BuzzerBeater Forums

interesting theory. can you elaborate on the "open" being worse observation?

Just observation from watching live games way too often. My theory, although I think a BB has claimed otherwise, is that an "open" shot is essentially contested by the opposition's team defense (so an "open" shot against a poor defense is easy, while an "open" shot against a team with very good OD is very likely to miss). I know for several seasons I had noticed that my players had a higher shooting percentage on contested jump shots and threes than they did on uncontested ones, although the tool on the USA offsite that was used to track the advanced stats has not worked for several years now. It also fits in with the number of times where I see players have uncontested layups miss (which seemed to be quite frequent in the Princeton team).

There may be more to it, like the quality of the passer vs. the OD that determines how "open" an uncontested shot is, but honestly I've got more confidence in my players shooting over someone than I do in them on uncontested shots at this point.

Did anyone tried to have a starting five of players, each having a combine JR and JS of 18 or higher?

That could possible reveal things.

I think we've already reached a point where LI is no longer the no-brainer tactics in competitive games. It'll be hard to construct princeton with a cheap salary roster though. As far as I understands it, this is the one tactics that almost require every aspect of the offensive repetoire for at least 4 of the 5 positions. A top princeton team probably will be very strong, but probably would be quite costly as well

I partly agree. But only because the BBs finally made overpowered Secondary skills more expensive. Remember the times when Pointguards had 18+ OD and an IS of 17+ with a salary of around 60K?

As far as I understood, reading several forums over the past few years, LI was never considered to be THE strongest offense-tactic by the GE-Design. It´s just, that it is the most efficient tactic based on money and neccessary skills. As you point out, for outside tactics a wider skillset is required to be as efficient as a LI-Team.

Therefore a lot of teams went to LI. For building a B3 competitive outside team your need more high level multi-skilled player wich are 1. extremly rare 2. extremly espensive 3. hard to train (nearly impossible for 1 team even with lvl 7 coach)

Sure, the current B3 champion won with Princeton quite clearly, but honestly his country has only 43 active teams. So he´s making a lot of money by being at least in the D2-league for several seasons now.

For countries with a bigger community, this won´t be possible. That´s why they went to LI.

One interesting explanation I´ve read was that some people consider OD (Outside Defense) as overpowered. To be honest, I also think that OD should be a bit more expensive. Compared to its tactical benefits OD is very cheap. It works against at least 4 Offensive skills (DR, JS, JR, HA (not 100% sure about PA), which are quite hard to train.

And when you´re training OD the players ID will be trained as well (not much though but still!). So to my opinion an outside team efficiency can be limited easier just by 1 or 2 player with OD 17+. I think that the effect is more noticeable than it would be for a LI-Team. Against LI you need OD for stopping the DR. ID+BL for good defense rotations for shot attemps in the zone. So basically you need 1 skill to defend efficiently against Outside teams but 3 skills against LI-Teams.

Even though our B3 Champion is proving me wrong, I think that he´s an exception and we will see either other extremly strong multiskilled teams from small countries or LI-Offenses at the top competitive level.

PS: Quite interesting though that both teams chose a tactic with relatively low midrange shooting at the B3 final game.

Last edited by Bommy at 1/4/2018 4:42:02 AM