When ratings change: Training Camp (offseason only). Little to no in-season change.

XP earning sources:

Playing Time: - Minutes played (linear scaling) - Road games > home games - Clutch minutes (<5 min remaining, ≤5 pt margin) = bonus - Overtime = extra XP

Team Success: - Close win (1-3 pts) = max XP - Win 4-9 pts = less XP - Blowout win = slightly less - Large loss = 0 XP (critical: playing young guys in blowouts hurts development)

Veterans: - Young players gain XP playing with veterans - Veteran leadership rating multiplies this effect

Playoffs: - Round 1 = ~4x regular season XP - Conference Finals = ~8x regular season XP - Scales by round

Training Camp focus areas: - Two focus areas per player, weighted distribution - Focus areas are BUNDLES (e.g., "Playmaking" = Playmaking + Passing + Ball Handling + Self-Creation equally) - Cannot micro-target single ratings - Usage matters: player who shot 200 threes more likely to improve 3PT than player who shot none

Pro Potential vs Development (COMMISH CONFIRMED): - Pro potential is the player's ceiling — how much "space" they have to grow, not the rate or magnitude of growth. - High pro potential does NOT mean faster or bigger development strides vs low pro potential players. - Low-potential players can still improve; they just have a lower floor/starting point and a lower cap on how good they can get. - Pro potential has no correlation with current college ability — a 3.5★ pro potential player can be a 2.5★ college ability senior. - For CJBL recruiting: Pro potential is irrelevant. Focus on current ratings and college ability.

Development reality: Development isn't just "play young guys." It's "play young guys in COMPETITIVE minutes on the ROAD in CLOSE games with VETERANS while WINNING." Narrow window, especially for low-prestige teams.

Rating Accuracy (Fog of War)

Scouting accuracy by relationship: - Own team: High accuracy - Conference opponents: Average accuracy - Everyone else: Low accuracy (significant uncertainty range)

Star ratings: Summaries, not gospel. System fit matters more than raw stars.

Fatigue & Rest

Halftime rest: ~2 blocks of recovery (not full recovery) Quarter breaks (JBL pro only): ~1 block of rest

Implications: - Fast pace = high fatigue accumulation - Can't just ride starters, rest at halftime, repeat - Depth required for fast-paced systems - Endurance ratings affect fatigue accumulation

Scheduling

Recruiting budget boost: Road games at higher prestige opponents = more recruiting $ Trade-off: Harder games vs better budget

Best practice for new ADs: - Don't schedule all OOC games before recruiting - Save 2-3 slots until after seeing recruiting class - Balance SOS needs with expected roster strength

Warning: If you've applied for another team, DO NOT schedule games (schedules persist with team, not AD)

Walk-Ons

• Can be released anytime
• Can be converted to scholarship
• Wait until AFTER recruiting to convert (don't burn scholarship early)
• Junior walk-ons must be offered scholarship by end of Transfer Phase 1 or auto-released

Player Release

Players released go to "Division II" (permanently gone). They don't return.

Coach Mechanics

Hiring: - Each phase = 24 hours - Must have Head Coach before Assistant Coaches - If you fail to hire in time, auto-assigned

Firing: - Firing inherited coach (previous AD's hire) = no penalty - Firing coach YOU hired = recruiting budget reduction - Firing can unsettle team, reduce scheme proficiency - Players may transfer after coach change

Extensions: - One extension per coach maximum - Must have 1-2 years remaining (not 0/free agent) - Your prestige must be high enough for their salary demand - Location: My Team > Front Office

Development: - Coaches develop slowly (25+ seasons) - Experience helps with unruly locker rooms - Rookie coaches are viable but less control

Key Thresholds to Remember

• 16 MPG: Players below this threshold are generally dissatisfied with playing time
• 85% of promised minutes: Below this risks breaking promise
• 0 XP: Players in blowout losses earn nothing
• 3-5 players retained: Expected carryover after philosophy change
• 2 pitches: Per offseason (transfers + recruiting combined)

CJBL Meta Knowledge & Community Insights

Undefined Terms Glossary

Black Sunday

Status: Partially defined Likely meaning: Day when hot seat firings happen and coach carousel opens Need to confirm: Exact timing

Tickover

Status: Defined Meaning: End-of-season processing that includes: - Prestige recalculation - Awards distribution - Season stats finalization - Hot seat evaluations

Community-Discovered Mechanics

Ball Dominance (BD)

Mechanic: Determines who terminates possessions - High BD = terminates plays early (more freelance) - Low BD = keeps passing (runs play to completion)

Hierarchy Interaction (Source: Vince, Rockets1 CM): - BD creates a usage floor — high-BD players placed low in hierarchy still command elevated usage - Example: 33% USG player dropped from #1 to #4 → only fell to 29% - Conversely, low-BD players (e.g., BD 11) placed at #1 will accept more touches than they'd seek naturally - Cannot fully suppress high-BD players through hierarchy alone; plan for their usage even when deprioritized - Not all high-usage players handle reduced usage well — some thrive (Moss: most efficient season of career at reduced role), others may not

Offensive Hierarchy Mechanics (Source: Vince, Rockets1 CM)

Primary function: 95% of hierarchy is a lever to control usage distribution.

Top-of-hierarchy special effects (beyond usage): - Interacts with "Clutch: Prefer Star Iso" setting — #1 hierarchy player gets Iso looks in clutch - Gets more touches near end of games even WITHOUT Prefer Star Iso checked - Gets the ball when play breaks down / shot clock winding down → player at #1 MUST have Iso/Self-Creation skills or these possessions are wasted

Heliocentric setting — three-tiered usage bump: | Hierarchy Position | Heliocentric Bump | |---|---| | Top 6 | Base bump | | Top 3 | Base bump + additional bump | | #1 | Base bump + additional bump + third bump |

Strategic implication: To suppress a ball-dominant player's usage, place them below #3 to avoid the compounding Heliocentric bonuses. Placing them at #4-6 still gives the base bump but removes the extra two tiers.

Real-world example (Vince's Austin Rockets, Prime): - Briggs Greenaway (heliocentric monster, 33% USG at #1) → moved to #4 → dropped to 29% USG - Antoine Rigaux (C, BD 11, not a natural shot-seeker) → placed #1 → pulled up to 24% USG - Cardez Moss (SF, career 27% USG) → placed below #3 → dropped to 21% USG, most efficient season of career - Hierarchy order: Rigaux #1, [Wills #2], [Link #3], Briggs #4, Moss #5, DPJ #6 - Final usage: Rigaux 24%, Briggs 29%, Moss 21%, Wills 19%, DPJ 18%, Link 16%

Key takeaway: You can use hierarchy position AND Heliocentric tier breaks to sculpt your usage distribution. Low-BD players at the top pull touches they wouldn't seek naturally; high-BD players below #3 lose the compounding bonuses but still maintain a usage floor from their BD rating.

Hierarchy Does Not Affect Mood (Source: THS - OKC2)

Hierarchy position does not affect player mood/satisfaction. Only role (offer importance) and minutes matter for mood. A Marquee player getting 30 minutes at the bottom of the hierarchy will be fine — they care about minutes and role promise fulfillment, not where they sit in the usage order.

Implication: Use hierarchy purely as a usage-sculpting tool without worrying about upsetting players by placing them low.

Pro Potential Star Scale (Source: THS - OKC2)

Approximate mapping of scouted pro potential to JBL ability stars:

COMMISH CONFIRMED: Pro potential is the player's ceiling — how much "space" they have to grow. Lower-potential players can still improve; they just likely have a lower floor/starting point. High pro potential does NOT mean faster or bigger development strides compared to low pro potential players. (Source: commish)

Additional context (Source: Brandon - Indiana University): Pro potential has no correlation with current CJBL ability. A 3.5★ pro potential player can easily be a 2.5★ college ability senior who only gained half a star over 3 seasons at 10 mpg. Development depends on playing time, TC emphasis, coaching, and luck. Pro potential is not relevant for CJBL recruiting decisions — focus on current college ability and ratings instead.

Captain Boost Mechanic (Source: Community Intel)

The captain provides a performance boost to teammates when on the floor with them. This means: - Captaincy should go to a starter or high-minutes player — the boost is wasted on bench players - Best case: Junior/Senior with great intangibles and leadership - Underclassman with better intangibles vs upperclassman with worse intangibles = open question, no confirmed answer - Never assign captaincy to a backup who doesn't play, regardless of leadership ratings

Pressing Frequency

"Only like 10-15% of the time and most of that is half court" - "Often" press ≠ majority of possessions

Trade Block Effects

Players know they're on block, affects performance (personality-dependent).

Analysis Sample Size Thresholds (Source: Vince, Rockets1 CM)

Rule: One change at a time. 10 games to sniff-test, 20 games to commit or revert.

Locker Room Transfer Chances

Even happy players show 20%+ transfer chance. System tuned to encourage movement.

Initial List

Definition: A prospect's top 10 schools that he is interested in — regardless of whether those schools have expressed interest in him.

Key Insights (Community Confirmed): - Not being on a prospect's Initial List is not disqualifying - "Easy to overcome" with proper recruiting effort - Only becomes difficult "if multiple top 10 teams are offering him"

Strategic Implications: - Don't eliminate targets just because you're not on their Initial List - Focus on being first to offer - Use coach visits and campus visits strategically - Deploy pitch only when facing multiple competing offers from schools on his top 10

Coach Visit Success Rates

• HC Visit: Higher success chance, lower failure chance, higher cost
• AC Visit: Lower success chance, higher failure chance, lower cost

Rule: Use HC visits on must-get Tier 1 targets where failure is unacceptable.

Campus Visit Timing Bonus

Offering a campus visit in an earlier phase gives a bonus compared to schools that offer in a later phase. This stacks with the general "early actions have greater impact" mechanic but is specifically confirmed for campus visits. Implication: Don't wait to offer campus visits on your top targets — being first matters.

Pitch ("Bag") Timing Bonus (Source: THS - OKC2, confirmed by Morgado - USC)

Note: "Dropping a bag" is community slang for using a pitch on a recruit.

Offering a pitch in an earlier phase provides more benefit than offering it in a later phase. This is consistent with the general "early actions have greater impact" mechanic — confirmed to apply to virtually all recruiting actions (calls, visits, campus visits, pitches). The earlier you commit resources, the greater their impact on the recruit's evaluation.

Implication: If you've decided to use a pitch on a recruit, deploy it as early as possible. Waiting until Phase 4+ loses the timing multiplier.

Pitch Timing (Source: James - Jaguars1, UNC/NMSU)

Risk/reward tradeoff: - Early pitch (Phase 3) = bigger impact on recruit's decision. If he's your guy, pitch now. - Wait (Phase 4) = more time to confirm he's the right target and avoid wasting a pitch against too-stiff competition. - Pitches do NOT roll over year to year — use them or lose them. (Source: robinsmd - Evansville)

Implication: Since pitches expire, the only reason to delay is uncertainty about the target or competition — not to bank pitches for later.

Recruiting Call Limit

Max 3 calls per recruit — cannot offer more. (Source: Secret - UNL/UWGB)

Not calling a recruit = knocked down when phase runs. If you have calls available, always use them on active targets or you lose ground passively.

pitch Budget

2 pitches per offseason, shared between transfers and recruiting. Plan allocation carefully — once spent, they're gone for the cycle. (Source: Community Intel, 2026-02-10)

Commitment Mechanics (Source: THS - OKC2)

• Commits are not phase-locked — once a recruit has sufficient interest, he can commit at any time from Phase 5 onward.
• Early decider timeline: Deciding phase starts at Phase 5, can commit as early as Phase 6 if they like the offer.
• Interest level is the driver, not a specific phase window.
• Early deciders with no offers: They do NOT enter deciding until the next phase flip. If they get a good enough offer, they'd likely become a decider at that phase flip. (Source: Coach Martin - Georgia Tech/Western Illinois)

Upgrading Offer Importance Mid-Recruiting (Source: PDM - St. Francis, THS - OKC2)

Upgrading offer importance during deciding phase (e.g., Starter → Marquee) does get considered in the recruit's final evaluation. It increases chances but not as much as if done with the initial promise. It doesn't move the interest bar much, but if interest is already maxed, the bar doesn't matter — it's the offer comparison that counts.

Implication: Front-load your best offer when possible. Late upgrades help but at diminished returns.

Scholarship Revocation Penalty (Source: Calvin - Michigan State/Campbell)

Revoking a scholarship offer has two consequences: - Same phase as offered: Lose interest in that recruit (no AD trust penalty). - Later phase than offered: Lose interest in that recruit plus a small AD trust hit.

Implication: If you need to revoke, do it the same phase you offered to avoid the trust penalty. Be deliberate with scholarship offers — don't offer speculatively if you might need to pull back.

Always Execute All Actions on Top Targets (Community Consensus)

Even with a full interest bar, no competition, and an active offer — keep doing every available action (visits, calls) on your top targets. The community consensus is unanimous: don't get complacent and redeploy resources elsewhere until a player is actually committed. The only exception is if the player is already in deciding phase, where visits may be less impactful. (Sources: Calvin - Michigan State/Campbell, Trevor - Skyhawks4/UTEP/Bellarmine, THS - OKC2)

Prestige Gap in Recruiting (Source: Morgado - USC, Scottie - Eastern Washington)

If programs 3-4 prestige levels above you are committing major resources to a recruit (Marquee/Important offer, 24-28+ min, pitch), competing against that is a losing play. Focus on realistic targets where prestige gap is manageable.

EL recruiting reality (Source: Scottie - Eastern Washington): At Extremely Low prestige, you have effectively last pick. Focus on recruits with no other offers, and only compete against other EL and VL teams. Fighting above that is a losing play.

Especially relevant for SIUE (Very Low prestige): Don't burn pitches or scholarships fighting VH/H programs for shared targets. Target recruits where the competition is EL/VL/Low at most.

Low-Prestige Recruiting Tactics (Source: THS, Coach Martin, Jackie, Kevin, Josh, Bill, Brad — community thread)

Can EL/VL beat A/AA teams? Yes, but it requires stacking every advantage:

How to win above your weight class (when you must): 1. Offer a significantly better role — Marquee/Important + 28+ min vs their Rotation/12. The offer gap must be large enough to overcome prestige deficit. 2. Scout the competition's roster — Check what they're returning, what they've already signed. Gauge whether their offer to your target is likely strong or an afterthought. 3. Player values are FUNCTIONAL, not flavor — Pay close attention to what the recruit values: - Low "Prestige" value = much more winnable for low-prestige teams. High prestige value = gravitates to bigger programs even with a worse offer. - High "Distance" value = local teams have a major edge - High "Playing Time" value = your 28-min offer beats their 12-min offer - Academics = if your school has good academics (rare at EL) - Even EH programs lose when they mismatch on recruit values. UConn (EH) missed on Leslie (prestige was his #1 value, UConn had M28 + pitch, only EH on him) — went to Wichita State (H), likely because of academic preference (Wichita = EL academics) and slight edge in success. Prestige being #1 doesn't make it the ONLY factor. (Source: Mr Clean - UConn, THS - OKC2) 4. Add a pitch ("bag") when close — Josh (VL) beat an AA team with IP/28 + pitch on an in-state recruit who valued being close to home 5. Pitch if you're close and think you can seal it (Source: Coach Martin)

The safer strategy (what you should do most of the time): 1. Target uncontested recruits — guys with no other offers or only EL/VL competition 2. Prioritize early deciders — lock them up before higher prestige teams can pivot to them late (Source: Bill, Kevin) 3. Find early-deciding guys you can win quick and uncontested — the safest path at EL/VL (Source: Kevin). Bigger schools sometimes save recruits as pivot targets — if you identify an early decider they haven't committed to, you can grab him before they arrive. 4. Be prepared to lose contested battles — "EL prestige life is largely about losing most contested guys" (Source: Kevin). Budget your pitches and emotional energy accordingly. 5. Always a luck element — even doing everything right, you can lose. Brad (L prestige) lost with I/28 + pitch against H prestige offering Future Starter/12. The game has variance. Mr Clean (EH, UConn) has "never landed my favorite recruit entering phase 1, for any school." Multiple valid strategies exist — experienced ADs with years of success fundamentally disagree on individual player evaluations. 6. Don't chase favorites — chase the gettable. You will generally NOT sign your favorite recruits. The chances of them wanting your specific program are small. Excellent recruiting classes are still possible without getting your top targets — the difference between your #1 choice and a very good alternative is usually small, but the difference in gettability can be enormous. (Source: Morgado - USC)

Real examples: - Jackie (Butler, A) lost to an EL team that had a better offer — Butler only had Rotation/4 - Josh (VL) beat AA with IP/28 + pitch on in-state recruit who valued distance - Kevin (EL with Miami OH) lost all contested battles vs higher prestige, won only vs other EL teams and uncontested - Brad (L) lost to H prestige despite better offer — prestige weight can override - PDM (St. Francis, VL) went 3/3 on contested recruits in his first cycle: beat BA in 1v1, beat BA+AA in 1v2, beat VL+A in 1v2. All "punching up." Acknowledges luck was involved, but demonstrates VL can consistently win contested battles when stacking advantages. - Morgado (USC, EH) got NONE of his top 3 bigs (Lefort/Duke, Dozier/VT, Esteller/UVA) but still landed a very good class (#4 Rozhkov, #37 Bowen, #64 Zabelin, #573 Sabb) by pivoting to gettable alternatives - Butter (Dayton, H) gave Marquee + pitch to Ndukwe (#14 SF) instead of swinging at Rozhkov — filled the must-have SF role with less competition. "Worked out." - Mr Clean (UConn, EH) keeps backup options "warmed up" with coach visits every phase — if the primary target falls through, the backup is already at high interest

Pitch ("Bag") Strategy — The Powell Doctrine (Source: Morgado - USC, THS - OKC2, Vince - Rockets1, sabotai - La Salle)

Note: "Dropping a bag" / "bag money" is community slang for using a pitch. You only get 2 pitches per offseason (shared between transfers and recruiting), so deployment strategy is critical.

