BuzzerBeater Forums

People shouldn't be using ratings to explain the outcome of a particular game anyhow.

Excellent conclusion. Instead of:

- The ratings aren't useful, therefore they should be fixed.

You're saying:

- The ratings aren't useful, therefore people shouldn't use them for helping explain their game result.

Bravo.

i believe currently the problem is more to get the ball into the post then converting in, i made good experiece with proficient vs strong or simmiliar rating but i have very much passing in my team and i also sometimes struggle if the opponent close the passing lanes and play 3-2 ;)

Hmm, your game is a good example of the problem I had as well.

I was an inside team, making use of leaks in the old engine by ignoring my guards and using the powerfull inside tactics. My higher IS almost always won from the higher ID.

However in the new engine it isn't that simple anymore. You can't just ignore your guards. You need to have guards that can actually bring the ball to your dominating inside men, thus you need offensive flow in the new engine. Chile clearly lacked that. While they dominated at the inside, the guards took 33 shots. The guards and SF (who was dominated by his opponent) took 54 shots out of a total of 87.

The C/PF took 33 shots, hit 18 of it. That's pretty decent shooting.

I don't know if it's true or not that the IS rating is off, I didn't study many games, but what I do know is that many teams ignored their outside game, focussing on playing a PF/C at the SF position to dominate the inside in the old engine. And that many of those teams, (myself included) started to complain about the inside when the new engine was released. It took me a while to realise the problem wasn't the engine, nor the ratings. It was the lack of ability of my guards to deliver the ball.


Last edited by BB-Patrick at 11/19/2009 12:46:45 PM