BuzzerBeater Forums

I really wasn't into the mood to start replying your points and when I see so many people doing it, I just to decided to add that there is no such a pain to have to train your C as a PF when he has OD 1 or 2. Just switch defensive roles with your PF so can have his higher OD at defense.

Yes, you will still have a lower performance but remember the trade off between low term and long term. Maybe you are just trying to defend something you were really sure -and some others are too- without really listening what others might be saying or the experiences they might have had.

Just trying to give you another perspective of the dialogue I'm seeing.

If u r training 2 positions then 1 of u r big men has to play SF. U cant train 1 position PF.

This is no sms text, you don't have to pay for the extra characters :)

Last edited by Newton07 at 1/2/2010 9:12:40 PM

You are not obliged to choose a big man with OD 1 for your team. Many do otherwise.

I agree. I find secondary skills for C-PF more important than for PG-SG. Passing and OD are very valuable for C-PF. They are a pain to train, that's why I would rather chose a trainee with lower primary skills but better secondaries.

For PG-SG, ID is quite important, but it trains with OD, so you can expect 1 or 2 pops in it. Reb is also useful, but it costs quite a lot in salary (and also in potential cap).

And last, I would pay to have the other teams in my league training SB :)

Hello,

I loose and I have some difficulties to understand it...

I don't understand why my centers do not make the difference for this game Look Inside Ofense vs a Man to Man Defense...

I need some help please

This is my game.... http://www.buzzerbeater.com/match/17982931/boxscore.aspx

Team ratings

My Inside Scoring prolific (medium) vs Inside Defense respectable (high)
My Outside Defense proficient (low) vs Outside Scoring average (high)
My Inside Defense respectable (low) vs Inside Scoring average (high)

average (low) Rebounding average (medium)
mediocre (medium) Offensive Flow average (high)

Both teams played with the same effort.

How Can he be better than me in "Points per 100 Shots" for Inside spot if he has a worst team rating?

Both team choose a wrong defensive game, But my inside man are much better than other team.

Inside men:

My Center $ 244 929 (Game Shape: strong) vs other $ 37 505 (Game Shape: respectable)
My PowerForward $ 99 853 (Game Shape: proficient) vs other $ 35 616 (Game Shape: strong)

Thanks in advance

The new engine should have an incident on trading... Is it the goal of the new engine to change trading rules?


Last edited by OoB at 1/3/2010 12:02:36 AM

I think my 3 points attack is prefect

If you go to the training page, select passing and then select "team" your center will get passing training. If you choose not to train this way, or by playing your center at either PG or Sg, which is also an option, then you choose not to. Do not reply with some blather about that not being possible or feasible or efficient. I don't care. You CAN train passing for your centers. I have and do.

This player (3201582), a backup on my team, averages 5 assists in 22 minutes per game.

You are dead wrong in your analysis of the SPurs. Parker ran circles around the whole league that year. Manu was great as well, but if he didn't have Parker necessitating help d almost every possession he wouldn't have had half the success he did. And my point about the Lakers was that they had a guy named Kareem Abdul Jabbar playing with Magic. Kareem was twice the player Shaq or Duncan or Howard have ever dreamt of being. No team wins the title with only a great center or a great point gurad. The Bulls are the closest to ever winning being a one-man team, because Jordan was a one-man team.

Hello,

I loose and I have some difficulties to understand it... I choose a defense "man to man" and his defense is not appropried (i play R&G et he choose a zone "2-3")...

http://www.buzzerbeater.com/match/17982936/boxscore.aspx

My evaluations are best and I am better in "Points per 100 Shots" !!!

What's the solution ? Take player with just secondary and no shoot, no defense ???

The result are ridiculous sometimes !!!

I think you're OT, we are discussing here about the efficency between outside and inside attack, in your case both played outsde (an your opponet had better effort than you), there is another thread where discussing about it. The only point can be useful here is how a 2-3 defense can work against an outside attack...

Still the efficiency is a very big factor when we train. Why for example we dont train a 6'0 player with great starting big men skills as a big men? Again u can train 7 guard skills without having to put u r player out of his position, but big men only 4.

Parker is great 15 foot and in player with amazing quickness/speed etc, but has never been considered as a great PG. Yes his drivings helps to open space for the shooters, but he is never considered as a great PG. Great player yes, great PG NO. For sure u cant win the ring alone, as good player as u r u need great players next to u but my statement was ''what's the last time that a team with PG being the best player have won the ring?''. U can argue that Jabbar is better than Tim,(even if am not sure that i agree but its not what we are debating) and maybe u r right, but the fact is that the Dunkan always considered by far the best player of the Spurs. Magic was considered the best player of those Lakers teams too.

Jordan was the only 1 who won rings without a dominant big man, but that again Rodman will be insulted even if he was the best role player ever, but still a role player.

All those those great big men had 1 common aside from the other things. Everybody had great passing skills something that we cant train with efficient way.

Well.. He had an amazing outside defense and your guards just couldn't put the ball inside. My opinion.