BuzzerBeater Forums

Help - English > Handling and Big guys

Handling and Big guys

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
213218.10 in reply to 213218.9
Date: 3/24/2012 6:56:38 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
406406
Minimum 9 for a good big.

This Post:
44
213218.11 in reply to 213218.10
Date: 3/24/2012 12:09:20 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
8989
Minimum 10 for a better big

From: CoachSK

This Post:
00
213218.12 in reply to 213218.11
Date: 3/24/2012 12:11:07 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
431431
Really depends on what Division your in.. For USA D.V, V.IV you dont need anything higher than 7 and Im sure D.III you dont need more than 8 or 9 and I dont know the rest.

This Post:
00
213218.13 in reply to 213218.1
Date: 3/24/2012 12:54:57 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
455455
I think high handling and passing are the 2 things that people overlook in bigs most often. I like bigs with handing in the 6-9 range. 4-5 would be a minimum level depending on his other skills. I would never consider adding a big with 1-3 handling.

Last edited by Beener not Beanerz at 3/24/2012 12:56:15 PM

This Post:
00
213218.14 in reply to 213218.5
Date: 3/24/2012 2:16:21 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
12061206
I checked few matches and divided points difference by skills difference.

This Post:
00
213218.15 in reply to 213218.8
Date: 3/24/2012 2:19:41 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
12061206
I don't thinks so, I suppose it works only with typical ranges of skills.

This Post:
00
213218.16 in reply to 213218.15
Date: 3/24/2012 5:49:10 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
699699
In lower leagues where you can't buy high primaries, decent secondaries on the bigs certainly help, decent being lvl 5-6.
It's not as much of a boost when primaries are green.

I am also surprised you seem to link handling to shot conversion exclusively.

This Post:
00
213218.17 in reply to 213218.14
Date: 3/24/2012 6:07:36 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
pretty difficult to get accurat numbers but with your result i would go more for no effect, even when i think thsat you need a very big sample to get different opponent and own lineup out of this calculation.

This Post:
00
213218.18 in reply to 213218.16
Date: 3/24/2012 6:56:44 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
12061206
Always 3 is better than 2, 4 is better than 3, 19 is better than 18 and 20 is better than 19, etc. And if You have possibility to have better skills with the same price and salary it is always useful. But it's obvious and it wasn't essence of question.
HN = 2 is acceptable minimum on every level. I saw successful NTs and U20 with PF/C with low HN so it shouldn't be big problem in div V.

In final result we have only points so conversion to points is proper and simple method.
Finally every skill increases number of scored points by own team or decreases number of points scored by opponent.

This Post:
11
213218.19 in reply to 213218.18
Date: 3/24/2012 7:17:13 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
699699
Then why 2 since 3 is better ? :)
My 5 is an educated guess just like your 2.

NT tournaments are very different competitions and yes, low handling doesn't impede success if primaries are high relatively, even in U21. It's different from a league, especially at a level like US D.IV where you need to find an effective balance under economical restraint.

Finally every skill increases number of scored points by own team or decreases number of points scored by opponent.


Probably. Now measuring the effect of each skill when some probably work in group is a more difficult problem to solve than your calculation make it look.

This Post:
00
213218.20 in reply to 213218.19
Date: 3/24/2012 7:44:30 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
Then why 2 since 3 is better ?
My 5 is an educated guess just like your 2.

NT tournaments are very different competitions and yes, low handling doesn't impede success if primaries are high relatively, even in U21. It's different from a league, especially at a level like US D.IV where you need to find an effective balance under economical restraint.

Finally every skill increases number of scored points by own team or decreases number of points scored by opponent.


Probably. Now measuring the effect of each skill when some probably work in group is a more difficult problem to solve than your calculation make it look.


Precisely. For example, adding one more level of rebounding may mean 1 extra possession in a game, while having lower handling might mean one more turnover. If there was a magical tool that would tell the value of each skill in raw points and then comparing it to the salary cost of each additional skillup, of course, we could identify an optimal solution to any player evaluation question. Since we don't have that, though, we get to have these fun discussions!

Advertisement