Core principle: The pitch is a tiebreaker — an additive factor that moves the mean of your random variable. It cannot be a tiebreaker if all resource commits are the same.

When to use a pitch: 1. Overwhelming superiority — You can slam the door shut and make it a near-guaranteed win you absolutely need. USC has never lost on any pitch because they only deploy them when they'll win with overwhelming superiority. (Source: Morgado) 2. Thin competition — Only 2-3 teams are offering, and you're confident you'll make the final 3. Using a pitch in a 3-way race gives you a meaningful edge. (Source: THS) 3. Must-win scholarships — When filling a starting spot or critical roster need, offer to win. "Winning is paramount." (Source: Morgado)

When NOT to use a pitch: 1. Crowded fields (4+ teams also pitching) — If everyone at the same prestige level is throwing pitches, there's no differentiator. It's down to RNG. A pitch in a 6-way race is a crap shoot. (Source: THS, Morgado) 2. Low gettability targets — A 33% chance at an outstanding player is inferior to a 95% chance at a very good player who fills your needs. (Source: Morgado) 3. Home run swings on surplus players — If the recruit is nice-to-have but not must-have, the pitch is better saved for a fight you need to win. (Source: Vince, Butter)

Statistical framing (Morgado): "I'm expecting the pitch to be an additive factor that moves the mean of my random variable. I want the 95% confidence intervals of my package to not overlap with opposing offers. Yes, there is some nonzero tail probability that someone gets a superfreak dice roll, but what can you do?"

Exception — high-upside gambles: sabotai (La Salle) pitched Jackson Hodge (generational talent, appears every 3-4 seasons) knowing it was a risk because La Salle was a frontrunner from Phase 1. Lost, but would do it again for the next Hodge/Deprez-level player. Sometimes the upside justifies the risk if your baseline position is strong.

Adversary Reading & Contingency Planning (Source: Morgado - USC, Mr Clean - UConn, Vince - Rockets1)

How well you plan alternatives and react to other programs' behavior on phase flips dictates recruiting success.

Two questions to always be asking: 1. Who do I have to beat to land this recruit? — Scout the competition's offers, prestige, and resources. (Source: Mr Clean) 2. What's my play if I swing and miss? — Have warmed-up backup options ready at all times. (Source: Mr Clean)

Reading the field: - Watch interest bars and competing school lists on each phase flip — the landscape changes constantly - If competition thins out on a recruit you didn't expect, consider pivoting to them (Morgado pivoted to Rozhkov when competition was thinner than expected on Zabelin) - If competition intensifies on your primary target, be ready to cut bait and redirect to backups (Vince dropped Yusong and Esteller when VH/EH pressure made the wins unlikely, pivoted to Weidenaar where only AA schools competed)

Keeping backups warm: - Do coach visits on 2-3 backup recruits every phase even when your primary target looks good (Source: Mr Clean) - This lets you immediately increase offers on backups if the primary falls through - Missing on a big recruit isn't the end of the world if your backup is already at high interest

The pivot is the skill: Original targets often don't work out — Morgado's final class of 4 included only 1 player from his initial Phase 0 targets. USC pivoted 3 times based on reading competition. The ability to read and react faster than opposing ADs is the core competitive advantage.

Roster Composition & Class Balance (Source: Morgado - USC, Anthony - Warriors2/Bradley)

Class balance matters — target ~3 players per class year (Fr/So/Jr/Sr) with 13 scholarships. The system targets an average of 3 vacancies per recruiting class.

Using transfers to rebalance classes: - If your class distribution is skewed (e.g., 1 SO, 5 SR), deliberately target SOs in the transfer portal to rebalance - Transfers are a great opportunity to reshape class cohorts — the portal pool is large enough to find decent players at any class year - Plan roster composition deliberately across BOTH transfers and recruiting (Source: Morgado)

You don't need 13 scholarship players. An 8-player rotation is easy to set up. Carrying 10-11 scholarship players is fine if your rotation is strong and you'd rather save scholarships for next year's class. (Source: Anthony - Warriors2/Bradley, DeaconBuc16 - UMBC)

Counterpoint — balance isn't mandatory in Year 1. PDM (St. Francis, VL) deliberately skipped class balance in his first cycle (4 FR, 1 SO, 3 JR, 5 SR) and was happy with the results. His philosophy: "just went after the guys that fit the best." Class balance is the most consistently recommended advice, but prioritizing fit over balance can work, especially when rebuilding. (Source: PDM - St. Francis)

Ideal rotation construction: 2 PGs, 3 Wings, 3 Bigs = 8-man rotation. (Source: DeaconBuc16)

Pipeline Recruiting Boost (Source: ChrisSpi - Stetson)

Pipelines provide a small initial bump to player interest. The effect is "probably quite small" — not a major factor in recruiting decisions. Build pipelines organically through commitments rather than chasing pipeline bonuses.

Positional Flexibility (Source: Morgado - USC)

• No positional proficiency mechanic — there's no learning curve for new positions. If a player has the right ratings/skills, plug him in at any position immediately.
• System position labels (PG, SG, SF, etc.) are just labels, not constraints. "Positions are a social construct."
• Example: 2049 POTY (Craig at UNC) was a "SF" playing PG. SFs at PF/PG, PGs at SG all work fine.
• Recruiting implication: Target best available players by ratings, not by listed position.

Coaching Attribute Priority (COMMISH CONFIRMED)

Priority Order: 1. Tactics — Most critical attribute 2. Coach Offense / Coach Defense — Core competency 3. Adaptability — Prevents "locked state" tactical rigidity 4. Position-specific (Guards, Forwards, Centers) 5. Culture, Patience, etc.

What Adaptability Does: - Low Adaptability = coach gets stuck playing one way - Cannot flex within the engine - Cannot do things "outside the box" - Creates ceiling regardless of talent

Community Philosophy Rankings

S-Tier (fun + effective): - Seven Seconds or Less (high variance) - Pace & Space (adaptable, recommended for rebuilds)

A-Tier: - Morey Ball (fantastic with right personnel) - Balanced (quietly effective)

B-Tier: - Post Centric - Perimeter Centric

F-Tier: - Triangle (terrible for rebuilds)

Morey Ball Community Notes

Mr Clean: "Fantastic with right personnel... Just get a prime Zbro" (tongue-in-cheek about difficulty)

Key insight: Morey Ball is harder in college than pro because: - Harder to recruit elite shooters at low prestige - Less roster flexibility - Development time needed for non-shooters

Phase 0 Recruiting Insights

Class Perception Pattern

Every class looks weak in Phase 0. They turn out ok. Don't panic.

Efficient Scouting Workflow

1. Regional filter first — Focus on home state + surrounding states
2. Scout to Level 4 before expressing interest — Character filter eliminates ~77%
3. OutS rating > 3PT% — Statistics don't match ratings
4. Budget allocation: ~$950/Level 4 scout (Great Lakes)
5. Express interest last — Only on clean-character survivors
6. Target 7-10 clean prospects — Expect to land 1-2 at Very Low prestige

Ratings vs. Statistics Disconnect

High school 3PT% does NOT correlate with OutS rating. Trust ratings, not statistics.

HS Box Score Stats — What They Actually Tell You (Source: 2050 Class Analysis, n=450 with ratings, 21K with stats)

HS stats predict archetype (guard vs big), not talent level. SPG (r=+0.794 vs avg rating), RPG (r=-0.742), BPG (r=-0.726) have the highest correlations with skill ratings — but these reflect position separation. High-SPG recruits have guard skills (Speed, Handling, Perimeter D), high-RPG/BPG recruits have big skills (Rim Protection, Post, Rebounding).

Best HS stat → rating mappings: - BPG → Rim Protection (r=+0.922, R2=84.9%) — extremely reliable - 3PAr → Spacing (r=+0.912, R2=83.1%) - RPG → Speed (r=-0.903, R2=81.5%) — inverse (guards are fast, bigs rebound) - SPG → Off-Ball Defense (r=+0.892, R2=79.5%) - APG → Passing (r=+0.814, R2=66.2%) - PPG → Basketball IQ (r=+0.270, R2=7.3%) — BBIQ is nearly invisible from box scores

BBIQ warning: The #1 college win predictor (coef 0.0186, 1.5x next skill) has only 7.3% variance explained by the best HS stat. You CANNOT identify high-BBIQ recruits from their HS box scores alone — scouting cards are essential.

PPG is the best balanced talent indicator (r=+0.575 vs avg rating) because it doesn't separate as strongly by position. Use PPG for rough talent ranking, but trust ratings for role-specific evaluation.

Star rating predictors: PPG is the best single stat for star rating (r=+0.430, R2=18.5%). But Production Score (r=+0.495) and Value Score (r=+0.463) from the model beat raw stats. Morey Score does NOT predict star rating (r=+0.089, R2=0.8%) — Morey Ball fit and raw talent are orthogonal measurements.

HS PPG by star rating: 1-star avg 13.1 PPG, 3-star 13.3, 4-star 15.1, 5-star 18.1. Overlap is enormous — PPG alone can't reliably distinguish stars from non-stars.

Character Filtering Data (2050 Class -- Phase 2 Updated)

• Sample: 16 players scouted to Level 5 with full character data
• Clean character rate: 20% (3 of 16). Worse than 23% Phase 1 estimate.
• "Maddeningly inconsistent" rate: ~80% of scouting reports contain this flag

CRITICAL UPDATE (Phase 2 L5 results): - "Maddeningly inconsistent" has ZERO correlation with Discipline. Players with Disc 20 (maximum) still get tagged "inconsistent" (Iruafemi, Ratcliff, Crossland). The flag describes on-court performance variance (likely low BBIQ), NOT character discipline. - Positive WE language predicts WE only, NOT Disc/Prof. "Obsessive dedication" = high WE (Abdallah WE 19) but Disc/Prof can still be terrible (Abdallah Disc 7, Prof 7). WE, Disc, and Prof are fully independent ratings. - Personality types provide signal: Workhorse = guaranteed CLEAN. Dedicated = guaranteed CLEAN (same intangible signature as Workhorse). Professional = reliable Disc/Prof. Troublemaker = catastrophic fail. Leader = high Prof but Disc varies (19% CLEAN). Driven = high WE/Prof but Disc varies (12% CLEAN). Introverted = high WE but Disc/Prof vary (5% CLEAN). Personality does NOT predict skill ratings (ANOVA p=0.40). - Prof 20 is NOT a strong positive signal. Many players with poor Disc have Prof 20 (Anderton, Bingaya, Glasford, Stockton, Crossland). Prof appears easier to max than Disc. - Clean character threshold: WE 15+, Disc 12+, Prof 12+ with no Troublemaker personality. Below Disc 10 or Prof 10 is disqualifying regardless of WE.

Useful URLs

• Recruit Stats: jblfl.com/cjbl/recruit-stats
• Transfer Portal: jblfl.com/cjbl/transfers?year=[YEAR]
• Coach Free Agency: jblfl.com/cjbl/coachfreeagency?year=[YEAR]

Season Timeline (Typical)

1. Season ends
2. Tickover (prestige updates, awards, hot seat evaluations)
3. Coach carousel opens
4. Transfer Portal Phase 1-3
5. Recruiting Phase 0-10
6. Walk-ons
7. Training Camp
8. Scheduling
9. Season begins

Note: Tickover happens BEFORE coach carousel. This means: - Hot seat evaluations use updated prestige - ADs apply for jobs knowing their new prestige tier - Prestige at carousel = prestige post-tickover

Offseason Phase Sequence

• Phase 3: Scholarships can be offered. Pitches available (earlier = bigger impact).
• Phase 5: EARLY players enter deciding phase. Can commit as early as Phase 6 if interest is sufficient.
• Phase 7: MID players commit
• Phase 9: LATE players commit

Note: Commits are not strictly phase-locked. Once a recruit reaches sufficient interest, he can commit at any time from his deciding phase onward — Phase 5/7/9 are when each tier starts deciding, not the only window they can commit.

SIUE-Specific Learnings (2049-2050)

Zone Defense Vulnerability (CORRECTED — v2 Parser Final)

Original analysis claimed: 0.38 PPP vs zone (catastrophic -32% drop)

Corrected v2 analysis found: 0.961 PPP vs zone, 0.966 PPP vs man (-0.5% — essentially no difference)

The original finding was a PBP parsing methodology error (shots with "draws foul" swallowed by foul handler, all 3PT counted as 2PT, inverted turnover attribution). Zone offense is not a team-level weakness, but specific zone types (2-1-2 at 0.794 PPP, 2-3 Matchup at 0.714 PPP) do require preparation.

Zone Performance by Player (v2 Corrected)

Road Performance

• 1-13 road record vs 15-7 home
• Root cause: Defensive breakdown on road, not offensive
• Road offense actually scored MORE than home
• Mental toughness manifests defensively

Philosophy Transition (2050)

• Balanced → Morey Ball
• Josh Carrington fired (0% penalty — inherited)
• Taavi Allen hired (Off 17, Def 13, Tactics 10, Adapt 8)
• Noah Davis hired as AC (Def 17, Tactics 10, Adapt 9)
• Critical gap: Both coaches weak in most important attribute (Tactics)

Coaching Staff Limitation

Problem: Allen (Tactics 10, Adapt 8) + Davis (Tactics 10, Adapt 9) = cannot adapt mid-game

Implication: Staff cannot counter opponent adjustments or flex scheme. Must win with talent execution, not tactical outmaneuvering. Simplify schemes.

Morey Ball Roster Fit Assessment

Transfer Portal Acquisition (2050)

• Loyd Robinzine (SF, Sr) — OutS 18, Gravity 18, On-Ball D 19
• 1-year rental solving SF shooting gap
• Character concern: "minimal appetite for extra work"
• Promise: Starter, 28 MPG, no pitch used

Recruiting Priority (2050 Class) -- POST-HTML EXTRACTION UPDATE

Strategy shift: Guard shooting is #1 predictor (r=+0.688). HTML page extractions revealed character failures in key Group A targets.

Scholarship Allocation (2 available): - If enforcing character threshold: Delaney + Haug (best clean/borderline combo with Morey Ball fit) - If accepting Seumalo's character risk: Delaney + Seumalo (best raw talent combo) - If Delaney lost: Haug + Iruafemi (system fit + perfect character)

Critical Finding: PG Barren

Every PG alternative to Delaney failed character screening: - Allegri, McGruder, Rosga, Duckworth, Hockman -- all failed - Danridge PENDING L5 (scout Phase 3) but 5'9/6'0 size is a real concern

If Delaney goes elsewhere, no proven backup PG exists in this class. Contingency: Trust Mimms, address PG in 2051.

Key HTML Extraction Finding: Philosophy Match

Haug is the ONLY target in the entire pool whose preferred philosophy is Morey Ball. All other major targets (Delaney, Seumalo, Cannon) prefer Balanced. Combined with Low prestige weight (47), ultra-local distance (13 mi), and only 3 competing schools, Haug is SIUE's most closeable target.

Scaling from Small Conference to P6 — What Changes (Source: Secret - UNL/UWGB, Kevin - Jailbirds3/Syracuse)

Question: What differentiates impactful players in small conferences vs P6?

Community consensus on what matters MORE at higher prestige/P6: 1. Defense and size — P6 programs are bigger and can punish undersized or weak defenders. You can get away with defensive liabilities in small conferences; in P6, they get exploited. (Source: Secret) 2. Basketball IQ — Small conferences have fewer high-IQ players, so you can win with athletes who make mistakes. At P6, opponents exploit low-IQ players. (Source: Kevin)

Implication for SIUE (Very Low, OVC): - At our level, we can prioritize offensive fit (shooting, spacing) and accept some defensive/size/IQ gaps - As we climb prestige, defense, size, and BBIQ become increasingly non-negotiable - This aligns with the College Ridge model: BBIQ is the #1 win predictor (2x any other skill), and its importance likely scales with competition quality

Open question: Whether it's fundamentally different (new skills needed) or mostly the same philosophy at higher rating thresholds. The thread leans toward "same archetypes, but defense + size + IQ become harder to sacrifice."

Role Player Efficiency Principle

Stars (25%+ USG): TS% 54%+ acceptable — they take difficult shots Role players (<15% USG): TS% 58%+ required — should only take good shots

Inefficient role players = wasted possessions. Bench them regardless of counting stats.

