BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Draft shame

Draft shame

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
28346.20 in reply to 28346.19
Date: 5/6/2008 1:08:43 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
player position is calculated my player skills only... height isnt a factor.

U have a player with all pitfuls and R and SB mediocre and ID respectable, so he has the skills to be a C

This Post:
00
28346.21 in reply to 28346.20
Date: 5/6/2008 4:41:56 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
137137
I do think it might be nice to include height in computation of players, at least in the draft. Honestly, many draftees are being selected for training purposes...so what's the point of drafting a 6"2" PF or center or a 7'1" point guard.

Just my opinion...

Steve
Bruins

This Post:
00
28346.22 in reply to 28346.20
Date: 5/6/2008 4:48:50 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
That´s exaclty why i am suggesting to take the height as a factor!!

Even if it is only for the draft like Bruins coach, Mr. Steve Solana ,suggested.

This Post:
00
28346.23 in reply to 28346.22
Date: 5/6/2008 5:09:28 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
That´s exaclty why i am suggesting to take the height as a factor!!

Even if it is only for the draft like Bruins coach, Mr. Steve Solana ,suggested.

It might be good to make height visible in general terms (short/medium/tall). I don't think it belongs in ratings calculation though.

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
This Post:
00
28346.24 in reply to 28346.23
Date: 5/6/2008 6:22:08 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
66
That´s exaclty why i am suggesting to take the height as a factor!!

Even if it is only for the draft like Bruins coach, Mr. Steve Solana ,suggested.

It might be good to make height visible in general terms (short/medium/tall). I don't think it belongs in ratings calculation though.


It might be good for the draft to make exact height visible in my opinion!
...and it would be more realistic...

but
but
but...

that is only one part of the problem:

and the age??? and salary???

A player
Weekly salary: $ 7 466
DMI: 0
Age: 18
Altezza: 6'11" / 211 cm
Potential: bandiera della squadra
Game Shape: rispettabile
Jump Shot:.: inept Jump Range: respectable
Outside Def: pitfull Handling: inept
Driving: average Passing: atrocius
Inside Shot: respectable Inside Def: respectable
Rebound: respectable Blocking: respectable
Stamina: awful Free Throw: awful
Experience: atrocius

A player
Weekly salary: $ 3 944
DMI: 0
Age: 19
Height: 6'5" / 196 cm
Potential: MVP
Game Shape: respectable
Jump Shot: atrocious Jump Range: mediocre
Outside Def.: average Handling: average
Driving: average Passing: atrocious
Inside Shot: average Inside Def.: respectable
Rebounding: respectable Shot Blocking: awful
Stamina: pitiful Free Throw: average
Experience: atrocious

We don't know if the first is A+ and the second A- (Vitto's player tell us that this is not sure) but ....let's say the first is A+ and the second A- ...is this difference normal in your opinion or there' something wrong?

This Post:
00
28346.25 in reply to 28346.24
Date: 5/6/2008 8:24:45 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
I don't think the difference is normal. For the record, I do agree that the draft is a bit top-heavy as far as the ratings are concerned. I was merely pointing out that it is counterproductive to calculate the height in the star rating formula, in my opinion. It should be provide as some sort of a range in the second scouting report instead.

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
This Post:
00
28346.26 in reply to 28346.25
Date: 5/7/2008 1:28:01 AM
AS Barroom Heroes
III.2
Overall Posts Rated:
10191019
Second Team:
Lone Pine Productions
Range would be fine with me, as long as it is a small enough range to understand at least if a guy is trainable.
For example, instead of having the stats from a single game (often times useless like my atrocious free throw shooter who shot 2-2 in that one game), I would MUCH rather know how old he is and if he is taller than 6'8 or shorter than 6'4 for example.

This Post:
00
28346.27 in reply to 28346.26
Date: 5/7/2008 1:50:26 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
458458
If you have a 7'1" PG, train him in C skills. He will train very quickly because of his age and height. Then you will have a C who can handle the ball and pass and still do the inside work. He will be a better all-around player. Same with the 6'4 C. Train him in SF skills- he already has the inside skills.

Granted, my team is in a league with only a few owners. But, my four best players can play any position and play it well. I have played two seasons now and my combined record is 39-5 and a two-time Champion. So, maybe having a huge guy with PG skills isn't a bad thing, if you develop his bigman skills.

Once I scored a basket that still makes me laugh.
This Post:
00
28346.28 in reply to 28346.27
Date: 5/7/2008 3:07:01 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
3535
If you have a 7'1" PG, train him in C skills

Not if he has atrocious rebounding and pitiful ID (just an example). It would only be a waste of time

This Post:
00
28346.29 in reply to 28346.26
Date: 5/7/2008 3:12:09 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
3535
I would MUCH rather know how old he is and if he is taller than 6'8 or shorter than 6'4 for example.

For the age a solution could be to make it influence the star rating.
The age would still be unknown, but, for example, if a 18yo 5 star has a 4k salary, a 19yo 5 star could have a 5k salary.

You still only see 5 star, but then at least the year more is (partially) compensated by better skills.

This Post:
00
28346.30 in reply to 28346.28
Date: 5/7/2008 4:11:23 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
458458
I totally disagree. By the time he was 22, his inside skills would be well-trained and you would have a 22 y.o center who could pass, drive, shoot, and bang inside for your team for the next 10 years. Does that sound like a waste of time?


Once I scored a basket that still makes me laugh.
Advertisement