S83 Town Hall 4

[Mike Lowry]

How valuable is team chemistry?
Can you throw a collection of great players together and win?
Or do they have to fit in any specific ways?
Guess those of us who have never won a ship will have to guess a little.

Rules: 1 point if you give thoughtful answers, which I will award after the timer ends for responses. The timer ends for responses at the moment the corresponding week's Sim is run.

Note: Use approximately 5 sentences as your bare minimum for 1 point. If you write 3 long, complex sentences, you'll still get a point. If you write 5, 3 word sentences, you will not get a point. Don't @ me.

Due: Due by the deadline for sim 4

[WigNosy]

How valuable is team chemistry?
Can you throw a collection of great players together and win?
Or do they have to fit in any specific ways?
Guess those of us who have never won a ship will have to guess a little.

Depends... what are you defining as "chemistry?" Is it whether players like each other? Is it whether or not they have overlapping skill sets? Is it the "cohesion" rating in FBB?

Generally, I think there is a certain minimum threshold of "things your team needs to do" that has to be met... for example, you probably can't win with a team that runs out 5 starters with a 0 rating in defensive rebounds, but I do think some things are more valuable than others... for example, I think right now, "shooting threes" is not an important skill to have (this will probably change in 20 league seasons) covered, but "defensive rebounds" is a skill you must have some coverage in.

I think to see what "matters" it's a good idea to look at the "Team Leaders" page and then look at where the teams currently atop the standings rank. As a concrete example, look at 1982's Archives and we'll use three-point attempts as our example. The top 5 teams by record were the Bullets (60 wins), Bucks (55), Kings (58), Warriors (66), and Trailblazers (64). These teams ranked #9, 14, 20, 22, and 21 respectively in threes attempted, so clearly that's not something that leads to winning. On the flip side, they ranked #2, 10, 4, 5, and 1 in field goal percentage respectively, so clearly that's important (I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to figure out how to get a high field goal percentage).

[RPF]

Team chemistry is immensely valuable because it acts as the essential multiplier for a roster's raw talent. While a collection of great players can occasionally win a championship, their success almost always hinges on their ability to develop cohesion and trust. Players must fit together through the acceptance of specific roles, as not everyone can be the primary star. Their on-field skills must also be complementary, balancing strengths and weaknesses to form a complete unit. This foundation of role acceptance and complementary talent is held together by deep trust and a shared sacrifice for a single team goal. Ultimately, talent sets a team's potential ceiling, but chemistry is what allows them to actually reach it and win when it matters most.

[BigDaddyd8720]

I think team chemistry matters more for the fringe playoff teams than the top tier teams. Having great chemistry allows for the team to play well together and be in the right spot at the right time. I know for my team over the years, I did not have good chemistry (cohesion) and it showed, along with my lack of talent. Last season, I had put together a competitive roster but they never played with each other so I was a very middle of the pack team, as evidenced by my 41-41 record. This season, my chemistry (cohesion) is even better and it's starting to show as I had so many road games to start the season but still came away with a winning road record. My players definitely got better in the offseason and I added some other really good pieces but even then, if they don't play well together, I'm likely on the outside looking in for the playoff race.

[Darth Vegito]

How valuable is team chemistry?
I will also say it depends on how you define chemistry. I'll make some assumptions here though. It's sim league not RL so we'll go with the definition of Chemistry that makes the most sense in the game which is the Team Cohesion setting. And as far as that setting goes, yes it definitely matters. It takes time in the game for your team cohesion to improve. The players have to be together for a little while, maybe even over a year. I've seen over the years that when you turn over your roster a ton, they have less cohesion and I do think it matters. While I am always trying ti improve my team, I do always consider "Is it worth it to change the make up of my team again and will it hurt their performance more than it helps?"

Can you throw a collection of great players together and win?
I think the answer is yes, but it's NOT easy. I think we will see certain players joining the same team and think "Oh shit that team gonna dominate" and then they don't. It's because of fit, and cohesion, and gameplan ofc. But it goes deeper than just throwing different players on a team each year.

Or do they have to fit in any specific ways?
The answer is without a doubt yes. There's only one ball. You could have 3 offensive guys all with over 90 Inside game. If they all want to take a ton of shots every game and that's historically what they do, it could/will present a problem. But on the same hand, you could have 5 guys with 90 Inside game but they aren't a shoot first player. I don't know how or why some players shoot more than others. But some are much more passive players with the same ratings. It's what separates the stars from the superstars if you will. But they do need to fit in specific ways and we've seen many over the years that do not fit in the right ways and those team do not prosper.

[greepleairport]

How valuable is team chemistry?
Can you throw a collection of great players together and win?
Or do they have to fit in any specific ways?
Guess those of us who have never won a ship will have to guess a little.

FBB3 accounts for chemistry via "cohesion" in its algorithm, in my opinion.

Team chemistry takes your team from good to great, literally. I've had plenty of good teams I wanted to make great, traded up for a better player to add to my rotation, and watch my wins tank in comparison to wear they were. Over time it changed, usually for the better, but sometimes I do think the better player is a worse fit. OR, I'm not sure how to utilize that player to the best of their ability.

I do think however your roster is constructed it needs a certain amount of balance, too. If you have too many of one type of player that fills the same need (i.e. 3 point guards), I think your team will struggle to have good chemistry overall. We'll see if the Lakers can prove me wrong.

[logpmess]

Chemistry is definitely valuable. It allows for players to learn each other and develop together. I always found that assist numbers go up with greater chemistry. I've never done an actual evaluation of this theory, so I'm basing this off of my previous experiences.

Having the right pieces to complement each other is important. You want to make sure that a team excels in all aspects of the game. With that being said, talent does trump all of those items. If your talent just simply exceeds other teams, your squad is more likely to win.

[IamQuailman]

How valuable is team chemistry?
Can you throw a collection of great players together and win?
Or do they have to fit in any specific ways?
Guess those of us who have never won a ship will have to guess a little.

Chemistry isn't the end all be all, but there definitely is some impact that it has on roster building. Many teams trade for studs and give up some other key players in the process.. and we always see those teams struggle a little out of the gate. However, the game has shown that chemistry can improve as the season continues, so it's not necessarily a long time issue. As for great players just being thrown together... depends what you mean by win? Right away, maybe depending on the matchups... but long term, definitely yes. Although fit can also play a role... also usage. I think though that rosters need to be built with intention to do something extremely well and have players that can fill in the holes.

[Xist2Inspire]

I've never been fully convinced of Cohesion's effect on a team's success. Usually it seems like simply keeping the same group of players together for a while will boost Cohesion, and then winning boosts it further. So I'm not sure if wins come from great Cohesion and team longevity, or if great Cohesion comes from team longevity and wins.

Chemistry absolutely does matter, at least in terms of team composition. It's important to have a set team build in mind, then to make sure your key players all have the skillset to execute the gameplan. From there, you can either get role players to fill holes or double down on your strategy by making sure everyone who's getting minutes can execute the gameplan. It's possible to just throw great players together and win, but there's only one ball. So, you have to make sure that those great players bring other things to the table with their skillset. You should also be mindful of shot tendencies or ballhandling deficiencies that will stifle the ability to make the most out of your star power offensively.

[Mike Lowry]

@WigNosy
@RPF
@BigDaddyd8720
@Darth Vegito
@greepleairport
@logpmess
@IamQuailman
@Xist2Inspire

+1 point