PnR Execution: College vs Pro Paradox (2026-02-11)

Finding: PnR Execution is NEGATIVE in the college Ridge win model (coefficient -0.0077) but is the #2 pro win predictor (+0.0252). This is NOT a contradiction — it's a level-of-analysis artifact.

Why it's negative at the team level: - The college model predicts wins from team-average ratings across all roster players - PnR Execution is a role-specific skill — only the ball handler and roll man need it (2 of 5 players on the floor) - High roster-wide PnR Execution means too many players were recruited for PnR skills, signaling a roster over-indexed on bigs/roll men and lacking shooters - The other 3 players on the floor need spacing skills (OutS, Gravity, BBIQ) — if they have high PnR instead, the team is misbuilt

Why it's positive at the pro level: - Pro model uses individual player ratings mapped to team wins — captures the VALUE of a great PnR executor without penalizing the roster for non-PnR players having low PnR ratings - At the pro level, elite PnR Execution in the right players drives offense

Recruiting implication: - Do NOT recruit broadly for PnR Execution — it's not a roster-wide skill - DO target PnR Execution specifically for PnR Ball Handler (PG) and Roll Man (C) roles - For wings and shooting guards, PnR Execution is irrelevant — prioritize OutS, Gravity, BBIQ, Help Defense - A prospect with low PnR Execution is NOT penalized unless they're being recruited for a PnR-specific role

Source: CJBL College Ridge regression (368 teams, R2=0.411) vs JBL Pro Ridge regression (36 teams, adj-R2=0.642)

Corrected Morey Ball Analysis Reference

Date: February 6, 2026

Cross-league analysis of 31 confirmed Morey Ball teams revealed critical strategic corrections: - Guard shooting (not PnR BH) is #1 predictor at low prestige (r=+0.688) - SF OutS importance was overstated (negligible after correction) - Post-scoring bigs are toxic (r=-0.631) - Too many creators hurts (r=-0.443) - Lighter, faster rosters win (avg weight r=-0.568) - Shooter stacking works (r=+0.576) - Wichita State benchmark was INVALID (wasn't running Morey Ball)

Full document: CJBL_Morey_Ball_Corrected_Analysis.md

Defensive Archetypes — Descriptors, Not Modifiers (Source: THS - OKC2, Donte - MXC2)

Status: Partially confirmed — no known penalties, but some uncertainty remains.

Defensive archetypes (Point of Attack, Wing Stopper, Chaser, Rim Protector, etc.) are descriptors of what a player is suited for based on their ratings, not bonus/penalty modifiers tied to specific defensive actions.

• No confirmed penalty for guarding actions outside your archetype (e.g., Point of Attack player guarding off-screen or spot-up actions)
• Use archetypes as a guide for assignment, not a hard constraint

Unresolved question — Wing Stopper on PG: - Historical community discussion about wing stoppers struggling when assigned to guard point guards, even if they're the team's best on-ball defender - Theory: the specific actions a PG runs (PnR ball handling, dribble penetration) may not align with what a wing stopper's ratings are optimized for - THS has done it and reports it "didn't seem disastrous" but has no empirical proof either way - No consensus. Treat as a yellow flag, not a hard rule. If your wing stopper has strong on-ball + help defense ratings, it's probably fine.

Practical implication: Don't overthink defensive archetypes. Assign defenders based on their actual ratings (On-Ball Defense, Help Defense, Steal, Quickness, etc.) rather than archetype labels. But be aware that positional matchup quirks may exist even if unconfirmed.

Hidden Ratings — Impact & Detection (Source: THS - OKC2, Scottie - Eastern Washington, Donte - MXC2, Butter - Barons)

Mechanic: Hidden ratings have roughly equal impact on winning as visible ratings. A player with mediocre visible ratings but strong hidden ratings can post elite advanced metrics (BPM, on-off splits) that don't match the eye test on his scouting card.

Case study: ML Reis (Eastern Washington) — unremarkable visible ratings but one of the best BPMs in the country and 2nd-best on-off splits on a top team. Explanation: great hidden ratings + highly cohesive system full of playmakers and floor spacers amplifying his output. On a bad team with unskilled players, his stats would crater.

Key hidden ratings to watch for clues: - Clutch — late-game performance - Consistency — game-to-game variance - Positioning — defensive/offensive awareness beyond visible ratings - Durability — injury resistance - Turnover Proneness — ball security independent of Ball Handling rating

How to detect hidden ratings when recruiting: - ~30% from high school stats (performance beyond what visible ratings explain) - ~30% from scouting report blurbs (strengths/weaknesses section drops clues) - ~40% luck (Source: Scottie - Eastern Washington)

Implication for recruiting: Don't dismiss prospects whose HS stats outperform their visible ratings — hidden ratings may explain the gap. Conversely, prospects with great visible ratings but poor stats may have bad hidden ratings. Always read the scouting blurb carefully for clues about Clutch, Consistency, Turnover Proneness, etc.

Implication for player evaluation: Advanced metrics (BPM, on-off, PER) capture hidden rating effects that the scouting card doesn't show. A role player posting elite on-off splits likely has strong hidden ratings even if his card looks pedestrian. System context matters too — the same player on a bad team may look average.

Community Intel (Unconfirmed)

Bigs may need rebounding + scoring ability, not just spacing/rolling.

Source: Community member, not Commish-confirmed.

UPDATE (Corrected Analysis): Cross-league data CONTRADICTS this for Morey Ball specifically. Big insideShot (r=-0.631), offensive rebounding (r=-0.347), and finish (r=-0.364) are all negatively correlated with winning at low prestige. For Morey Ball, bigs should stretch or rim-run, not post-score or crash boards. This community intel may apply to other philosophies but is harmful for Morey Ball.

CJBL New User Guide

Source: Official CJBL documentation

Welcome to the CJBL

As an Athletic Director of a CJBL team, you are responsible for hiring a coach, recruiting players and managing your roster in an attempt to reach (and win) the CJBL Tournament.

The CJBL is part of the JBL universe, running for over 30 real-life years. Players recruited from high schools may go on to the pro league (JBL) or international leagues after graduating. All teams (college and pro) are run by humans.

What Makes CJBL Stand Out

• Depth: The simulation engine takes into account hundreds of factors from player ratings and team chemistry to coaching styles and game-specific situations.
• Community: Active Slack channels for strategy, conference chatter, help. Passionate user base.
• Competition: Hundreds of dedicated users managing programs. Don't expect to win a championship in your first season.
• Realism: Conference structures, recruiting battles, transfer portal, hot seat pressure. Evolves its own history and rivalries.
• Commissioner & Development: Developer is the commissioner. New features constantly. Still technically in "beta."

Setting Expectations

The CJBL has a steep learning curve. First season is about learning, experimenting, getting comfortable. Little pressure to win immediately. Be patient, ask questions, enjoy the process. It takes time to build a successful program.

League Basics

Slack and Community

• All college discussion: #collegejbl channel
• Join your conference channel (e.g., #ivy)
• Questions: #help-and-tips
• Being part of the community is a vital part of being in the CJBL

League Structure and Conferences

• 32 conferences, 367 total teams, geographically organized
• 14-17 out-of-conference games + conference regular season (each opponent 1-2 times) = ~35-40 games total
• Conference Tournament at end of regular season (seeded by conference record, not overall)
• Conference Tournament winner gets automatic CJBL Tournament bid
• At-large teams ranked by NET formula (record, SOS, strength of opponents)
• CJBL Tournament: 64 teams, six-round knockout
• JIT Tournament: Next 64 teams
• WMG Tournament: Next 64 teams
• Total: 192 teams make postseason

Prestige

Nine tiers (highest to lowest): 1. Extremely High 2. Very High 3. High 4. Above Average 5. Average 6. Below Average 7. Low 8. Very Low 9. Extremely Low

Prestige matters for recruiting — higher-ranked players want high-prestige programs for pro draft exposure.

Prestige changes yearly based on: National Championship, Tournament depth, conference regular season title, having a player drafted in JBL. Losing prestige from losing conference record or missing Tournament.

Impact is scaled by current tier: Missing the Tournament as EH = huge drop. Making it as EL = big boost. Expected performance for your tier doesn't move the needle.

The Hot Seat

• Every AD starts with a 6-season contract (~18 months real time)
• Evaluated on: Tournament performance, conference finish, win-loss record, prestige expectations
• Safe: Meeting/exceeding expectations
• Precarious (Hot Seat): Underperforming, on notice
• Fired: Consistently underperformed
• Contract extensions: Championship = 6 years, meeting expectations = 3 years, underperforming = 1 year
• Tier 1 (High+): Highest hot seat risk. Must compete for titles.
• Tier 2 (AA to BA): Generally safe, but consistent failure leads to review.
• Tier 3 (Low to EL): Safe from performance-based hot seat. Focus on development.
• If fired, other ADs can apply for your job. You can always find a new opening.

Polls and Rankings

• RPI and Strength of Schedule used for overall rankings
• Top 25 Poll, Mid-Major and AD rankings use algorithmic formula (SOS, RPI, record, roster strength, etc.)
• Quadrant wins system exists (see Rules & FAQ)

League Phases

Regular Season / Postseason

If joined mid-season: roster is set, can't add/release players, can't change coach or philosophy.

Regular Season phases: - Out of Conference: 14 games against non-conference opponents - Early Season Tournament: 1-3 games, auto-assigned knockout - Conference Challenge Game: 1 game, power-matched from rival conference - Conference Regular Season: 16-20 games - Conference Tournament: 2-4 games, winner gets CJBL Tournament bid

Postseason: - CJBL Tournament: Top 64 (conference winners + at-large by NET) - JIT Tournament: Next 64 (includes all conference regular season winners not in CJBL Tournament)

Regular Season Responsibilities

• Watch games, review boxscores and statistics
• Manage depth chart, strategy, rotations based on performance/injuries
• Maintain healthy locker room (role and playing time satisfaction)
• Participate in Slack discussion

Activity Requirements

• Minimum: Log in at least once every 7 days
• Recommended: Check in every 2-3 days
• Counts as activity: Any team action (logging in, setting lineups, recruiting, checking scores)
• Vacation: Message Commissioner if away
• Consequence: Teams released after 7+ days inactivity without notice

Scouting Players

• View roster: My Team > Roster or My Team > Home > Roster tab
• View ratings: My Team > Home > Ratings tab
• All ratings are 1-20 (20 = league best in CJBL, scaled relative to college level)
• Scouting accuracy:
• Own team: High Accuracy
• Conference players: Average Accuracy
• All other players: Low Accuracy
• Lower accuracy = ratings may be higher or lower than actual ("fog of war")

Star Ratings

• College Ability: Relative ability against other CJBL players (5-star = best in CJBL)
• Pro Potential: Ceiling relative to JBL (5★=MVP, 4★=All-Star, 3★=Starter, 2★=Rotation, 1★=Deep bench). Shows growth "space," not development speed. No correlation with current college ability — irrelevant for CJBL recruiting.
• Star ratings are weighted sum of visible + hidden ratings — rough guide only
• Chemistry, cohesion and system fit are more important than raw star ratings

The Daily Sim

• Games simulated daily ~6-7pm ET
• Four JBL Days per sim session = team plays ~once per real day
• Games are "live" — watch play-by-play with live boxscore via Simcast
• Results posted in Slack channel after each Day

Team Strategy

Depth Chart and Rotations

• Depth chart: 4 players deep per position (each player listed only once per position)
• Rotations: set at two-minute intervals, assumes no foul trouble
• If depth chart/rotations invalid, AI sets them — make sure they're correct
• Strategy page: My Team > Strategy

Offensive Settings

• Pace: Faster = more transition but more turnovers. Coach philosophy limits range.
• Focus: Balanced, Outside, Inside, Drive, Bully Ball, Pick & Roll Heavy. Choose based on roster strengths.
• Ball Distribution: Natural (based on Ball Dominance), Heliocentric (star-focused), Egalitarian (share). Uses Offensive Hierarchy.
• Offensive Freedom: Balance between set plays and freelance. More freedom = more creation, less structure.
• Clutch: Star takes over vs. run set plays in late game.
• Playmakers: Designate primary ball-handlers.
• Emphasis Points: Up to 2 per game (e.g., Box Out, Look for Early Threes, Get to the Rim).

Defensive Settings

• Intensity: Aggressive (more turnovers forced, more fouls) vs. Conservative (safer, more open looks given up).
• Focus: Balanced, Perimeter, Interior.
• Screen Defense: Guards (Over, Under, Switch) and Bigs (Drop, Hedge, Blitz). Critical for stopping PnR.
• Press Frequency: Never, Rarely, Situational, Often.
• Zone Frequency: Never, Rarely, Situational, Often, Always.
• Emphasis Points: Up to 2 (e.g., No Fouls, Limit Fast Breaks, Force Turnovers).
• Defensive Assignments: Set archetypes and specific matchups.

Offensive Philosophies (8 Types)

Key: Choose philosophy via head coach. Don't force a square peg into a round hole. Match roster strengths to philosophy.

Offseason

Offseason Phases (in order)

1. League Break — Downtime while JBL/other leagues catch up. Plan your offseason.
2. JBL Draft — Seniors auto-eligible. Underclassmen may declare. Undrafted return. Drafted = freed scholarship.
3. Out of Conference Scheduling — Schedule 14 OOC games (min 5 home, 5 away). Road games earn budget for NEXT season. Higher prestige opponents = more road money. Use #college_scheduling. Don't schedule too early — wait for recruiting class.
4. Coach Hiring/Firing — HC and AC. Budget set by prestige. Full budget offered automatically. HC hiring happens before AC (HC needed for recruiting). Fire via My Team > Front Office. Firing mid-contract may cost recruiting budget. Firing impacts transfers, cohesion, scheme proficiency.
5. Transfer Portal — Phase 1: Discuss with transferring players to convince them to stay. Phase 2: Other schools can call, visit, offer. Phase 3: Final chance. Actions refresh each phase and don't cost budget.
6. Recruiting — See Recruiting Guide for full detail.
7. Walk-On Tryouts — Request positions (My Team > Scholarships). Random allocation from local high schools. Walk-ons stay max 2 years (must offer scholarship or cut before junior year).
8. Training Camp — Set development focuses.

Scheduling Strategy

• Schedule based on team ability and expectations
• EH teams need harder schedules; EL teams should play peers but take a few paydays for budget
• Hard conferences: easier OOC to find lineups. Easy conferences: harder OOC to boost SOS.
• Balance difficulty — too hard = bubble losses, too easy = weak SOS

Player Roles / Status

• Roles lock after third week of season
• Unmet expectations = unhappy player (check Locker Room)

Training Camp and Development

Experience Points (XP) System

Players earn hidden XP throughout the season via: - Playing time (minutes) - Starting games - Tournament games - Clutch situations - Road games - Playing with veteran teammates - Team wins

More XP = more development opportunities during Training Camp. Give young players meaningful minutes freshman/sophomore years.

Training Camp Focuses

Set two focus areas per player (My Team > Training Camp). Allocate percentage split (50/50, 100/0, etc.):

• Player still develops in other areas naturally (XP, coach, work ethic, DNA)
• Effectiveness depends on work ethic + coaching skills + room to improve
• Coach impact: 80% HC, 20% AC
• Freshmen have no XP but still get coaching bonuses
• Not all attributes are trainable (especially Intangibles, BBIQ)
• Results shown at TC conclusion: blue = improvement, red = decline

Chemistry vs Cohesion

Team Chemistry

How well players get along off the court. Influenced by: - Player personalities and how they mesh - Coaching style compatibility - Locker room dynamics and happiness - Success on the court (winning helps) - Role satisfaction (playing time, role contentment)

High chemistry = overperform talent. Low chemistry = derail even talented rosters.

Team Cohesion

On-court familiarity — how long players have played together: - Better play execution through familiarity - Better handling of momentum swings - More resilient during tough stretches - Senior-heavy teams generally have better cohesion

Building cohesion takes time. Keep core groups together when possible.

Advanced Topics

Statistics Available

• Traditional: points, rebounds, assists, steals, blocks
• Advanced: eFG%, TS%, assist rate, usage rate
• Team metrics: offensive/defensive efficiency, pace, turnover rate
• Plus-minus and lineup analysis

Pro Pipeline

• All seniors eligible for JBL Draft
• Underclassmen may declare early
• Undrafted players return to roster
• Having players drafted boosts prestige
• Developing players for pros is part of AD legacy

Pricing & Credits

• CJBL: 600 credits/season (~$6 USD)
• JBL: 3,000 credits/season (~$30 USD)
• New users: 600 free credits (one CJBL season)
• Rate: $1 per 100 credits
• Bulk buying: Bonus credits at higher tiers
• Credits never expire
• Deducted at season lock, not when you join
• ~4 seasons per real-life year (~3 months each)
• Payments via Stripe
• Credits are non-refundable and non-transferable (gift codes available)

CJBL Opponent Scouting Framework

Source

Methodology developed with experienced AD Morgado. Proven across 6 case studies with consistent results.

