I've played it, and these guys aren't quite right.
Here is the exact data posted in the other forum about the new tactics- I have two games worth.
First Game
set it to TIE, expecting to lose the game, and ended up doing a lot better than I'd thought- here's some raw stats for the game.
My starting SG played the full 48 minutes, and took 25 of the team's 89 shots, roughly 28% of the total shots taken.
My starting PG payed the full 48 minutes, and took 7 of the team's 89 shots (missing them all, might I add?), a bit less than 8% of the total shots taken.
The SF Position was split 26/19/3 between 3 players, with some stats not quite accurate, because two of the three got a couple minutes at Center. I'll estimate that 29 of the team's 89 shots were taken at SF, about 30% of the total shots.
The PF position was played by the same guy the full 48 minutes. He took 12 shots during the game, about 13% of the total shots. He also led the team with 13 rebounds.
The Center was split between 5 players (strangely enough!?!) with 44 of those minutes being split between 3 players that can provide me reasonable statistics, because the other 4 minutes were by players who played mostly SF.
The team's rebounding suffered severely. Only 36 rebounds is the lowest number of rebounds the team has gotten since season 11 (my first season in BB). That being said, 13 of those 36 rebounds, over 1/3 of the total, were made by the Power Forward. The starting Center, who played 34 minutes, only had 2 rebounds. He also fouled out.
20 assists is a large number for my team; the average my team usually gets is around 13-16 a game.
At least 5 and at most 9 of those assists were made by the Center position, the reason I say this is because of the one player who got 3 minutes at Center and 26 at SF, who had 4 assists. The starting center had 5 assists in 34 minutes.
4 assists were produced from the SG position, and 4 were produced byt he PF position. 2 assists were produced by the PG, and the remaining assists (at least 1, and at most 5) were by the SF.
Second Game
I can't specify how fast the pace was of the game featuring Outside Iso, but...
Knowing he was using Look Inside, a 4 of 5 pace (I'm use a number system to judge pace so that I know, 5 being fastest, 1 being the slowest.
In the past, I've played a majority of Run and Gun, which is a 5 on my system, I'd played a couple of games against look inside. The most recent of which was a game in which the total number of shots taken was 190, with 22 total turnovers. Comparing this to a Look Inside vs Outside Iso game, in which there were 186 shots taken and 20 turnovers, I'd estimate the pace of an Outside Iso offense to be around a 3.7-4.0 on a 5 point scale.
Looking back, I found an additional set of data which might be helpful. Late last season, I played a scrimmage. I hadn't noticed until now that my opponent used Outside Iso (and Outside Box and One). The data is a bit skewed due to players playing multiple positions during the game, but I'll try to estimate to the best I can.
WOW, this data is gonna be hard to sum up about right- one guy played 3 different positions it appears.
SF took about 35 of 101 shots- that's 34.65% of all shots. 13 of those shots were 3 point shots.
SG took about 23 of 101 shots- that's 22.77% of all shots. 16 of those shots were 3 point shots.
PG took about 12 of 101 shots- that's 11.88% of all shots. 4 of those shots were 3 point shots.
PF took about 20 of 101 shots- that's 19.08% of all shots. 2 of thsoe shots were 3 point shots.
C took about 12 of 101 shots- that's 11.88% of all shots. 1 of those shots was a 3 point shot.
The team was much better than me, however, so this data's a bit different than an equil-ish matchup.
63 rebounds for the team, divided 28 to the C, and 15 to the PF.
15 turnovers, 6 of which were given by the PF position.
19 assists, including 8 for the starting PG, 6 for the starting SG, a