BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > ranting section of those having an upset

ranting section of those having an upset

Set priority
Show messages by
From: nickfox45

This Post:
00
12837.15 in reply to 12837.14
Date: 1/17/2008 2:18:16 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
When you set the orders for a game, it should appear as a choice at the bottom of the page, alongside the tactics and coaching options.

This Post:
00
12837.16 in reply to 12837.11
Date: 1/17/2008 3:27:28 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
Then please explain how crunch time really works, since obviously you have a better understanding of it than I do.


CT improves Defense.

You gave 2 reasons who could possibly be linked to the improved defense of the opposite team. And another that is semi-linked to improved defense.

1. Rebounds...
2. Bad FG% , which could be caused by the opponents improved Defense.

3. (semi linked) His 14 foults could be a reduced foul count due to improved defense. Maybe if he didn't play CT he would have 20+ fouls.

This Post:
00
12837.17 in reply to 12837.16
Date: 1/17/2008 4:34:45 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
1. I said in my original post that the rebounds were probably because of CT

2. His FG % is always bad, it's not just this team. If you go and look at his previous games, you'll see shooting percentages in the 35% for from the field and around 20-25% from 3. That's pretty close to what he shot in this game. That's also what he shot in the last game against this team.

Even if CT slightly improves defense, it didn't affect his 3 point %, which is really what cost him this game.

3. This is pure speculation, you have no proof of this.

This Post:
00
12837.18 in reply to 12837.17
Date: 1/17/2008 8:56:45 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
When did i say i was right and that you were wrong?
Need i explain to you that keywords such as probably, might, possibly, could, all suggest that I'm not sure? Nor can you for that matter. No need to be defensive.

Speculating is part of analyzing and managing, in my opinion. You think of scenario's to try and find out what is the cause of ones failure/success.

Edited by Riceball (1/17/2008 8:58:40 PM CET)

Last edited by Legen...Riceball...Dary! at 1/17/2008 8:58:40 PM

This Post:
00
12837.19 in reply to 12837.18
Date: 1/17/2008 9:20:23 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
When did i say i was right and that you were wrong?

You said that 3 of my reasons could be linked to CT, whereas I said only 1 could be linked. This seems to be our disagreement.

Speculating is part of analyzing and managing, in my opinion. You think of scenario's to try and find out what is the cause of ones failure/success.


You can't just go around saying things might be the case (well you can, but it isn't helpful to sharkboy figuring out why he lost). I've listed stats based on both the game in question and previous games, and you've so far given no evidence whatsoever that your theory of bad shooting % and less fouls are linked to CT.

I agree that there is room for speculation in a game such a this, but not in areas such as game results, when we have solid stats and numbers to examine. Give us something to see your point.

Also, for future reference, I don't need you to explain english to me, and I don't appreciate the sarcasm. If you want to be sarcastic, please go practice elsewhere.

Edited by nickfox45 (1/17/2008 9:27:35 PM CET)

Last edited by nickfox45 at 1/17/2008 9:27:35 PM

This Post:
00
12837.20 in reply to 12837.19
Date: 1/17/2008 9:25:41 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
5050
This is a useful thread. Let's keep it on topic and to the point.

This Post:
00
12837.21 in reply to 12837.19
Date: 1/17/2008 10:08:52 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
Like i said, no need to be defensive.

Are you suggesting that CT had no effect whatsoever on his FG%, because he shot almost the same % in the previous games? So if i play 2 games against the same team with same tactics and Enthusiasm, one i play normal the other i play CT. In both games he shoots 40% FG. Then if i follow your logic... My CT didn't do anything. I might as well played normal. Correct me if i wrong...

As for the fouls, from personal experience whenever i play TIE, i would get 20+ fouls. When i play normal i would have an average of 15 fouls throughout the season.
It's pretty logical to think that if CT and TIE effects Defense that it also has effect on the amount of fouls. Unless you say that Defense and Fouls don't have a link whatsoever.

Edited by Riceball (1/17/2008 10:22:18 PM CET)

Last edited by Legen...Riceball...Dary! at 1/17/2008 10:22:18 PM

This Post:
00
12837.22 in reply to 12837.21
Date: 1/17/2008 10:53:04 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
It's possible that CT had an effect on his FG %, I'm not sure. But just because the FG % is about the same doesn't mean there's no benefit to CT - as we've discussed the rebounding advantage seems pretty significant. As you suggest, there might be other advantages we don't know about yet, I was just saying the game in question doesn't seem to be a huge difference his previous games this season.

I don't know about the fouls either, I'd have to go look at sharkboy's previous games to find out if his fouls are usually in the 20 range, or are lower. He never answered my questions about whether his guys had bad stamina or bad defense, so we don't know if those are the reasons for his high fouls.

And for the record, I absolutely think defense and fouls are linked, I'm just not sure how much I think defense and CT are linked.

This Post:
00
12837.23 in reply to 12837.22
Date: 1/17/2008 11:09:14 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
Yes, that's what i was trying to point out in my first post.

But you can take it to the bank that CT/TIE indeed effects Fouls. I've started playing TIE since mid season. Before that i had an average of 14-16 fouls. (Can't really recall the exact average. )
When i started playing TIE i realized i started committing 20+ fouls.
It's reasonable to assume that it is linked to defense after playing 9 TIE matches and 13 normal matches.

Edited by Riceball (1/17/2008 11:09:49 PM CET)

Last edited by Legen...Riceball...Dary! at 1/17/2008 11:09:49 PM

This Post:
00
12837.24 in reply to 12837.21
Date: 1/17/2008 11:13:34 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
I've thought about this more, and here's what I've got. Even if I think that CT affects defense, that shouldn't affect fouls, because the fouls would largely be called when the team who is CTing is on offense. So you'd argue that CT would make your offense better (thus causing the opponent to commit more fouls) not the other way around.

Unless you think that CT causes your opponent to commit more fouls, but that doesn't make sense to me, and I have proof to back it up. I check several of sharkboy's previous games, and here is the number of fouls he commited:
25, 22, 20, 27, 28, 23, 20, 19
This leads me to believe he just has really bad defenders or bad stamina, or both, and that if there was a CT involved, it had nothing to do with the amount of fouls called.

This Post:
00
12837.25 in reply to 12837.24
Date: 1/17/2008 11:20:23 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
I think you misread my point. My point was that his (the opponent) 14 fouls could have been 21 if he didn't play CT. I wasn't referring to the 20+ Sharkboy made. Sorry if it was misleading.

There is no deny though, that Sharboy' Defense is a bit broken if he has an average of 20+ fouls

Edited by Riceball (1/17/2008 11:21:28 PM CET)

Last edited by Legen...Riceball...Dary! at 1/17/2008 11:21:28 PM

Advertisement