BuzzerBeater Forums

I disagree that SFs are the poor man of Buzzerbeater, there are just far fewer good SFs. At the top level, the match up between SFs decides the result as much as any other position.

As for the height thing, the best SF trainees for Buzzer beater are 6'5"-6'8" due to training speeds.

I think the idea of using potential to influence skill groupings rather than one size fits all is interesting. But what you also need to consider is that handling is beleived to be a defensive skill as well as an offensive skill in Buzzerbeater.

There are far fewer SFs because here isn't good training technique enough to make them equal with the rest in the position, and like I said in the last message if it was SGs who didn't have the good training methods then right now people would be content with very few SGs. Taking away SG training like JS/JR would make SG equivelant to SF (give or take with some height to consider) as far as inferior position to train and it would be about the PG & C only. You can see that you won't take that away, but you can't see that its practically the same as taking it away from SF if SF had good training method in the first place

I disagree that SFs are the poor man of Buzzerbeater, there are just far fewer good SFs. At the top level, the match up between SFs decides the result as much as any other position.

It's true, but then you don't get Dwight taking advantage at C vs. LeBron taking advantage at SF match ups. Instead you get Dwight vs Delfino or D Rose vs Beasley. Though you can't really create D Rose in BB.

I simply disagree with you that within the context of a game, the SF training isn't good. It's wicked - and difficult.

I think the guy who said that all the SF trainers are happy with the current system, and it's only those that don't train SFs who want it changed, is correct.

We've already discussed this earlier in this thread, anyway.

Also by the comment you made about SFs, the best SF may be about 200k and yes at division V he would be the best. On average and by percentile comparison you would find the 50th, 60th, 70th percentile SF by skill is inferior to the 50th, 60th, 70th percentile PG or C by their skill. a 90th percentile C may be 40k (sounds too low but there are too many cheap centers go hardly noticed), a SF in the 90th percentile would be about 20k. Thats why not suprisingly, when you try to get a SF at 50k, you would find him much more expensive than a center at 50k. It's the economy of supply and demand and by your statement

I disagree that SFs are the poor man of Buzzerbeater, there are just far fewer good SFs

You clearly indicating the supply is low which is why prices got to be jacked. If anything in real life it's Centers thats harder to find than any other position, but the amount of good SFs should be the same as any other position.

Also if you look at players ratings you will find that SFs on average are lower than centers and point guards.

And exactly as thylacine said, when no good training SFs are available you get such ridiculous displacement of a player in a position he shouldn't play and results in ridiculous matchups but that's how BB started and that's how people would like it. If they started with a thing you can buy Nacho Cheese for 10k on a player he would turn to Michael Jordan, then everyone would love it now and say don't remove the nacho cheese, but implementing such idea right now would sound stupid, but would be normal if thats how BB started things around.

Last edited by Coach_Gil at 3/24/2011 11:25:55 AM

I've been looking for an SF on the TL. Wow, the decent ones go for so much more than any other position players. A really good SF seems to fetch the same price as a really awesome PG or SG. It must be too hard to train a SF or something...

I find out I happen to respond to some of the same comments made as before so of all the things that I have said, read this (174785.82) or this (174785.98) it is by far the best message I written to this point and shows the obviousness of how the SF situation here is flawed and needs changing.

Here it explains why people like the current SF training and can't see the obvious flaw that can be fixed:

I know people would start disagreeing with this, because its all about what people are used to, so if from the begining you had an option to name players Nacho Cheese and if you did then they become good as Michael Jordan, then now everyone be saying don't get rid of the Nacho Cheese labeling I think it's good idea cause it keeps around Michael Jordan. Sounds absurd? well tell me this, there is no way we can get players like Lebron James or Kevin Durant in our league, and thats not absurd??? Oh wait, that's how BB started it, so its good we don't have LBJ or Durant keep it this way and don't change it.

Here Is Important Paragraph People Should Read Also:

If we had a good training system for SFs from the begining and we could have Lebron James or Kevin Durant like players, now if you took the SF training away and make it exactly like it is today, people would think its nuts and stupid and pointless. But no!! it started that way ,so its nuts and stupid to implement a good SF training.

Ok don't believe me, how about lets no longer have training method for SG so no more JS/JR strictly available to them, now its stupid we take it away, right. But if from the begining it wasn't available, it would be stupid to implement it, just as it is stupid to implement better training for SF. Then you have everyone also saying how they like to keep the no SG training with JS/JR, how they love to have them very cheap, they would ask why are SG are disadvantaged, why make comparison to NBA players like Kobe Bryant, Michael Jordan, or Dwayne Wade, and say you don't just do it based on real life. Those that would think that way would in that scenario be contempt to keep SG system that way and not change it just as they do with SF.

Last edited by Coach_Gil at 3/24/2011 11:29:23 AM