A. Defensive Philosophy

Core Principles: 1. Execute YOUR offensive plan. Don't react to opponents offensively. Offense is roster-driven and mostly stable. 2. Defensively, push opponents out of their comfort zone WITHOUT committing fouls. Force teams to do what they don't want to do. 3. Conservative intensity is the default. Always. Reduces gambling, reaching, and foul-prone plays. 4. Don't get too fancy with settings. Identify the 2-3 settings that actually matter for a given matchup, not every lever. 5. Break scoreless streaks. Any score (1, 2, or 3 points) is better than going cold. Prioritize getting the ball in the hoop. 6. High-percentage mechanisms win. Build around what you do efficiently. If inside guys, go inside. If outside, go outside. Or get fouled.

Two Defensive Modes: | Mode | When | Settings | |------|------|----------| | Box Out / Conservative (default) | Default for most games | Conservative intensity, No Fouls emphasis | | High Intensity Steals | Rarely, when personnel supports it or opponent is turnover-prone | Aggressive intensity, Force Turnovers emphasis |

Always choose Conservative to avoid fouling and giving up high-probability shots.

B. Available Defensive Settings

Intensity

Focus (PRIMARY counter-lever)

Screen Defense

Press Frequency

Never / Rarely / Situational / Often / Always

Zone Frequency

Never / Rarely / Situational / Often / Always

Zone Defense Type

2-3 / 2-1-2 / 3-2 / 1-3-1 / 1-2-2 / 1-1-2-1 / 2-3 Matchup

Defensive Emphasis (pick 2)

Defensive Archetypes (per player)

C. Step-by-Step Scouting Methodology

Step 1: Team-Level Profile

Normalize everything by pace. Raw counting stats are meaningless without pace context. Use Offensive Rating and Defensive Rating (per 100 possessions), NOT points per game.

Calculate shares, not raw volume: - Paint Share = Points in Paint / Points Scored - Three Share = (3PM x 3) / Points Scored - FT Share = FTM / Points Scored - Transition Share = Transition Points / Points Scored

High share in one area = that's their identity = that's what you target.

Data points to check (in order): 1. Pace (national rank) -- How fast do they play? 2. Transition Points (rank) -- Do they score in transition? 3. 3PA and 3PT% (rank) -- Perimeter threat level? 4. Points in Paint (as share of total scoring) -- Inside identity? 5. FTA (rank) -- Do they draw fouls? 6. Bench Scoring -- Starter-dependent or deep? 7. Assists and Screen Assists -- Ball movement? Screen-based offense? 8. Defensive Rebounds, Blocks, Steals -- Defensive profile 9. Offensive Rating / Defensive Rating (per 100 possessions)

Step 2: Individual Player Analysis

1. Sort roster by MPG to push starters to top
2. Identify alphas -- Is scoring concentrated (1 player 25%+ of team scoring) or diversified (4-5 in double figures)?
3. For each key player, examine:
4. Shot location distribution (% of FGA from three, mid-range, rim)
5. Play type volume (where do their possessions come from?)
6. Play type efficiency (eFG% or PPP by play type -- what ACTUALLY works?)
7. Separate volume from actual threats:
8. High volume + high efficiency = REAL threat -- deny this
9. High volume + low efficiency = NOT a threat -- let them shoot, they're hurting their own team
10. Low volume + high efficiency = Monitor, don't over-commit

Step 3: Threat Prioritization

Rank all threats as: Primary / Secondary / Acceptable

Key questions: - Which actions are BOTH high-volume AND efficient? - Which players are dangerous vs. which are hurting their own team? - If their alpha is a volume shooter but eFG stinks across all play types, you WANT him to shoot - "If he's truly dangerous at something, lean into defending that"

Scoring distribution matters: | Profile | Indicator | Implication | |---------|-----------|-------------| | Alpha-dependent | 1 player with 25%+ of team scoring | "Stifle Star Players" is high-value | | Diversified | 4-5 in double figures | "Stifle Star Players" is low-value; focus on scheme |

Play type analysis for alphas: - Don't defend what they do MOST -- defend what they do BEST - A player might run lots of PnR but actually score efficiently on spot-ups and transition - Look at efficient actions, not overall role

Step 4: Settings Selection

Intensity: Conservative (locked default)

Focus Decision Tree:

Is opponent clearly paint-heavy (high paint share, low 3PA)?
  YES --> Interior Focus (pack the paint)
Is opponent clearly perimeter-heavy (high 3PA, good 3PT%)?
  YES --> Perimeter Focus (pack the line)
Is opponent good at BOTH inside and outside?
  YES --> Balanced Focus (don't create openings)
Is opponent EXTREMELY one-dimensional (e.g., #1 paint, 336th 3PA)?
  YES --> Full opposite Focus + double-down with Emphasis

CRITICAL: Don't overcommit Focus if it opens a secondary threat. If they have both a perimeter alpha and a paint alpha, stay Balanced and use Emphasis checkboxes to cover both.

Emphasis Checkbox Selection (pick 2): Match opponent's top 2 statistical strengths to counter-checkboxes:

The goal is marginal disruption, not total shutdown. You're shaving percentage points off their best actions and forcing them into Plan B. The checkboxes are small tilts, not silver bullets. Cumulative small edges over 40 minutes.

Step 5: Big Game Loss Pattern Analysis

For important games only (conference rivals, tournament matchups):

1. Pull opponent's losses
2. Identify common statistical patterns across those losses
3. Build your settings to replicate those conditions
4. "Other teams give you the roadmap"

Example: If every loss has "poor outside shooting + lost rebound battle," your game plan is: - Perimeter Focus (contest threes, lower their 3PT%) - Box Out emphasis (win the rebound battle)

You're not guessing -- you're reverse-engineering what actually beats them.

D. Key Analytical Insights

1. "Spot-up is bad but 3PT% is good" = pull-up threes in transition. The threes are coming in transition (pull-ups), not half-court (catch-and-shoot). Limit Fast Breaks is more valuable than Disrupt Passing Lanes in this case.

2. Pace does not equal Transition. Virginia Tech: #37 pace but only #93 transition. They push pace for half-court advantages, not fast breaks. Don't assume high pace = transition team.

3. Screen assists reveal scheme-based offense. Elite screen assists = motion/PnR offense. Counter with Defensive Communication.

4. Don't overcommit Focus if it opens secondary threats. When threats are mixed (perimeter + PnR), stay Balanced and use emphasis checkboxes to cover multiple threats without tilting Focus.

5. Co-alpha teams require Balanced Focus. If the two best players are split inside/outside, you can't tilt either way.

6. Inefficient volume scorers are a gift. If a player has high usage but low efficiency across all play types, they're hurting their own team. Let them cook.

7. For big games, study losses, not wins. Opponent losses reveal vulnerabilities more clearly than wins reveal strengths.

E. Quick Reference Decision Matrix

Focus Selection (one decision)

Paint-heavy opponent  --> INTERIOR
Perimeter-heavy       --> PERIMETER
Good at both          --> BALANCED
Extreme one-dimension --> FULL OPPOSITE + double-down emphasis

Emphasis Selection (pick 2 from this mapping)

Scouting Checklist (Pre-Game)

1. What is opponent's pace and transition rank?
2. What share of their scoring comes from paint vs. perimeter?
3. Is scoring concentrated (alpha) or diversified?
4. What are the alpha's efficient play types (not just volume)?
5. Do they draw fouls? (high FTA = consider No Fouls)
6. Are they screen-heavy? (high screen assists = Defensive Communication)
7. (Big games) What do their losses have in common?

F. Case Studies

1. UConn -- Defense-First, Transition-Dependent

Profile: #53 pace, #35 transition, high efficiency, #200 FTA, starter-dependent, elite defense Threats: Monroe (pull-up 3s in transition), Billings (PnR roll man, foul drawing), Talbert (transition only, inefficient in half-court) Not threats: Larranaga (volume scorer, mostly inefficient post-ups) Settings: Conservative / Balanced / Limit Fast Breaks + Defensive Communication Logic: Can't go Perimeter because of PnR threat from Billings. Balanced + checkboxes covers both threats.

2. Virginia Tech -- Screen-Heavy, Co-Alphas

Profile: #37 pace, #93 transition (pace != transition), high efficiency, #19 screen assists, starter-dependent Threats: Parson (PnR roll man, paint), Eberly (off-screen, transition), Morozov (off-screen) Not threats: Richburg (high volume, horrible 3PT%, only value is transition) Settings: Conservative / Balanced / Defensive Communication + Disrupt Passing Lanes Logic: Co-alphas (Parson paint + Eberly perimeter) = Balanced. Screen-heavy + high assists = Communication + Passing Lanes.

3. Notre Dame -- Three-Shooter Heavy

Profile: #238 pace (slow), #120 3PA, #60 3PT%, #71 FTA, bad defense (#241 DRtg) Threats: Cotal (pull-up 3s, playmaker), Hein (1.31 PPP spot-up -- elite kick target), Island (transition) Not threats: Crooks (only inside threat -- dare him to beat us) Settings: Conservative / Perimeter / Limit Fast Breaks + Disrupt Passing Lanes Logic: 3 players with 50%+ 3PA = Perimeter. Transition + drive-kick = Limit Breaks + Disrupt Lanes. Plan: make Crooks beat us.

4. Elon -- Extreme Paint (The Textbook Case)

Profile: #1 pace, #1 points in paint, #336 3PA (no threes), #179 3PT% (can't make them), #21 FTA Settings: Conservative / Interior / No Fouls + Protect The Rim Logic: Most one-dimensional team possible. Full paint denial. Dare them to shoot threes they never take and can't make. No Fouls because they get to the line at high rate.

5. Toledo -- Transition Pull-Up Threes

Profile: #34 pace, #32 transition, #105 3PA (low for pace), slightly perimeter-tilted, starter-dependent Threats: Fuller (pull-up 3s in transition, spot-up is terrible), Folston (PnR roll man), Opara (transition) Key insight: Good 3PT% overall but bad spot-up efficiency = the threes are pull-ups in transition Settings: Conservative / Perimeter / Limit Fast Breaks + Defensive Communication Logic: Perimeter fights pull-up 3s. Limit Breaks kills transition. Communication handles PnR with Folston.

6. North Florida -- Screen-Heavy Perimeter (Validation Test)

Profile: #114 pace, #215 transition (NOT a transition team), #33 assists, #26 screen assists, #239 paint, #60 3PT% Threats: Elliss (1.27 PPP off-screen -- elite), three efficient PnR roll men, Elliss spot-up (1.00 PPP) Not threats: Brinkley (high volume, inefficient everywhere -- let him shoot) Settings: Conservative / Perimeter / Defensive Communication + Disrupt Passing Lanes Logic: Low transition (215th) rules out Limit Breaks. Perimeter-tilted with good 3PT%. Screen-heavy (26th) + high assists (33rd) = Communication + Passing Lanes.

CJBL Recruit Data Guide

Overview

A searchable database of 22,000+ HS recruits for the 2050 class is available via the /recruit command in the CJBL agent. The data was extracted from the CJBL recruiting page and includes all HS stats.

What's in the Data

Each recruit record contains: - Identity: Name, stars (1/3/4/5), position (with dual combos), height, weight, age - Location: Hometown, state, region (Great Lakes, South Atlantic, etc.) - HS Stats: G, GS, MPG, PPG, RPG, APG, SPG, BPG, TPG - Shooting: FGA, FGM, FG%, 3PM, 3PA, 3P%, FTM, FTA, FT%, EFG, FTr, 3PAr - Advanced: BPM, PER, WS (where available) - Computed: Morey Screening Score (0-100, position-aware)

Critical Limitation

HS stats do NOT predict in-game ratings. Per Strategic Playbook, a recruit's 3P% in high school has no correlation with their OutS (Outside Shooting) rating in CJBL. Similarly, APG does not predict Passing, and PPG does not predict overall talent.

Use this data ONLY for: - Identifying high-volume candidates to Express Interest in - Narrowing the field before spending scouting actions (L1/L5) - Finding home-region targets for cheaper scouting costs

Do NOT use this data for: - Predicting a player's actual in-game ability - Making scholarship offers without L5 scouting - Ranking recruits by talent (only by HS production)

Morey Screening Score (0-100)

A position-aware composite score that estimates how well a recruit's HS stats align with Morey Ball principles (rim or three, no mid-range). Higher = more 3PT volume/efficiency relative to position peers.

Weights by position: - Guards (PG, SG): 3P% (30%), 3PAr (25%), PPG (20%), APG (15%), EFG (10%) - Wings (SF): 3P% (35%), 3PAr (25%), PPG (15%), Defensive stats (10%), EFG (15%) - Bigs (PF, C): 3P% (30%), RPG (20%), BPG (20%), PPG (15%), EFG (15%)

What it measures: HS shooting volume and efficiency relative to same-position peers. What it does NOT measure: Actual in-game shooting ability, BBIQ, intangibles, or scheme fit.

/recruit Command Reference

Pipeline Annotations

When searching the 22K recruit database, any player who appears in the SIUE pipeline is automatically tagged in search results. For example:

• [T1 CLEAN schol] — Tier 1, clean character, scholarship target
• [T1.5 CLEAN backup] — Tier 1B, clean character, backup scholarship
• [T3 MIXED] — Tier 3, mixed character, maintain contact
• [DROPPED FAIL] — Dropped from pipeline due to character fail

The /recruit player NAME detail view also shows a full "SIUE Pipeline" section with tier, status, character, promise, competition, and next Phase 3 action.

Filter Syntax

• pos=PG or pos=PG,SG (comma = OR, matches dual positions too)
• stars=1 or stars=1,3
• region=Great Lakes (case-insensitive contains)
• state=IL or state=IL,OH,IN
• Numeric: ppg>10, tppct>.35, apg>3, efg>.50, morey>60, hgt>76
• limit=25 (default), sort=morey (default, or ppg/tppct/apg/efg)

Live Recruit Page Fetching (MCP)

Claude Code can fetch authenticated recruit pages directly from jblfl.com via the CJBL MCP server. All recruit tools return structured markdown with parsed sections (bio, ratings, tendencies, intangibles, personality, scouting report, recruiting status, top schools, initial list). Pipeline recruits are automatically cross-referenced with siue_pipeline_2050.json.

Available MCP tools:

cjbl_recruit_eval Output Sections

The eval tool returns a complete evaluation with:

1. Player Profile — Bio, physical, rankings, headline stats
2. Scouting Ratings — All categories: Shooting, Creation, Execution, Playmaking, Defense, Rebounding, Physical
3. Tendencies — Driving, Roll:Pop, C&S:Pull-Up, Corner3:ATB
4. Intangibles — WE, Leadership, Discipline, Prof, Aggression, Toughness, Hustle
5. Personality — Type (e.g., Introverted, Workhorse, Troublemaker)
6. Scouting Report — Description, college ability stars, pro potential, strengths/weaknesses lists, accuracy
7. Recruiting Status — Mood, commit timeline, interest, distance, scouted/called/visited/scholarship/pitch status
8. Top Schools — Ranked list with interest levels
9. Initial List — Phase 1 school rankings
10. SIUE Pipeline — Tier, status, character, personality, promise, competition, commit phase, philosophy, notes
11. Morey Ball Fit — Position-specific threshold table (Min/Ideal vs actual rating, PASS/BELOW/IDEAL status)
12. Character Assessment — WE/Disc/Prof vs 15/12/12 thresholds, personality signal, CLEAN/BORDERLINE/FAIL verdict
13. HS Database Stats — Morey score, 3P%, 3PAr, EFG from recruits_2050.json

Morey Ball Thresholds (Embedded in Eval Tool)

Character Thresholds (Embedded in Eval Tool)

• Clean: WE 15+, Disc 12+, Prof 12+, no Troublemaker personality
• Borderline: Fails within 3 of threshold (e.g., Disc 11 or Prof 10)
• Fail: Any value more than 3 below threshold, or Troublemaker personality

The pid for each pipeline recruit is stored in siue_pipeline_2050.json. The id field in recruits_2050.json is the same as the pid URL parameter.

Note: Requires a valid PHPSESSID cookie configured in .claude/settings.local.json. If tools return a "cookie expired" error, the user needs to update the cookie value.

SIUE-Specific Guidance

• Prestige: Very Low = focus on 1-star and 3-star recruits (4-5 star unrealistic)
• Home region: Great Lakes = cheapest scouting actions
• Position needs: Varies by season; check current roster depth chart
• Workflow: /recruit top 30 pos=PG stars=1,3 region=Great Lakes -> Express Interest -> L1 scout -> L5 scout if promising -> scholarship offer

CJBL Recruiting Guide

Source: Official CJBL documentation (Last edited: 3 August 2025, 2048 Season)

Recruiting is the most important aspect of the CJBL. It takes a few seasons to perform confidently. This guide presumes knowledge of the Recruiting rules (Rules > Recruiting tab). Ask for help in #help-and-tips on Slack.

0. Background to Recruiting

• Recruiting takes place during the offseason for the upcoming year
• Recruit senior high school players from 1,350+ real schools in North America
• Recruited players play immediately in the upcoming season (no future commitments)
• Max 13 scholarship players, minimum 9. With walk-ons, max 15 players, minimum 12 at season opening.
• Balance classes: Aim for 3-4 players per class (Fr/So/Jr/Sr) with 13 scholarships
• Prospects play high school games during the season; rankings update based partly on stats

Phase 0: In-Season Recruiting

Phase 0 opens midway through the regular season and runs through postseason into the first week of offseason.

