BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Athleticism

Athleticism

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
178282.20 in reply to 178282.19
Date: 3/25/2011 4:56:24 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
9191
The new skill I'm proposing is just that. BB can call it something else. We can even call it "athletik" :)


but it is still to powerful i think, and bringt nothing new ;) Even that it makes the BB Bigs smaller then now, and with your realism argument the good ones are also to small compared to reality, because they are usually more 2.03- 2.06 then 2.10+. because of the sme reason, why the 2.20 guys in the NBA are rare, because the modern Big plays much more outside, and not so much because they can jump higher when they run.


Sorry, I didn't understand that. Are you saying that there are more 2.03-2.06 guys than the rest in NBA?

This Post:
00
178282.21 in reply to 178282.10
Date: 3/25/2011 6:46:06 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
5555
Just to stop the absurd argument and help people to come out of denial.

BBs player heights divide evenly in three groups:
a) 5'9-6'3
b) 6'4-6'10
c) 6'11-7'5

Question 1: Which group contains most superstars and the best players in real life?

Question 2: Which group contains most superstars and the best players in BB?


I'll have to answer your 2 questions with another question

My Question: Do we really need to answer these questions when they are fairly obvious?

My Answer: If people can't see that its obvious SFs are scarce and 5'9 or 7'5 have advantage over 6'7, then we have to be questioning what is obvious, which you provided those 2 questions and albeit obviousness it needs to be answered.

Answer 1: They're about equally divided but argument can be made as well that some position are bit stronger than others.
Answer 2: Centers most of all with PG/SG not far behind. Good question to ask in this is which position has least superstars in BB and the obvious answer is SF.

Last edited by Coach_Gil at 3/25/2011 6:47:58 PM

This Post:
00
178282.22 in reply to 178282.20
Date: 3/25/2011 6:50:41 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
The new skill I'm proposing is just that. BB can call it something else. We can even call it "athletik" :)


but it is still to powerful i think, and bringt nothing new ;) Even that it makes the BB Bigs smaller then now, and with your realism argument the good ones are also to small compared to reality, because they are usually more 2.03- 2.06 then 2.10+. because of the sme reason, why the 2.20 guys in the NBA are rare, because the modern Big plays much more outside, and not so much because they can jump higher when they run.


Sorry, I didn't understand that. Are you saying that there are more 2.03-2.06 guys than the rest in NBA?


i mean the pf and center are often in this size, at least the good ones.

This Post:
00
178282.23 in reply to 178282.21
Date: 3/25/2011 6:57:01 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
5555
I think the important thing to consider from this forum is not to be too hung up by the name "Athleticism" for all it matters it can be named "Austin Powers Mojo". The real focus should be on the idea that a training method that better appeals to 6'7 guys should be implemented and if what he proposed would pretty much more or less balance so 6'7 could be trained like 5'9 or 7'5 at the SF then its realistic. It's better to do what would most of all balance training for 6'7 with the 5'9 or 7'5. So for sake of balancing, if certain tweaking to his suggested ideas would be better to make it more balance or realistic as a SF then that's what it should be. I think he would also support that whatever is done, that it would be as realistic as possible to allow 6'7 to train well at SF.

Message deleted
This Post:
00
178282.25 in reply to 178282.22
Date: 3/25/2011 7:11:37 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
9191
i mean the pf and center are often in this size, at least the good ones.
In BB or RL?

This Post:
00
178282.26 in reply to 178282.25
Date: 3/25/2011 7:21:08 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
BB

This Post:
00
178282.27 in reply to 178282.22
Date: 3/25/2011 7:46:40 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
9191
i mean the pf and center are often in this size, at least the good ones.
Different reasons for that:
The salaries for bigs skyrocket, The giants are better but you cannot afford them.
The 6'8 PFs that you mention might be better and well-rounded, but it has taken the poor Chinese farm team 8 seasons with a lvl 7 trainer, playing them out of position most of the time to achieve that.
The fact that you find these players, doesn't mean they're not underprivileged.
What exactly is the reason to make it difficult for SFs? If that's the only system BB could implement at the start to make sense out of it all, I understand. But now with all the experience and such ingenious solution (see top), one cannot help but wonder if this tweak is not the only way forward:)

Last edited by thylacine at 3/25/2011 10:39:13 PM

This Post:
00
178282.28 in reply to 178282.27
Date: 3/26/2011 4:04:03 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
The salaries for bigs skyrocket, The giants are better but you cannot afford them.


but thats also a thing you have to consider, and i wouldn't be sure if it just the salary. i searched for one monster before my last cup game, and this lituanian 600k center, is pretty strong but i wouldn't be sure that he is stronger then Fagot who is probadly one of the best 5 PF on NT level even on Center position and get less then the half of his salary.
And if you want to train bigs, you also have to watch for B-Skills if you want to earn money and you didn't need 8 seasons of offseason farming for it. Even when you had to play them from time to time outside, but you do it most on position and there are always some weeks where you can do "crazy" stuff like that because your opponent plays crappy or is so good that you don't have to try.

This Post:
00
178282.29 in reply to 178282.28
Date: 4/4/2011 9:00:45 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
9191
Why go crazy? Why complicate things? Why not have a SF playing at SF for ONE skill development as every other position? Actually, do PFs have a skill? No, they don't, so playing them at SF would be an advantage vs Cs played at SF. and an option of Forwards training in Athleticism.

Last edited by thylacine at 4/4/2011 9:05:17 PM

This Post:
00
178282.30 in reply to 178282.29
Date: 4/5/2011 12:00:22 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
5555
it goes back to the nacho cheese example, if to start off you can feed your players and they can be as good as michael jordan, then thats what everyone wants. From the begining they didn't provide good SF development, that's what everyone wants. That's the Nacho Cheese Icing

Advertisement