BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Small Forwards' ratings.

Small Forwards' ratings.

Set priority
Show messages by
From: eMat
This Post:
00
110979.1
Date: 9/12/2009 3:09:53 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1010
What's wrong with them? Why do they suck so much? Why is a "small forward" with solid skills almost always better off as a SG or a PF? You take a small forward who earns 10k a week and he'll get a 6.5 rating on average. You take any other position and a 10k/week player will give you at least an 8 regularly. It obviously has no basis in reality (hell, the best player in the world is a SF). Once in a while I see someone on the transfer list that's cheap and has the same strengths as all the rest of SFs yet gets 8+ rating every game. What gives? Or am I a fool for paying any attention to the ratings in the first place?

From: uncreative

To: eMat
This Post:
00
110979.2 in reply to 110979.1
Date: 9/12/2009 3:49:36 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
11
Probably because small forwards need some of everything. Guards and big men can ignore half the skills in the game.

This Post:
00
110979.3 in reply to 110979.1
Date: 9/12/2009 3:53:23 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
404404
if a SF doesnt'have any kind of defence(your Sf have low OD and ID)obviously will have a low rating)

This Post:
00
110979.4 in reply to 110979.3
Date: 9/12/2009 4:24:20 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
But if you put the SF at guard, he would take his poor defense with him. Does not explain why he would get a higher rating at guard than at SF.

This Post:
00
110979.5 in reply to 110979.4
Date: 9/12/2009 5:00:26 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
404404
because it consdier less important the low inside defence in the Guard positon than in the Sf position

This Post:
00
110979.6 in reply to 110979.3
Date: 9/12/2009 6:13:35 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1010
Oh, I'm not referring to my SF. Just go check out the SFs available for transfer - even the ones with strong inside and outside defense either aren't very good or cost millions. Unlike any other position, there doesn't seem to be any middle ground - you either have a poor SF for cheap or spend millions for a decent one.

This Post:
00
110979.7 in reply to 110979.1
Date: 9/13/2009 7:06:28 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
458458
The player rating is a reflection of the skill strengths used by the GE in calculating the decisions that are each "game". A SF has a wider range of skills measured more evenly than a C or PG. Naturally a SF will have lower ratings unless he has a wide range of very high skills.

Well, that is my opinion anyway.

Once I scored a basket that still makes me laugh.
This Post:
00
110979.8 in reply to 110979.6
Date: 9/24/2009 9:58:21 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
you should also check the strength of the league those SFs on the transfer market are from....the same SF will have different ratings if he played in NBBA vs if he played in India D.III

This Post:
00
110979.9 in reply to 110979.8
Date: 9/24/2009 11:37:56 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
458458
Would he? I don't think this is accurate. He would certianly have different statistics, but I think the player ratings are independent.


Once I scored a basket that still makes me laugh.
This Post:
00
110979.10 in reply to 110979.9
Date: 9/25/2009 3:16:48 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
I highly doubt this. Last season my C and PF got ratings of 10+ against every team but one. When I played him, the ratings dropped to 8.5-9.5. So, the opposition clearly has something to do with the ratings. (Gameshape varied between strong and proficient the entire season, so that can be ruled out)

Last edited by Wolf_Apostle at 9/25/2009 3:26:43 AM

This Post:
00
110979.11 in reply to 110979.10
Date: 9/25/2009 3:38:09 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
458458
Are you speaking about Broekman? Because if you take a look at his season 9 stats, he began getting 8.5, 7.5, 9.5 etc. before going up to 10+. This season he is already up to 10, after starting at 8.5. You are the only team that has played him, seeing as you drafted him in season 6.

Once I scored a basket that still makes me laugh.