Key Features

• Player Rankings: Only top 200 (5-star + some 4-star) are ranked initially. All others are 1-star. Full class re-ranked before Phase 1 based partly on Phase 0 interest.
• Available Actions: Scouting (up to Level 4) and Express Interest only. No calls, visits, or scholarships.
• Budget: Special $100,000 budget (two $50K installments during season). Does NOT affect normal recruiting budget for Phases 1-10.
• If you change teams, Phase 0 resets — previous AD's actions wiped, fresh 30 Express Interest actions.

Strategy

• Spend the entire $100K — unspent funds are wasted (no rollover)
• Focus locally first — free Level 1 scouting on all players in your region. Local scouting is cheapest.
• Finding all prospects: Change filter from default (4 & 5 stars) to show 1-star players. Navigate to High Schools page to find out-of-region prospects.
• Express Interest (30 actions): Informal call letting a recruit know they're on your radar. Significantly increases chance of being on their initial interested schools list in Phase 1. Use wisely — save a few for later as rankings shift.
• Use tags from the start (Top Target, Potential Target, Not Interested, etc.) to organize the 11,000+ prospects.

1. Recruiting Actions

How to Perform Actions

• Main screen: Recruiting Menu > Recruit Prospects
• Default filters show top 200 + 3-stars in your region
• Click player name > Profile > Recruiting tab for action buttons
• Actions: Call, Scout, Head Coach Visit, Assistant Coach Visit, Offer Campus Visit, Offer Scholarship
• Add to Watchlist or Call List from player profile header
• View your prospects: My Team > Recruiting (or Recruiting > My Prospects)

Actions Per Phase (Replenish Each Phase)

Actions do NOT roll over. Use all actions every phase.

Budget Unlock Schedule

You do not get access to your full recruiting budget immediately. It unlocks progressively:

Implication: Front-load scouting in Phases 1-2 while budget is fresh. By Phase 6, whatever remains is fully available — save expensive coach/campus visits for mid-to-late phases when you've identified your shortlist.

Action chains: Must call before visiting. Must call before offering scholarship.

Warning: Actions on a player may leak on Swatter (in-game Twitter). Weighted toward higher-ranked players.

2. Identifying Target Recruits

Team Identity First

• You must play your HC's Philosophy (can't change without firing)
• Identify what positions and player types you need based on existing roster + philosophy
• Don't waste actions on players that don't fit your system
• Example: If your philosophy needs shooters, don't recruit guards with 12 or worse shooting

Early Phases = Information Gathering

• Phase 1 (72 hrs) and Phase 2 (48 hrs): Scout as much as possible. Can't offer scholarships yet.
• Start with Local/Regional distance, 3-4 stars, Not Committed
• Closer players = cheaper scouting
• Each scouting level gets closer to truth; early levels may have missing ratings
• Max 2 scouting levels per phase — start at L1, reach L5 by Phase 2
• For lower-ranked players (3-star and below), scouting may slightly increase their interest

Calling Reveals Player Values

First call reveals what the player values most: - Prestige - Distance From Home - Academics - Playing Time - Team Success - Favoured Philosophy

If player doesn't value anything your program offers, and multiple other programs are competing — cut losses early rather than sinking more resources.

Call mechanics: - Clicking "Call Player" uses one of your calls even if you hang up immediately (prevents fishing) - Must call before coach visit (it's rude to show up uninvited) - Answers and choices matter — wrong answers or insults may kill interest - Player personality affects which answers work - Call max 3 times per recruit (hard cap). Not calling = knocked down when phase runs. (Source: Secret - UNL/UWGB)

Target Players That Fit Philosophy

Determine disqualifiers and stick to them. Example: "No guards under 10 shooting" = tag as Not Interested immediately.

Role Players Are Useful

Players don't need to do everything well. Add players who fill roles. A decent 3PT shooter + defender with weak rebounding may be fine for your system. You'll need to concede some positions as role players since bigger teams compete for better players.

Get Comfortable Abandoning Players

Monitor Top Schools list — other programs' actions signal who's serious. You may need to abandon a perfect-fit player because bigger programs are outbidding you. Switch to slightly worse but unopposed prospects, especially if you scouted deeply early.

3. Narrowing the Target List

After Local, Target Neighbouring Regions

• Neighbouring/Nearby regions: more expensive scouting and visits
• May lose players to closer-to-home schools
• Target second/third tier talent (100-200 rankings)
• If a team has full green interest bar, they may be uncatchable

Use Call Lists and Tags

• Essential for organizing 11,000+ prospects
• Suggested tags: Top Target, Priority Target, Potential Target, Not Interested, Backup, Wait and See
• Tag every scouted player to enable filtering

Scout Further for Accuracy

• 5 scouting levels. Precision narrows with each level.
• Early: coarse approximations are fine. A player showing 10 Def Reb won't actually be 18.
• If you see a player at 14 On-Ball D and need 12-16, scout further to confirm.
• Worth scouting to L2 before calling to avoid wasting calls.

4. Visits and Promises

Coach & Campus Visits

• Expensive — gain immediate interest but use judiciously
• Early phases: better to spend on scouting than visits (you're starting from near-zero info)
• Save visits for when you've identified your shortlist and need to beat rivals
• Phase 2: School prestige letters revealed next to names (EH, VH, H, AA, A, BA, L, VL, EL)

Coach Visit Details

• 7 total per phase (any mix of HC + AC visits)
• HC visit: Higher success chance, lower failure chance
• AC visit: Lower success chance, higher failure chance, cheaper
• Coaching ratings factor in (Discipline, Motivation, Tactics, Technique, Rapport, position coaching, style)
• Visit occurs immediately. Feedback on success/failure provided.
• Stack visits on top targets rather than spreading across many recruits. Community consensus is to concentrate as many actions as possible on priority targets each phase. (Sources: Mike - Lightning3, Rubesicon - Saints1)

Campus Visit Details

• Player must be in "Deciding" to attend (visits happen following phase)
• Instant interest increase when offered (shows you're serious)
• Can go well or poorly
• Player can only visit 5 schools total — highly competitive action
• Available starting Phase 2
• Early phase bonus: Offering a campus visit in an earlier phase gives a bonus over schools that offer in a later phase. Front-load campus visit offers on priority targets.

5. Scholarship Offers and Commitments

Hard vs Soft Offers

• Can convert soft to hard offer (Click "Convert to Hard Offer")
• Converting revokes soft offer for other players on that scholarship

Revoking Offers

• Calls and visits: cannot be revoked — budget removed and action performed immediately
• Scholarship: can revoke within same phase with no penalty. After phase = impacts Recruiting Trust.
• Cannot revoke once player enters Deciding (prevents manipulation)

Promises and Recruiting Trust

• Third and final call: Must offer minutes and role indication
• Without promise, player won't consider your offer highly
• Underpromise and overdeliver — don't promise every recruit Marquee + 32 minutes
• Breaking promises reduces Recruiting Trust (impacts future recruiting + locker room)
• Trust hit is same whether you miss by 1 minute or 15 minutes
• Cannot avoid hit by cutting the player

Available Promises

Community insight — Marquee demotion: Offering a new recruit Marquee when an existing player already has it will upset the current Marquee player, even if a different AD made the original promise. Marquee players always expect to remain Marquee once promised — even if they lower their visible expectation to "Important" or "Starter," they will still be upset by the demotion. Whether it triggers a transfer depends on the player's personality, but expect them to be offended regardless. (Sources: Peyton - UNLV/UMES, Calvin - Wolves1, THS - OKC2)

Pitches (pitches)

Each team gets 2 pitches per offseason (do not roll over — use them or lose them).

Uses: - Convince underclassman to return from draft: Guaranteed success (but not for high draft projections) - Retain your own transfer (Phase 1): 100% success. Must choose pitch OR discuss — can't try discuss first then pitch. - Recruit a transfer: Not guaranteed but significant boost. - Recruit high school prospect: Not guaranteed but major boost.

Key rules: - Pitches consumed on use regardless of outcome (for external targets) - Offers are blind — you don't know if competitors used pitches - Prestige-weighted: Higher prestige pitch = more valuable. But low-prestige pitch still beats no pitch. - Pitches enhance, don't replace, a good offer — still need competitive promise - Pitch timing is risk/reward: Earlier pitches have bigger impact on the recruit's decision. Waiting gives more time to confirm the target is right and avoid wasting against stiff competition. Since pitches don't roll over, the only reason to wait is uncertainty — not saving for later. (Source: James - Jaguars1)

6. Player Commitments

Commit Phases

• Commits are not phase-locked — once a recruit has sufficient interest, he can commit at any time from his deciding phase onward. The phases above are when each tier starts deciding, not the only window they can commit. (Source: THS - OKC2)
• Most 5-star players are Early committers
• If player doesn't receive enough offers, they may defer
• Don't put all scholarships on Early players — by the time you hear back, Mid players may be gone
• Lower prestige: lock away targets early before bigger schools come knocking later

How Deciding Works

1. Player enters "Deciding" based on Commit Phase
2. Eliminates some schools, narrows to Top 5 (or Top 4/3/2)
3. Next phase: reduces to Top 3
4. Phase after: makes final commitment
5. Once Deciding, no new teams can perform actions — locked to teams already involved
6. Teams in the final list CAN still call, visit, offer within that group

How Players Choose

• Player compares teams on their personal factor weights (Prestige, Distance, Academics, Playing Time, Team Success, Philosophy)
• #1 school is NOT guaranteed — factor weights vary per player, and there's inherent randomness
• Making Top 3 = real shot even at #3
• Player traits (dream schools, girlfriend nearby, family) give slight final bonus
• Think of randomness as an 18-year-old's unpredictable decision-making

Interest and Rankings

• During a phase, interest changes as teams perform actions
• Teams aren't compared against each other until phase runs (fairness — different timezones)
• After phase runs, player re-ranks all teams. Beginning of next phase = most accurate ranking.
• Multiple teams at max interest bar doesn't mean they're equal — comparison happens at phase run

7. Walk-Ons

• Available after recruiting ends
• All walk-ons are freshmen, allocated from local high schools
• Can't choose specific players, only request positions (My Team > Scholarships)
• If roster < 12, walk-ons allocated automatically
• Can add up to 3 walk-ons (max 15 roster)
• Walk-ons stay max 2 years — must offer scholarship or cut before junior year
• Cutting walk-ons does NOT count toward your 4 scholarship cuts per year

Recruiting Timeline Summary

Phase timer is a deadline — may run any time after.

Common Questions

Scouting and Ratings

• Star ratings: Quick filter only, not definitive. Weighted sum of visible + hidden ratings. Common to find 1-star "gems" who scout as 4-5 star ability.
• Hidden ratings: Clutch, Big Game, Positioning, Off/Def Awareness. Make players unique.
• Basketball IQ (BBIQ): Used in nearly every court decision. Low BBIQ is debilitating. Only improves 2-3 points over entire career — essentially innate.
• HS to college transition: Ratings re-scale (HS scale to college scale). Expect ~2 point drop on average (range 0-5). Not actual ability change, just viewing scale.
• Pro potential ≠ college ability: Pro potential is ceiling (what they could become with ideal development), not current skill. No correlation with CJBL performance. Not relevant for CJBL recruiting — focus on current ratings. (Source: Brandon - Indiana University)

Recruiting Mechanics

• Initial interest: Based on player factors (family nearby, girlfriend, traits) + random element. Some players have shortlists giving certain schools a head start.
• Multiple teams maxed interest: Not equal — comparison happens at phase run, not during phase.
• Dream schools: Weighted toward higher prestige and closer schools, but can be anywhere.
• Traits matter: Impact initial interest + slight final bonus at commitment decision.
• Offer leaks: Small chance your offers leak to other prospects at same position. May reduce their interest.
• Pipelines: Small initial bump to player interest from repeatedly recruiting at same high school. Commitments build strongest pipelines. The boost is "probably quite small." (Source: ChrisSpi - Stetson)
• Actions in early phases have greater impact than same actions in later phases. This is specifically confirmed for pitches ("bags"), campus visits, and most recruiting actions — earlier deployment = stronger effect. (Sources: THS - OKC2, Morgado - USC)
• Upgrading offer importance late (e.g., Starter → Marquee during deciding) still helps but less than if done with the initial promise. Front-load your best offer. (Sources: PDM - St. Francis, THS - OKC2)
• Early deciders with no offers don't enter deciding until the next phase flip. A good offer triggers deciding at the next phase change. (Source: Coach Martin)
• Always do all actions on top targets — even with full interest bar and no competition. Don't redeploy resources until player is committed. (Community consensus)
• Revoking a scholarship: Lose interest in that recruit. If revoked in a later phase than when offered, also lose a small amount of AD trust. (Source: Calvin - Michigan State/Campbell)

Strategy for Low-Prestige Schools

• Focus on gradually improving roster talent level
• Accept players with flaws — identify which deficiencies you can work with
• Build roster of "decent basketball players" before optimizing for system fit
• Balanced and Grit & Grind are easiest to recruit for at low prestige (don't need specialized player types)

Soft Offers Caution

Strongly recommended to avoid soft offers until Phase 9-10. Players view soft offers as less valuable than hard offers. The two players who don't accept lose all interest — risky.

CJBL Strategic Playbook

Transfer Market Strategy

Core Principle

Transfer market is DEPTH ARBITRAGE, not talent upgrade.

What works: - Acquiring role players willing to accept reduced minutes - High prestige programs convincing players to accept bench roles for exposure - Filling specific gaps (backup PG, stretch 4, etc.)

What doesn't work: - Expecting to acquire starters via transfers - Building your team around transfer acquisitions - Treating transfers as recruiting replacement

Prestige Arbitrage

Mechanism: Players want to "move up" in prestige and will accept LESS playing time at HIGHER prestige schools.

For high prestige ADs: - Can under-promise playing time (prestige compensates) - Target players seeking exposure over minutes

For low prestige ADs: - Must over-promise to compete - Expect to LOSE talent to prestige-chasing transfers - Over-recruit freshmen to compensate for annual losses

Transfer Portal Phases

Phase 1 (Discussion): - Talk to YOUR players considering transfer - Use Discuss OR pitch (not both) - Cannot offer external players yet - Junior walk-ons must get scholarship offer or auto-released

Phase 2 (Live Bidding): - Offer external transfer players - ONE-SHOT OFFERS: Cannot upgrade promises after initial offer - Can revoke if not in player's Top 3

Phase 3+: - Actions refresh each phase - pitch does NOT refresh (2 total per offseason)

Recruiting Strategy

Recruiting by Prestige Tier

Extremely Low / Very Low: - Target: 2-3★ local players - Strategy: Scout entire local region, express interest in 25-30 locals - Goal: Find hidden 1★ players who become 2-3★ after re-ranking - Reality: You're not getting 4-5★ players - Don't recruit above your weight class: If programs 3-4 prestige levels above you are committing major resources (Marquee/Important offer, 24-28+ min, pitch) to a recruit, competing is a losing play. Focus on realistic targets where prestige gap is manageable. (Source: Morgado - USC) - Player values are FUNCTIONAL, not flavor: Prioritize recruits with LOW "Prestige" value (won't gravitate to bigger schools) and HIGH "Distance" or "Playing Time" value (your local/minutes advantage matters more to them). (Source: THS - OKC2) - Target early deciders + uncontested recruits: Lock them up before higher prestige teams can pivot. Finding early-deciding guys you can win quickly and uncontested is the safest EL/VL strategy. (Source: Kevin - Miami OH, Bill - Manhattan) - When contesting above your weight: Need a significantly better offer (Marquee/28+ vs their Rotation/12), scout their roster to gauge their likely offer, and stack distance + pitch. Still expect to lose most contested battles — budget pitches accordingly.

Low / Below Average: - Target: 3★ realistic, 4★ reaches - Strategy: Mix of local 3★ (high conversion) + national 4★ gambles - Timeline: 3-4 years to tournament contention

Average / Above Average: - Target: 3.5-4★ core, 4.5★ reaches - Strategy: National recruiting, compete for top-50 recruits - Timeline: 2-3 years to conference championship contention

High / Very High / Extremely High: - Target: 4-5★ elite players - Strategy: National recruiting, leverage prestige advantage - Timeline: Must win NOW (hot seat pressure)

Phase 0 Scouting

Budget: $100k to spend on scouting

Scouting limits: Can only scout TWICE per phase. Scout straight to Level 4 on top targets.

Optimal workflow: 1. Filter by position + region 2. Scout Coach Rec list 3. Scout to Level 4 before expressing serious interest 4. Character filter eliminates ~77% — do this FIRST

Ratings vs. Statistics Disconnect (CRITICAL)

Finding: Advertised high school 3PT% does NOT correlate with OutS (Outside Shooting) rating.

Solution: Always scout to Level 4 before expressing serious interest. OutS rating is the only reliable shooting indicator.

