BuzzerBeater Forums

It wasn't really about winning or losing the game, even if I had lost the game I would have made this post with the huge difference in + and - stats. If you watched the whole game whenever the 6 SB was on the floor he was getting dunked on endlessly, not just by the opposing center but the whole team. When the 10 SB was on the floor they couldn't score. It wasn't just the 5 minutes of overtime where the poor free throw shooting played a factor, the other 12 minutes he played through the game were stretched when my defense performed very well. The difference was night and day and it was result in a 40 point +- differential despite Arias having much better rebounding and scoring stats.

You should keep Arias far from the field, then. :)
However, I wouldn't give to +/- stats such an importance. I will take this as example (39221324) (a recent playoff match of mine, not a scrimmage...). There is a 28 point differential between my two centers, without overtime, but I don't think Frechilla is stronger than Guillemin (ah, if you want to know, Frechilla's SB is lower than Guillemin's one :P ).
Simply, during this match my starting five played nearly only against his one, and so my bench players. But his bench players were by far weaker than mines, while Guillemin had to face a player with 250k salary. I won thanks to my bench players, as you can see with the +/- stats, and that kind of result is absolutely normal.
You know, we should know how much Arias and Indic had played against his starting five, the kind of shots their direct opponents made, etc. It's much more complex that what someone could think.

However, I'm not saying SB is useless at all. I just think that having high SB is anti-economical for your team, if you consider the ratio result/cost.

Last edited by Paco el Niño de Piombo at 11/10/2011 1:14:30 PM

Amazing. Very good example. Hopefully SB finally gets some attention. In my opinion I think it is the most neglected skill as many players argue it is not cost efficient. But I think , as you said, that SB is a very useful skill for Cs.

H

My research parameters when buying a big man:
IS > 14
ID > 13
Reb > 14
SB < 7

I'm not saying SB is not useful (it does more than it shows), but it is still too heavy on salary. Sort of like Reb for Guards.

Why not substitute shot blocking for IS for and outside or neutral offense based team? SB cost half as much as IS and with the prevalence of look inside, a center with skills like 8 IS, 18 ID, 18 SB and 18 RB with solid outside secondaries would be unbelievable.

Non a good idea in my opinion. There are lot's of inside shots even when playing outside offenses and teams with poor secondary attacks don't do so well.

My research parameters when buying a big man:
IS > 14
ID > 13
Reb > 14
SB < 7

I'm not saying SB is not useful (it does more than it shows), but it is still too heavy on salary. Sort of like Reb for Guards.

Why not substitute shot blocking for IS for and outside or neutral offense based team? SB cost half as much as IS and with the prevalence of look inside, a center with skills like 8 IS, 18 ID, 18 SB and 18 RB with solid outside secondaries would be unbelievable.

Non a good idea in my opinion. There are lot's of inside shots even when playing outside offenses and teams with poor secondary attacks don't do so well.

Moreover, if I had such a player I couldn't play anything but R&G (and with worse results, I fear)
I think your PF is not that different from what you say (salary=40k, but ID=17 and SB=11 means IS and RB are no more than 10-11, I suppose...). I'd however prefer a player with more IS, especially in PF position.

I did many tests last season with a player that had good SB. The times i saw he performed better was when he was playing zone, so i doubt the effect it's important on m2m.

Anyway, i still have doubts, also had some weird results...(like being outscored easy in front of him)