BuzzerBeater Forums

Ok, for points 1&2, player rating are not meant to compare different players, it is a measure of how that player played compared to his own potential. If my star p layer gets a 6.0 and one of my scrubs gets a 7.0 in a certain game it doesn't mean th e scrub was a better player, just that he fulfilled more of his potential in that game. Player rating is not for comparing different players.

I am new to the game, but my interpretation is that when a sub gets higher rating than the star ter he has actually performed better during the time he was on the field. However, the reason for this is that he played shorter time, and therefore he did not run ou t of stamina. I.e. the sub plyed better when he was on the field (and this i refl ected by the rating), but the starter is still a better player.

I have same problem as my_imaginery_friend;) (1289442)

I think the rati ngs aren´t working right. How I have set my tactics and rosters if I know that rati ngs are useless. I have no idea what is important how does the game working.

And all answers are only talking about nothing...no answer talking about main reaso ns why he lost.

Thx for all more useful answers.

sorry for my english;)

That's the biggest upset I've seen in BB.

I dont think he want to fire those guy :x

Transfer History for Daniel Figueras (2556953)
Buyed
Jackson Milicia 02/11/2007 08/11/2007 $78500


Transf er History for Guillermo Pascual (2259270)
Buyed
UNICAJA Malaga 27/10/2007 06 /11/2007 $59000

Ps :Here what it happen when you buy spanish BB players ;D

>>It shows some vague team generalities, <<

They are only 'vague' to you. Read up on the definition of those team indices and perhaps you will get it.

You won 't learn how the game works unless you put in a little effort.

I don't have any problem understanding the report of your game. You shot poorly, and had starters come in with a 3.5 and the rest 5's. Shooting poorly is extrao rdinary bad luck, but it happens. Your players received poor grades for the game.

Yo u had better rebounding and that happened. His guys got good grades, so they pla yed better.

If my game report had read like yours does, I would be happy with t he game report in that it reflected the outcome of my game. I see nothing the matt er with your report.



Edited by Your_Imaginary_Friend (11/15/2007 2:55:56 PM CET)

Last edited by Your_Imaginary_Friend at 11/15/2007 2:55:56 PM

Thanks for the answers. I don't think that's what I'm looking for, however.

1) My opponents always have more assists. In this game, my opponent had 23 assits to my 14, a typical day.

2) I have terrible ball handling skills. This is a new team, so I have a weird mix of skills.

3) We didn't avoid turnovers. We had 24, they had 4.

Villa plays the point because he has the highest combination of Handling and Passing. We are more likely to be incredibly poor at handling the ball than passing it because, overall, the team is better at passing than handling.

Again, I'm not concerned about the loss or being unlucky. I'm concerned that the feedback I received from the game in the form of the player grades and team ratings do not reflect this fact.

I don't believe splitting the offensive flow is the issue. The issue is that I had SIX TIMES the turnovers and far fewer assists, yet got rated awful(high) to his awful(medium) for the game. That should never happen. That it is what needs fixing!