Character Evaluation (UPDATED)

"Maddeningly inconsistent" — ⚠️ YELLOW FLAG (changed from auto-reject) - Appeared in 77% of Level 4 scouts - Weigh against other factors — NOT automatic elimination - Players with elite intangibles elsewhere may overcome this - Example: Player with WE 20, Discipline 20, Leadership 18 + "inconsistent" tag warrants consideration

Strong Concern (Need Compensating Factors): - "Intensity fluctuates throughout games" - "Disappears for stretches" - "Questions about motor and effort" - "Could be more dedicated"

Clean character indicators: - "Reliable leadership presence" - "Extension of coaching staff on court" - "Maintains composure under pressure" - "Consistent effort" language - Work Ethic 17+, Discipline 15+, Professionalism 15+

Positional Flexibility in Roster Building

There is no positional proficiency mechanic. Players can be plugged into any position immediately if they have the right ratings — no learning curve, no development time. System position labels (PG, SG, SF, PF, C) are just labels, not constraints. (Source: Morgado - USC)

• Example: 2049 POTY (Craig at UNC) was a "SF" playing PG. SFs at PF, PGs at SG all work fine.
• Recruit by ratings, not position label. A 6'5 "PG" with strong defensive ratings can play SG day one.
• Roster construction benefit: Position versatility is free. Evaluate skill profiles against philosophy needs rather than filtering by listed position.
• Morey Ball application: If your best available prospect is a "SF" with OutS 17, Gravity 15, and strong ball handling — he can play SG or even PG regardless of what the system calls him. Don't pass on talent because of a position label.

Philosophy-Specific Roster Building

Morey Ball (SIUE Current Philosophy)

Core Principle: Efficiency-obsessed. Rim or three ONLY. No mid-range.

Primary Actions: - Spot Up (three-point focused) - Pick & Roll (rim attacks) - Transition (early threes, rim attacks) - Isolation (for elite creators)

Pace: Average (4-6) — not as fast as Seven Seconds

Recruit for: - 3PT shooting (OutS 15+ minimum, 17+ preferred) - Isolation ability (SlfC 15+) - Ball handling (Hndl 15+) - Athletic rim runners (for C only) - Self-creation - High gravity (Grav 14+)

Avoid: - Traditional post players who can't shoot - Mid-range specialists (wasted skill points) - Wings with OutS below 12 - Slow-footed bigs who can't roll

Spacing threshold: ~18 3PA/100 possessions at 37%+

Lineup construction: - Ideal: 5 shooters (rare) - Acceptable: 4 shooters + 1 rim-runner - Minimum: 3 shooters + 2 rim-runners (spacing suffers)

Tendency settings: - "Shoot More Threes" - "Shoot Less Mid-Range" - "Drive More"

Morey Ball Big Man Profile: Two acceptable archetypes:

1. Stretch Big (preferred)
2. OutS 14+
3. Can space floor

4. Pop threat in PnR

5. Athletic Rim-Runner (acceptable)

6. OutS doesn't matter
7. Roll threat in PnR (screen, roll, finish lobs)
8. Rim protection anchor
9. Example: Canyon Jihad (3PT 6 but elite rim protection)
10. ⚠️ Offensive rebounding is NEGATIVELY correlated (r=-0.347) — don't recruit for OREB
11. ⚠️ Post scoring (insideShot) is NEGATIVELY correlated (r=-0.631) — stretch or rim-run ONLY
12. ⚠️ Lighter bigs preferred (avg weight r=-0.568 at low prestige)

Morey Ball Wing Profile: - OutS 15+ (non-negotiable) - Gravity 14+ - Shoot Off Dribble 12+ - Self-Creation 14+

Morey Ball Guard Profile: - OutS 15+ - Ball Handling 15+ - Passing 14+ - Gravity 14+

Common Morey Ball Mistakes: 1. Playing non-shooters at wing positions 2. Running mid-range heavy players 3. Post-up actions (unless dunking) 4. Slow pace when you have athletes 5. Not pushing transition for early threes 6. Stacking creators without shooters (r=-0.443 at low prestige) 7. Recruiting post-scoring bigs (insideShot r=-0.631 at low prestige) 8. Prioritizing offensive rebounding in bigs (r=-0.347 partial) 9. Building heavy/slow rosters (avg weight r=-0.568 at low prestige) 10. Recruiting broadly for PnR Execution — it's role-specific (PG + C only), negative at team-average level in college (College Ridge: -0.0077). Wings/SGs should have shooting and spacing, not PnR skills.

Morey Ball Data-Driven Findings (Corrected Analysis, 31 Teams)

Source: Cross-league analysis of 31 confirmed Morey Ball teams. See CJBL_Morey_Ball_Corrected_Analysis.md for full methodology.

Key Correlations with Win % (low prestige, n=13):

Physical correlations (low prestige):

Benchmarks: - Winners (WP>.55): Guard OutS 15.5 avg, 4.2 shooters 15+ - Losers (WP<.45): Guard OutS 13.6 avg, 3.7 shooters 15+ - Low prestige mean: 4.3 shooters 15+, guard OutS 14.6

Model teams: UIC (P4, .570) -- 6 shooters 15+, one elite creator, roll-and-cut bigs, 213 lbs avg. Harvard (P4, .536) -- 6 shooters 15+, guard depth, 206 lbs avg.

Anti-model: Lipscomb (P2, .372) -- 6 creators (SlfC 15+), only 3 shooters 15+, athletic but no shooting discipline.

Pace & Space

Recruit for: - Shooters - Passers - Off-ball movement - Roll gravity bigs

Spacing threshold: ~15 3PA/100 at 35%+

Seven Seconds or Less

Recruit for: - Ball handlers - Athletes (speed, quickness) - Rim runners - Fearless transition shooters - Endurance (fast pace = fatigue)

Priority: Athleticism over skill (speed > technique)

Post Centric

Recruit for: - Post scorers - Face-up forwards - Distributing guards - PnR execution

Spacing threshold: ~10 3PA/100 at 33%+ (can survive with 1-2 non-shooters)

Triangle

Recruit for: - Passing bigs - Isolation wings - High BBIQ players - Veterans (cohesion requirement)

Reality: Avoid this philosophy for rebuilds

Offensive Settings Best Practices

Universal Principle: Use Screens More

"All great teams are checking 'Use Screens More' every time."

Screen action is foundational — it generates both rim AND three opportunities. This is the primary mechanism for creating advantages in modern basketball.

Why screens matter: - Creates advantages before defense can react - Opens driving lanes AND three-point looks - Generates assisted baskets (higher efficiency than isolation) - Works regardless of philosophy

Recommended emphasis combination: - Use Screens More (creates advantages) - Get To The Rim OR Look For Early Threes (finishes advantages)

Big Game Scouting: Loss Pattern Analysis

For important games, study opponent losses — find the blueprint.

Instead of just profiling what they do well, look at: - Games they lost - What the winning team did differently - What statistical patterns appear in their losses vs. wins

Questions to answer: - Did they lose when forced to shoot threes? - Did they lose when transition was taken away? - Did they lose to teams that packed the paint? - Did they lose when their alpha was contained? - Did they lose the rebound battle in every loss?

Workflow: 1. Pull their losses 2. Identify common statistical patterns across those losses 3. Build your settings to replicate those conditions

Key insight: "Other teams give you the roadmap." If 4 different teams beat them the same way, that's a proven formula, not a theory.

Role Player Efficiency Principle (NEW)

Core Insight: Role players must be more efficient than stars.

Why this matters: - Stars earn lower efficiency through shot difficulty - Role players who are inefficient = wasted possessions - A role player shooting 52% TS on 10% usage is actively hurting the team - Better to give those possessions to a star at 54%

Application: - Evaluate role players by efficiency, not counting stats - Bench inefficient role players even if they "produce" - Role player value = floor spacing + defensive contribution + high-efficiency finishing

Coaching Attribute Priority (NEW — COMMISH CONFIRMED)

Attribute Hierarchy

Per Commish intel, coaching attributes rank in this order:

1. Tactics — Most critical. Determines scheme execution quality.
2. Coach Offense / Coach Defense — Core competency for their side of the ball.
3. Adaptability — Prevents "locked state" where coach can't adjust mid-game.
4. Position-specific coaching (Guards, Forwards, Centers)
5. Culture, Patience, etc.

What Adaptability Does

• Low Adaptability = coach gets stuck in predictable patterns
• Cannot adjust to opponent's halftime changes
• Cannot counter when game plan isn't working
• Creates ceiling regardless of roster talent

Implications for Staff Construction

SIUE Reality: Both Allen (Tactics 10, Adapt 8) and Davis (Tactics 10, Adapt 9) are weak in the most critical attribute. Staff cannot adapt mid-game. Must win with talent, not schemes.

Roster Management

Playing Time Thresholds

~16 MPG: Critical threshold. Players below this generally want more minutes. - 20+ MPG = very safe retention zone - 16-20 MPG = acceptable, monitor mood - Below 16 MPG = always a transfer risk

Promise Management

Promise threshold: 85% of promised minutes = "safe" - Below 85% = risk of breaking promise - 95%+ fulfillment = definitely safe

Breaking promise consequences: - Immediate high transfer chance (~95-98%) - Major AD Trust hit (long-term recruiting damage)

One broken promise ≠ death sentence. Pattern of breaks = severe trust damage.

Roster Retention After Philosophy Change

Expect 3-5 players to carry over. 7-8 staying = great outcome.

Why retention is low: - Scheme fit changes - Role changes (starters become backups) - Coach personality conflicts

Training Camp Focus Strategy

By Player Role

Primary ball handler (PG): - Focus 1: Playmaking (50-75%) - Focus 2: Shooting OR Offensive Execution (25-50%)

Wing scorer (SF/SG): - Focus 1: Shooting (60-80%) - Focus 2: Perimeter Defense OR Athletics (20-40%)

Stretch big: - Focus 1: Shooting (50-70%) - Focus 2: Rebounding OR Post Defense (30-50%)

Traditional big: - Focus 1: Rebounding (50-70%) - Focus 2: Post Defense OR Offensive Execution (30-50%)

Tendency Work by Philosophy

Morey Ball Specific Development

For non-shooters you must keep: - 100% training camp focus on 3PT Shooting - Only works if Work Ethic 15+ - Accept 1-2 seasons of development time

For mid-range specialists: - Tendency work to shift shots to three - May never fully convert — consider replacement

Offensive Hierarchy & Lineup Configuration

Source: Vince (Rockets1 CM, Houston/Fordham) — experienced manager running heliocentric pro builds.

Hierarchy Function

The offensive hierarchy is primarily a usage control lever (~95% of its function). It determines who terminates possessions and at what volume.

Secondary effects of the #1 slot: - Gets ball in broken plays / shot clock expiring → must have Iso/Self-Creation skills - Interacts with Clutch "Prefer Star Iso" setting → more late-game touches even without that setting checked - End-of-game touch distribution skews toward #1

Rule: Never put a player at #1 who lacks SlfC/Iso ability. Broken plays and late-clock situations will find them.

Heliocentric Setting — Tiered Usage Bumps

When Heliocentric is checked, usage bumps are applied in three tiers:

Implication: To suppress a ball-dominant player's usage, place them below #3. Even at #4, high-BD players still fight for touches (see Ball Dominance interaction in Meta Knowledge).

Hierarchy Tuning — Practical Example

Vince's Austin Rockets (Prime) — full hierarchy and resulting usage:

Key observations: - Even at #4, Briggs only dropped from 33% to 29% USG — BD creates a usage floor that hierarchy can't fully override - Rigaux (BD 11) at #1 was pulled UP to 24% — low-BD players placed high accept more touches than they'd naturally seek - Moss at #5 dropped to 21% and had the most efficient season of his career — proof that reduced usage can improve shot selection for the right players - Vince's next-season goal: Briggs and Rigaux both 25-26%, DPJ and Wills up to 20% — gradual rebalancing

Takeaway: Hierarchy placement and Ball Dominance interact. You can't fully suppress a high-BD player through hierarchy alone. Conversely, low-BD players placed high will accept more touches than their nature would otherwise generate. Use the #3 threshold (Heliocentric tiers) as your primary lever.

Reduced Usage and Efficiency

Not all players respond the same to reduced usage: - Some become more efficient with fewer touches — better shot selection, only taking good looks (Moss example above) - Others struggle with rhythm disruption — "no-chill chuckers" who can't take a hint may force bad shots regardless - Monitor over 10-game windows after hierarchy changes - If a player's efficiency drops after being moved down, they may not be suited to a reduced role

Sample Size for Setting Changes

Rule: Don't overreact to small samples. Make one change, run 10 games, evaluate. Commit or revert at 20 games.

SIUE Application Notes

With Allen's Tactics 10 and Adapt 8, we have limited ability to run complex hierarchy schemes. Priorities: - Keep our best SlfC player at #1 (currently Coddington or Robinzine depending on roster) - If running Heliocentric, ensure #1-3 are players we WANT taking high-volume shots - Suppress non-creators by placing them #4+ - Monitor over 10-game windows before adjusting

Defensive Gameplan Guidelines

Against High Spacing Opponent

• Zone Frequency: Rarely (zone vulnerable to shooting)
• Screen Defense: Over (prevent open threes)
• Defensive Focus: Perimeter

Against Low Spacing Opponent

• Zone Frequency: Often (pack paint, dare them to shoot)
• Screen Defense: Under (let them shoot)
• Defensive Focus: Interior

Common Mistakes to Avoid

1. Over-recruiting upperclassmen in Year 1 - Juniors/seniors give 1-2 years max - Prioritize younger players UNLESS on hot seat

2. Breaking promises to "win now" - AD Trust follows you to next job - Better to lose games Year 1 than destroy trust

3. Scheduling too hard too early - Save 2-3 OOC schedule slots until post-recruiting

4. Treating transfer market as recruiting replacement - Transfers are depth, not starters

5. Keeping wrong philosophy too long - Firing inherited coach = 0% penalty - Eating one year of bad philosophy costs more

6. Trusting statistics over ratings - HS 3PT% ≠ OutS rating - Always scout to Level 4

7. Running non-shooters in Morey Ball - Each non-shooter collapses spacing - Maximum 1 non-shooter on floor (rim-runner C only)

8. Treating character flags as binary - "Maddeningly inconsistent" = yellow flag, not auto-reject - Weigh against other factors, especially Work Ethic and Discipline

9. Chasing favorites over gettable targets - You will generally NOT sign your favorite recruits — the odds of them wanting your specific program are small - A 95% chance at a very good player who fills your needs > 33% chance at an outstanding player who's perfect - Excellent classes are built from gettable alternatives, not dream targets (Source: Morgado - USC, Vince - Rockets1)

10. Using pitches in crowded fields - If 4+ teams at similar prestige are all pitching, there's no tiebreaker advantage — it's pure RNG - Deploy pitches for overwhelming superiority in thin competition, not hopeful swings in crowded races (Source: THS - OKC2, Morgado - USC)

Play-by-Play Analysis Insights

Action Type Efficiency Benchmarks

Red Flags in PBP Data

• 30%+ efficiency drop vs zone -- Spacing problem (note: SIUE's v2-corrected zone drop was only 0.5%, not the originally reported 32%)
• 20+ point home/away margin swing — Mental toughness issue (often defensive)
• Spot-up PPP below 0.60 — Can't space the floor
• Star player efficiency below role players — Usage optimization needed
• Role player TS% below 55% — Wasted possessions, bench them

Assistant Coach Strategy

Complementary Hiring

Hire assistants who patch head coach weaknesses:

Morey Ball Specific

Morey Ball HCs typically have: - High Offense (15+) - Lower Defense (8-13) - Lower Culture (7-10)

Compensate with: Defensive specialist AC (Defense 15+, Culture 12+)

SIUE Example: Taavi Allen (Off 17, Def 13, Cul 8) + Noah Davis (Def 17, Cul 10) - Defense covered ✓ - Culture still weak — rely on player leadership (Totten) - Tactics gap NOT solved — both coaches have Tactics 10

Coach Visit Strategy (NEW)

Rule: Use HC visits on must-get targets. The reduced failure risk is worth the cost premium.

Team Context: Southern Illinois-Edwardsville (Last Updated: 2050 Offseason - Phase 1 Recruiting)

Team

• Name: Southern Illinois-Edwardsville (SIUE)
• Conference: OVC (Ohio Valley Conference)
• Prestige: Very Low
• Academics: Low
• Location: Edwardsville, Illinois
• Record (2049): 16-20 (36 games; Conference: 9-11, 4th place)
• Championships: 0
• Conference Titles: 1

Board Expectations

• Expectation: Finish with .500 Conference Record
• Job Security: Safe
• Status: Missed expectation (9-11 vs 10-10 needed) but still safe

2049 Season Performance Analysis (PBP Findings)

The Road Problem

• 17-point margin swing between home and away
• Many road losses were close (1-7 point margins)
• Root cause: Defensive breakdown on road, not offensive issues
• Road offense actually scored MORE than home offense
• Mental toughness manifests defensively

Zone Defense Vulnerability (CORRECTED — v2 Parser)

Original analysis claimed catastrophic -32% PPP vs zone. Corrected v2 parser (fixed foul/shot ordering, 3PT attribution, turnover logic) found:

The original -32% was a parsing methodology error (shots with "draws foul" swallowed by foul handler, all 3PT counted as 2PT). Zone offense is not a weakness overall — but specific zone types matter:

Zone Performance by Player (v2 Corrected Data)

Action Type Efficiency (v2 Corrected)

Hidden Efficiency Finding: Mark Mimms

• 46.0% FG, 43.6% 3P (best percentages on team)
• Spot-Up 1.156 PPP (only player above average), PnR BH 1.032 PPP
• 84 assists, +53 duo differential with Jihad
• Severely underutilized — should get increased minutes in 2050

SIUE Offensive Settings (Morey Ball)

Key Insight: "Use Screens More" is foundational — it generates both rim AND three opportunities. Screen action is the primary mechanism for creating advantages in modern basketball.

Defensive Settings Recommendations

Coaching Staff (UPDATED - 2050)

Head Coach: Taavi Allen (NEW)

Ratings:

Assessment: Elite offensive mind (Off 17) who will implement Morey Ball. However, Tactics 10 and Adaptability 8 are critical weaknesses. Per Commish intel, Tactics is the most important coaching attribute. Allen cannot adapt mid-game or counter opponent adjustments effectively. Must win with talent execution, not scheme complexity.

Assistant Coach: Noah Davis (NEW)

Ratings:

Assessment: Same philosophy alignment (Morey Ball). Elite Defense (17) patches Allen's defensive weakness. However, does NOT solve Tactics/Adaptability gap — both coaches are weak in the most critical attribute.

Combined Staff Profile

Strategic Implication: Staff cannot adapt mid-game or counter opponent adjustments. Simplify schemes, win with talent execution. Don't expect tactical outmaneuvering.

Roster Overview (UPDATED - Including Transfers)

Team Chemistry & Culture

• Team Chemistry: Very Harmonious
• Team Continuity: 94.7%
• Captain: NOT SELECTED (Recommend: Tabari Totten)

Roster by Class

Seniors (4) — Graduating: - Arkel Topercer (SG) — Important Player, Lazy, LEADING SCORER - Cyncier Levett (SF) — Rotation, Friendly, Leadership Group - Ramel Brink (PG) — Rotation, 0 minutes played - Loyd Robinzine (SF) — TRANSFER ACQUISITION ⭐

Juniors (6) — Core for 2050: - Canyon Jihad (C) — Important Player, anchor - Quion Sliwoski (PF) — Starter, low morale - Tabari Totten (PF) — Rotation, LEADER, High Influence - Arlon Sanderson (SF) — Rotation, Leadership Group - Mark Mimms (PG) — Rotation, 30% transfer risk - Donchevell Ross (C) — Rotation, stable

Sophomores (2) — Long-term core: - Izayah Coddington (SG) — Marquee, franchise player - Stanislav Kunchik (SG/PG) — Rotation, highest aptitude (15), 30% transfer risk

Scholarship Situation

• Current: 12/13 used (after Robinzine)
• Available: 2
• Walk-ons: 0/3
• pitches: 2/2 (unused)

Transfer Portal Acquisition: Loyd Robinzine ⭐

Key Ratings

What He Solves

Character Concerns

• Work Ethic: "Minimal appetite for extra work"
• Consistency: "Consistency is rare"
• Assessment: Won't develop as a senior, but elite shooter for one year

Promise Made

• Role: Starter
• Minutes: 28 MPG
• pitch: Not used

Complete Player Profiles

1. Ramel Brink (PG) — Senior, Graduating

2049 Stats: 0.0 PPG, 0.0 RPG, 0.0 APG (Did not play)

Ratings:

Assessment: Elite perimeter defender with shooting and creation ability. Criminally underused (0 MPG). Listed as playmaker despite no minutes. Graduating — no action needed.

2. Izayah Coddington (SG) — Sophomore, MARQUEE PLAYER ⭐

2049 Stats: 15.5 PPG, 3.2 RPG, 2.4 APG, 1.21 SPG, 29.0 MPG

PBP Insight: Slight zone weakness (0.970 zone vs 1.032 man, -6%). Not catastrophic. Elite cutter (1.128 PPP, 57.6% FG) — use off-ball more than PnR BH (0.774).

Morey Ball Fit: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ Perfect — OutS 18, Gravity 18, Ball Dom 18

Ratings:

Assessment: FRANCHISE PLAYER. Elite 3PT shooter (18) with length (7'3 WS). High gravity (18) creates space. Weak defender but only a sophomore — developable. Ball dominant (18) so heliocentric offense makes sense. Build around him.

Development Focus: Defense (On-Ball, Help) + Finishing

3. Canyon Jihad (C) — Junior, IMPORTANT PLAYER ⭐

2049 Stats: 5.8 PPG, 8.6 RPG, 0.6 APG, 2.13 BPG, 25.5 MPG

Morey Ball Fit: ⭐⭐ Rim-runner only — OutS 6, but elite rim protection makes him viable

Ratings:

Assessment: ELITE RIM PROTECTOR. 7'1 with 7'6 wingspan, Post Defense 19, Rim Protection 16, 2.13 BPG. Rebounds (8.6 RPG) and draws fouls (19). Zero shooting but fills rim-runner role in Morey Ball.

Development Focus: Finishing + PnR Execution

4. Stanislav Kunchik (SG/PG) — Sophomore

2049 Stats: 2.2 PPG, 0.8 RPG, 1.19 APG, 11.7 MPG

Morey Ball Fit: ⭐⭐⭐ Mixed — OutS 12 (below threshold), but elite intangibles

Assessment: HIGH UPSIDE SOPHOMORE. Highest aptitude on team (15). Elite first step (18), passing (18), self-creation (18). High BBIQ (17). Wants more minutes (30% transfer risk). Work ethic 19 = will develop.

Development Focus: 3PT Shooting + Defense

5-11. [Remaining players same as original document]

Recruiting: Current Status (Phase 1)

Resources Available

Primary Targets (UPDATED -- Corrected Analysis Applied)

Strategy shift: Guard shooting is now #1 predictor (r=+0.688 at low prestige). SF-specific urgency was overstated.

Scholarship Allocation (2 available): - Option A (Guard-First): Delaney + Seumalo -- NOW CLEARLY BEST per corrected data. Two guards OutS 18+/19 directly attacks strongest predictor. - Option B (Balanced): Delaney + Mangrum -- Previously Option A. Still viable but SF urgency based on contaminated data. - Option C (If Delaney lost): Seumalo + Haug -- Two elite guard shooters.

Pending actions: - Scout Seumalo to L4 (elevated priority) - Scout Cannon to L4 - Offer Delaney scholarship Phase 3 - Deploy pitches Phase 4+

Commit Timeline

• Phase 5: EARLY players commit (Delaney, Mangrum)
• Phase 7: MID players commit (Mundy, Haug)

Character Filtering Update

"Maddeningly inconsistent" is now a YELLOW FLAG, not auto-reject.

Previous analysis was overcautious. The trait should be weighed against other factors rather than eliminating prospects outright.

Season Goals (2050)

• Realistic: .500 conference record (10-10), improve from 9-11
• Stretch: Make OVC tournament, compete for 3rd place
• Floor: Maintain roster stability, develop Coddington/Kunchik/Sanderson

Immediate Action Items

1. Select Captain: Tabari Totten (Leader 19, High Influence)

2. Fix Playmaker Settings: Remove Ramel Brink (0 MPG), add Izayah Coddington

3. Add Offensive Emphasis: "Get To The Rim" + "Look For Early Threes"

4. Recruiting Phase 1: Prioritize Delaney (irreplaceable PG) and Mangrum (complete wing)

5. Increase Mark Mimms Minutes: 1.090 PPP efficiency warrants larger role

6. Monitor Transfer Risks: Mimms (30%), Kunchik (30%), Totten (25%)

Strategic Summary

Corrected Morey Ball Analysis (NEW)

Cross-league data (31 Morey teams) reveals key strategic corrections: - Guard shooting is #1 predictor at low prestige (r=+0.688), not PnR or SF shooting - Non-shooters actively harmful (r=-0.652) -- every roster spot with OutS <13 hurts - Post-scoring bigs toxic (r=-0.631) -- stretch or rim-run only - Creator trap: too many SlfC 15+ hurts (r=-0.443) - Physical: lighter/faster rosters win (weight r=-0.568) - Shooter stacking effect confirmed (r=+0.576) - Full analysis: CJBL_Morey_Ball_Corrected_Analysis.md

Strengths

• Very Harmonious chemistry (94.7% continuity)
• Safe job security (no pressure)
• Morey Ball philosophy (modern, efficient)
• Franchise player in Coddington (So, Marquee, 3PT 18)
• Elite rim protector in Jihad (Jr, 7'1, Post Def 19)
• Transfer acquisition Robinzine solves SF shooting for 2050
• Transition offense is elite (1.261 PPP)

Weaknesses

• Very Low prestige (recruiting handicap)
• Coaching staff weak in Tactics (10) and Adaptability (8-9) — cannot adjust mid-game
• Scholarship cliff in 2052 (down to 2 players)
• Losing leading scorer (Topercer, 17.4 PPG)
• Several players want larger roles
• 1-13 road record (defensive effort issue)
• Robinzine is 1-year rental — SF need returns in 2051

Philosophy Fit

Morey Ball requires shooters. Current shooters meeting OutS 15+ threshold: - Coddington (18) ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ - Robinzine (18) ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (1 year) - Mimms (18) ⭐⭐⭐⭐ - Totten (16) ⭐⭐⭐ - Sliwoski (15) ⭐⭐⭐ - Kunchik (12) ⚠️ Below threshold - Sanderson (9) ❌ Cannot play Morey Ball - Jihad (6) ⭐⭐ Rim-runner only

3-Year Outlook

2050: Transition year. Lose Topercer's scoring, integrate Robinzine and recruits. Target: .500 conference.

2051: Coddington Jr year, Jihad Sr year. Peak window opens. Need to replace Robinzine at SF. Target: Tournament.

2052: Cliff year. Only Coddington (Sr) and Kunchik (Sr) remain from current roster. Must have recruited 8+ players by now.

JBL Pro Win Predictors

Cross-project knowledge doc from JBL Analytics (Denver Dragons). Source: 36-team regression analysis, 516 players, 3,180 games (2049 season).

Top Skills That Predict Pro Wins

From bivariate OLS regression (each rating vs team win%, minutes-weighted):

Best Win-Prediction Model (Stepwise)

4-variable model: adj-R² = 0.642 (explains 64% of team win% variance)

Interpretation: A +1 point increase in team-average Inside Shooting rating predicts +0.10 in win% (roughly +8 wins over 82 games). Inside Shooting is 2.5x more impactful per unit than PnR Execution.

Ridge Regression Coefficients (Top 10, Standardized)

These account for collinearity and are the most robust importance weights:

College vs Pro Priority Comparison

Key Differences: - BBIQ is the #1 predictor in college (2x any other) but not in the JBL top-5 for wins. This suggests BBIQ enables role execution rather than directly driving wins. - Inside Shooting dominates at pro level, possibly because pro defenses are better and finishing through contact matters more. - PnR Execution is top-3 in both leagues, confirming it as a universal skill.

Recruiting Weight Adjustments for SIUE

Based on JBL pro data, SIUE should upweight these skills when evaluating recruits with pro potential:

1. PnR Execution — Already valued in CJBL. Keep as top priority. Translates directly to pro wins.
2. Inside Shooting — Not explicitly in CJBL Morey Ball thresholds. Consider adding a soft threshold (12+) for scholarship targets.
3. Defensive Rebounding — Highly win-correlated at pro. Bigs with Def Reb 14+ have outsized pro value.
4. Speed — In the stepwise model. Fast players contribute to transition and defensive rotation.
5. 3PT Shooting — Already in Morey Ball thresholds. Confirmed as pro win-driver.

CA Bias Warning

JBL's Current Ability (CA) rating is systematically biased toward bigs with inside scoring:

• CA favors: Inside Shooting (+0.449), Ball Dominance (+0.434), Big Fit (+0.451)
• CA ignores: Spacing (+0.014), Free Throws (+0.014), Ball Handling (-0.016), Speed (-0.062)

Implication for Draft: College guards/wings with elite spacing and perimeter skills will be undervalued by their CA rating. Look for pro upside that CA misses, especially in: - High Spacing + High 3PT + High Speed guards - Defensive specialists with elite Help Defense + Rim Protection

JBL Salary Cap & Exceptions

Max Level Exception (XLE)

Official rules from the commissioner. Also called "Max Level Extension."

What It Does

Allows a team to sign an unrestricted free agent from another team (or a renounced player) at the applicable maximum salary level, even if the team is over the salary cap (up to the Hard Cap).

Eligibility

Who can USE the XLE: - Any team, subject to the 2-season cooldown - Must have re-signed all own free agents the team intends to retain first - Upon submitting an XLE offer, the team immediately forfeits all remaining tenure rights (Tenure, Early Tenure, or Unrestricted) on all unsigned players

Who can be SIGNED with the XLE: - Unrestricted free agents from other teams - Renounced (free agent) players

Who CANNOT be signed: - The team's own free agents (including Bird, Early Bird, Non-Bird rights) - Restricted free agents - A player renounced from that team in the same offseason - Sign-and-trade players

Timing

XLE offers may only be made from Day 2 of Free Agency onwards (not during Moratorium, Days 1-4).

Contract Structure

Age exception: If the player is 32 or older, the offer must be $35M/3.

No-Trade Clause: All XLE contracts include a two-year no-trade clause: - Year 1: Hard no-trade clause - Year 2: Player has the right to waive the clause

Restrictions

• Cap exception — can exceed salary cap but NOT the Hard Cap ($150M)
• No MLE — a team that uses the XLE cannot use the MLE in the same season
• May still use Minimum Salary Exception and Rookie Exception
• Sign-and-trade prohibited for XLE contracts
• Cooldown: Once every two seasons

Pre-Offer Requirements

Before offering an XLE contract: 1. Team must have re-signed all own FAs it intends to retain 2. Must use available cap space to sign own players first 3. Upon submitting the XLE offer, all remaining tenure rights on unsigned players are immediately forfeited

This makes the XLE a "burn the boats" move — you must be done with your own FA business first.

Replacement Player Exemption (RPE)

Granted to a team that loses a player to another team's XLE signing.

Amount

$15,000,000 — one-time exemption.

Usage Options (choose ONE)

1. Signing exception (same offseason) — sign an unrestricted FA from another team or a renounced player, up to $15M, exceeding the salary cap up to the Hard Cap. Cannot be used to re-sign own free agents.

2. Trade exception (TPE) of $15M — valid until the next trade deadline. Can absorb incoming salary in a trade without matching outgoing salaries.

RPE Rules

• Cannot be split between uses (must be wholly applied as signing exception, trade exception, or deferred in full)
• A team CAN use both the MLE and RPE in the same offseason
• If converted to TPE, expires at the next trade deadline
• The RPE is not a tradeable asset

Trade Salary Matching Rules

Confirmed by commissioner. Applies to all teams, always — no cap-based exceptions.

Three Rules

1. Player-for-pick (exactly 1 player in the trade, rest are picks): No salary matching required. Any salary works — you can trade a $40M player for a future first straight up.

2. All other trades (player-for-player, multi-player packages): 50% rule — incoming salary must be within 150% of outgoing salary.

3. Hard Trading Limit ($135M):

4. Under $135M: Trade freely, but cannot cross $135M via trade (post-trade salary must stay ≤ $135M)
5. Over $135M: Can add up to $3.25M net salary via trade (incoming salary - outgoing salary ≤ $3.25M)

50% Rule Formula

Incoming salary ≤ Outgoing salary × 1.50
Outgoing salary ≥ Incoming salary / 1.50 (i.e., ≥ 66.7% of incoming)

Examples

Key Implications for Denver

• At $142.75M, Denver is over $135M — can only add up to $3.25M net salary via trade
• The 50% rule still applies on top of the $3.25M limit (both constraints must be satisfied)
• Player-for-pick exception: A single-player-for-picks trade bypasses 50% matching entirely (useful for salary dumps)
• Net salary math: Denver sends $20M, receives $23.25M = legal ($3.25M net). Denver sends $20M, receives $24M = illegal ($4M net exceeds $3.25M limit).
• To make a big acquisition, Denver must shed salary first (e.g., dump Jurkin's contract for picks, then trade for the target)
• The RPE trade exception ($15M) can absorb incoming salary without matching (see RPE section above)

Key Salary Cap Thresholds (2050)

Community Strategy Notes

"Terroristic Bidding" (from 2049 Offseason Primer by Jesse Goehl)

The XLE enables aggressive FA poaching. Key strategic considerations:

• Detroit cautionary tale: Lost Mazalovic and Zouita to XLE in Year 1 of the rule. A year later, Detroit was "certainly better off not paying Mazalovic $35m/4 or Zouita $30m/3."
• Timing tension: The "re-sign your own guys first" rule means XLE users must complete their own FA business before making the offer. This creates a window where the target's current team can make their own offer.
• Vipers used XLE (2049): "Vipers Trade Second to Cleveland for Salary, Intend to use XLE" — teams actively create cap room to deploy XLE.
• Defensive implication: If you have a star FA, another team's XLE is a real threat. Consider re-signing early to remove the risk.

Morey Ball Role-Based Evaluation Framework

Philosophy

Define the role FIRST → Identify enabling ratings → Validate with advanced stats

Stats are context, not the starting point. A player who doesn't fit the role is a problem regardless of efficiency.

PnR Execution: Role-Specific, Not Roster-Wide

Critical insight (from College Ridge model): PnR Execution is NEGATIVE at the team-average level in college (-0.0077) because it's a role-specific skill. Only 2 of 5 players on the floor need it (ball handler + roll man). High roster-wide PnR Execution signals a misbuilt roster over-indexed on bigs lacking shooters.

Recruiting rule: Only evaluate PnR Execution for PG (Role 1) and Center (Role 5A). For wings and shooting guards, ignore PnR Execution entirely — prioritize OutS, Gravity, BBIQ, and Help Defense instead.

ROLE 1: Primary Ball Handler (PG)

What We Need

• Run PnR as ball handler
• Attack rim or pull-up 3 off the pick
• Create for others when defense commits
• Control pace and tempo
• Limit turnovers in half-court

Required Ratings (Scouting Priority)

Validation Stats

Role Player vs Star Threshold

• Star PG (20%+ USG): TS% 54%+ acceptable, can take tough shots
• Role PG (<15% USG): TS% 58%+ required, should only take good shots

ROLE 2: Scoring Guard (SG)

What We Need

• Primary or secondary scoring option
• Spot-up 3PT threat off kick-outs
• ISO ability when play breaks down
• Can run PnR as secondary ball handler
• Reliable in late-clock situations

Required Ratings (Scouting Priority)

Validation Stats

Role Player vs Star Threshold

• Star SG (25%+ USG): TS% 55%+ acceptable
• Role SG (<15% USG): TS% 58%+ required

ROLE 3: Shooting Wing (SF)

What We Need

• Floor spacer — must shoot 3s at volume
• Secondary playmaker off closeouts
• Switchable defender (guard 2-4)
• Transition finisher
• Connective passer in half-court

Required Ratings (Scouting Priority)

Validation Stats

Role Player vs Star Threshold

• Star SF (20%+ USG): TS% 55%+ acceptable
• Role SF (<15% USG): TS% 58%+ required

IMPORTANT NOTE

A wing with OutS < 15 collapses the entire offense. Non-shooters at SF = 4-on-5 spacing. However, corrected cross-league analysis (31 Morey teams) shows SF-specific OutS is NOT the strongest positional predictor — guard shooting (r=+0.688 at low prestige) matters more. SF shooting is table stakes, not the primary differentiator. Prioritize guard OutS in recruiting, then ensure SF meets minimum thresholds.

ROLE 4: Stretch Big (PF)

What We Need

• Floor spacing from 4 position
• Pop threat in PnR (forces help decisions)
• Can switch onto perimeter players
• Rim protection as help defender
• Offensive rebounding in scramble situations

Required Ratings (Scouting Priority)

Validation Stats

Role Player vs Star Threshold

• Star PF (18%+ USG): TS% 54%+ acceptable
• Role PF (<15% USG): TS% 57%+ required

ROLE 5A: Rim-Running Center (C) — Athletic Archetype

What We Need

• Roll threat in PnR (finishes at rim)
• Rim protection anchor
• Vertical spacing (lob threat)
• Doesn't need the ball to impact game
• Screens and stays out of the way when not rolling

Required Ratings (Scouting Priority)

Note: OutS not required for this archetype. They create value through rolling, screening, and defending.

DATA-DRIVEN WARNINGS (Corrected Analysis, 31 Morey Teams): - Offensive rebounding is NEGATIVELY correlated with winning (r=-0.347 partial, r=-0.364 low-prestige). Bigs who crash boards pull spacing apart. Rim-runners should get back or space, not hunt OREBs. - High insideShot is NEGATIVELY correlated (r=-0.631 low-prestige). Rim-runners should finish lobs/rolls, not post up. - High finish is NEGATIVELY correlated (r=-0.364 low-prestige). Likely reflects bigs who demand post touches. - Lighter rosters win at low prestige (avg weight r=-0.568). Prefer mobile rim-runners over heavy plodders. - Strength is NOT an asset at low prestige (r=-0.219). Correlates with weight, which correlates with losing.

Validation Stats

Efficiency Threshold

• TS% > 58% (should only take layups/dunks)
• If TS% < 55%, they're taking bad shots or can't finish

ROLE 5B: Stretch Center (C) — Shooting Archetype

What We Need

• Floor spacing from 5 position (rare, high value)
• Pop threat in PnR
• Still provides some rim protection
• Allows 5-out lineups
• Opens driving lanes for guards

Required Ratings (Scouting Priority)

Validation Stats

LINEUP CONSTRUCTION RULES

Spacing Requirements

Position Priorities for Shooting (UPDATED — Corrected Analysis)

1. Guards (PG/SG) — Most critical (guard OutS r=+0.688 at low prestige — #1 predictor)
2. SF — Must shoot (non-shooter = 4-on-5 spacing, but SF-specific OutS is NOT the top differentiator)
3. PF — Strong preference for shooting (stretch bigs r=+0.452 at low prestige)
4. C — Can survive with rim-runner (max 1 non-shooter on floor)

Shooter Stacking Effect (DATA-DRIVEN)

More players with OutS 15+ = more wins (r=+0.315 partial, r=+0.576 low-prestige).

The Creator Trap (DATA-DRIVEN — r=-0.443 at low prestige)

Too many self-creation specialists (SlfC 15+) is NEGATIVELY correlated with winning.

Why: Players with high SlfC but low OutS take possessions out of the system, generate mid-range shots, reduce ball movement, and don't provide spacing.

Rule: One franchise creator (Coddington-type), surround with system shooters. Not 2-3 ISO wings.

Case study: Lipscomb (P2, .372 WP%) had 6 players with SlfC 15+ — worst record in low-prestige Morey subset.

Physical Profile for Morey Ball (DATA-DRIVEN)

Winning low-prestige Morey teams are lighter, shorter on average, and faster.

The ideal: Light, mobile roster of shooters (~sub-215 lbs avg) with one tall rim protector.

Usage Distribution Principle

• Stars (25%+ USG): 1-2 players max
• Secondary (15-25% USG): 1-2 players
• Role players (<15% USG): Everyone else

Role players with USG > 15% but TS% < 55% are actively hurting the team.

EVALUATION CHECKLIST

For Any Prospect/Player:

Step 1: Define Role - [ ] What position will they play? - [ ] What role archetype fits? (Star/Secondary/Role) - [ ] What specific actions do we need from them?

Step 2: Check Ratings - [ ] Do they meet minimum thresholds for role? - [ ] Any critical gaps? (OutS < 15 for wings = disqualifying) - [ ] Character clean? ("Maddeningly inconsistent" = ⚠️ yellow flag, weigh against WE/Discipline/Prof)

Step 3: Validate with Stats (if available) - [ ] TS% appropriate for usage level? - [ ] Shot distribution fits Morey Ball? (3PAr, MidAr, RimAr) - [ ] Play type efficiency? (PnR, Spot-Up, ISO PPP) - [ ] Any red flags? (Zone PPP collapse, high TOV%)

Step 4: Contextual Factors - [ ] ORTG/DRTG from previous system? (discount if philosophy changed) - [ ] Sample size sufficient? (50+ possessions minimum) - [ ] Lineup effects? (who did they play with)

QUICK REFERENCE: DISQUALIFYING TRAITS

Auto-Reject (Regardless of Other Attributes)

• Wing with OutS < 12
• Primary ball handler with Hndl < 13
• Role player with TS% < 50% on 50+ possessions
• Guard with OutS < 13 (actively harmful per r=-0.652 non-shooter correlation)

Yellow Flag (Need Strong Compensating Factors)

• "Maddeningly inconsistent" character — weigh against WE, Discipline, Professionalism

Strong Concern (Need Compensating Factors)

• Wing with OutS 12-14 (only if elite elsewhere)
• MidAr > 30% (tendency work may not fix)
• Role player with TS% 50-55%
• ORTG 15+ points below team average

APPLYING TO SIUE 2050 ROSTER

SIUE 2049 Season Analytics

Source: Play-by-play parsing of 36 games (2049 season), validated 33/36 within 3 points Parser: v2 with corrected shot detection, 3PT attribution, turnover team logic, and foul-draw handling Last Updated: 2050 Offseason

Season Summary

Only road win: at Tennessee-Martin (Game 33, Day 119)

Diagnosis: Same opponents, dramatically different outcomes at home vs away. This is a mental toughness/effort problem, not a talent gap. Home crowd masks effort deficiencies.

Game Log

*Game 32 header score (14-18) is a data error; tracked score is 69-84.

Data anomalies: duplicate Game 8 numbering (Quinnipiac + Western Illinois), Game 10 and Game 16 missing from original numbering.

Shot Distribution

By Distance Zone

Morey Ball 3-Zone

Assessment: Mid-range share at 24.0% is too high for Morey Ball. Target: reduce to <15% by eliminating long twos. Rim and three share combined is 76.0% — goal should be 85%+.

Play Type Efficiency

Key Takeaways: - Transition is elite (1.261 PPP) — push pace aggressively, this is the #1 action - Spot-Up is the biggest problem — highest-volume action (26.5% share) at worst efficiency (0.802 PPP). Reducing volume and improving personnel here is the single highest-leverage fix. - Cuts are underused at 10.0% — 1.034 PPP justifies more off-ball movement - PnR BH at 0.918 is below the 1.0 benchmark — ball handler creation needs improvement

Zone vs Man-to-Man Efficiency

Zone vs Man PPP diff: -0.5%

CORRECTION: The previous analysis claimed a -32% efficiency drop vs zone. This was a parsing error in the original PBP extraction (shots with "draws foul" were being swallowed by the foul handler, and all three-pointers were counted as two-pointers). The corrected analysis shows essentially no difference between zone and man offense.

Zone Type Breakdown

Actionable: SIUE struggles significantly against 2-1-2 Zone (0.794) and 2-3 Matchup Zone (0.714). These specific zone types are where preparation is needed, not zone defense in general.

Player Man vs Zone Performance (min 20 poss each)

Zone Killers: Totten (+0.405) and Topercer (+0.138) — Topercer is graduating, so Totten becomes the primary zone weapon. Zone Struggles: Ross (-0.293) and Coddington (-0.062) — shield these players from primary usage vs zone.

Shot Quality: Defender Proximity

Notable: "Tight" FG% (48.2%) is higher than "Open" (35.6%). This suggests SIUE's best scorers are effective finishers at the rim where tight contests are common, but perimeter shooters are missing open looks. This reinforces the need for better shooting personnel.

Player Statistics (min 10 FGA)

Player Notes: - Sanderson leads in assists (171) by a massive margin — true floor general - Topercer is the volume scorer (591 pts) with decent 3P% (38.2%) — graduating - Coddington has highest FGA (529) but mediocre efficiency, especially from 3 (33.7%) - Levett is the most efficient shooter (42.6% FG, 43.5% 3P) — graduating - Mimms is the best shooter by percentage (46.0% FG, 43.6% 3P) with 84 assists — underutilized - Jihad draws the most fouls (49) with only 9 turnovers — elite ball security for a big

Player Play Type Breakdowns (min 20 possessions)

PnR Ball Handler

Critical: Coddington is the highest-volume PnR ball handler (159 poss) but ranks LAST in efficiency (0.774). This is the team's most-run action with its worst performer. Topercer (1.015) is far better but is graduating. Finding a PnR-capable guard is the top offensive priority.

Isolation

Spot-Up

Spot-up is the team's biggest weakness. Only Mimms (1.156) is above average. The highest-volume spot-up shooters (Topercer 162 poss at 0.852, Coddington 154 poss at 0.818) are both below benchmark.

Transition

Everyone except Kunchik is effective in transition. This is a team-wide strength.

PnR Roll Man

Jihad is a solid roll man (1.106 PPP) — better than his old legacy numbers suggested (0.740 was from the bugged parser).

Off Screen

Cut

Cutting is efficient across the board. Coddington has elite cut FG% (57.6%) — run more off-ball actions for him rather than PnR creation.

Set Play Analysis

Freelance slightly outperforms structured sets. Not a major gap.

Named Set Efficiency (min 15 uses)

Action Items: - Run more Iverson (1.154, 91 uses) and Zipper (1.292) — both elite - Reduce Horns (0.885, 156 uses) — most-used set but below average - Eliminate Double Drag (0.788, 99 uses) and Wide Pin (0.676) — these are destroying possessions

PnR Coverage Analysis (How Opponents Defend SIUE PnR)

Key Findings: - SIUE handles Over/Drop well (1.059, most common coverage) — standard coverage isn't a problem - Under/Switch is exploitable by opponents but SIUE scores well (1.098) — likely because switches create mismatches - Ice coverages are SIUE's kryptonite — Drop (0.743) and Switch (0.786) both struggle. Opponents who ice the PnR effectively shut SIUE down. - Zone/Contain (0.810) is also a struggle — reinforces need for better perimeter creation against help schemes - Over/Soft (0.769) — SIUE can't punish soft drops, suggesting the ball handler can't pull up effectively from mid-range (expected with Morey Ball)

Lineup Analysis (Point Differential)

Starting Lineup

The starting five was the single worst lineup on the team by total differential. This unit played the most minutes and was consistently outscored.

Best Lineups

Pattern: The best lineups consistently feature Jihad + Totten and/or Mimms + Kunchik. Removing Sanderson-Coddington from the same unit improves results.

Worst Lineups

Two-Man Combinations

Best Duos (by point differential)

Jihad is the connective hub — his best pairings (Totten +76, Mimms +53, Levett +47, Kunchik +39) are all among the team's best duos.

Worst Duos

Sliwoski is a lineup poison pill — appears in 3 of the 4 worst duos. His lack of shooting (29.5% 3P) collapses spacing. Sanderson + Coddington (-99) is the single worst pairing. These two should not share the floor together. This has massive implications — they were both starters.

Home vs Away Play Type Splits

Home (1,588 poss, 0.981 PPP overall)

Away (1,027 poss, 0.926 PPP overall)

Away transition is the best road play (1.390 PPP). On the road, SIUE should push pace even harder rather than trying to execute in the half court where they collapse (spot-up 0.737 road vs 0.847 home).

Strategic Recommendations for 2050

Offense

1. Push transition relentlessly — 1.261 PPP overall, 1.390 on the road. This is SIUE's best action regardless of venue.
2. Run more Iverson and Zipper sets — Both elite PPP (1.154 and 1.292). Reduce Horns (0.885) and eliminate Double Drag (0.788) and Wide Pin (0.676).
3. Get Coddington off the ball — His PnR BH (0.774) is team-worst. His cutting (1.128 PPP, 57.6% FG) is elite. Use him as an off-ball scorer, not primary creator.
4. Increase Mimms usage — Best shooter (43.6% 3P), best spot-up scorer (1.156 PPP), 84 assists. He should be getting starter minutes with better lineups around him.
5. Separate Sanderson and Coddington — Their -99 differential as a duo is catastrophic. Stagger their minutes.
6. Use Totten as primary zone weapon — +0.405 PPP differential vs zone. Only remaining elite zone killer after Topercer graduates.
7. Target mid-range elimination — 24% of shots from mid-range at 31.7% FG is destroying efficiency. Morey Ball demands this drops below 15%.

Recruiting Priorities (Validated by Analytics)

Rotation Changes

Data Notes

• Parser version: v2 with corrected shot/foul ordering, 3PT detection, turnover attribution
• Validation: 33/36 games within 3 points of header score; Game 26 (off 4), Game 30 (off 4), Game 32 (header error)
• Possessions: 2,615 total tracked from play-by-play chains
• Previous analysis errors corrected: Zone vulnerability was -0.5%, not -32%. Record was 16-20, not 17-21. Jihad roll man PPP was 1.106, not 0.740.
• PBP data anomalies: Duplicate Game 8 numbering, missing Games 10/16 from numbering, Game 32 header score (14-18) is clearly wrong vs tracked (69-84)

SIUE Recruiting: Phase 1 Complete Summary (2050 Class)

Last Updated: Phase 1 End Scholarships Available: 2 Budget Remaining: $7,747 Calls Remaining: 0 (phase over) Visits Used: 7 HC visits (Delaney, Mangrum, Haug, Cannon, Seumalo, Kalil, Pfister)

Phase 1 Resource Usage

Complete Target Board (41 Players)

GROUP A: Original 8 Targets (Called + Visited, Character Confirmed)

All 8 have clean character. All were called in Phase 1. HC visited: Delaney, Mangrum, Haug, Cannon, Seumalo, Kalil, Pfister (7 of 8). Antwine not visited.

GROUP B: 33 New Phase 1 Scouts (Called, Need L5 Character Check)

All scouted to L3 and called in Phase 1. Need L3 to L5 in Phase 2 for character data.

B1: No Character Red Flags (Clean Signals) — PRIORITY FOR PHASE 2 L5

B2: Positive WE Signals Despite Inconsistent Flag

B3: High Upside, Character Flags (Inconsistent / Motor / Effort)

B4: PASS — Not Worth Phase 2 Investment