BuzzerBeater Forums

they are subs for a reason, rite?

Sort of......

It is important (for many) to keep your game shape as high as possible, which means spreading your minutes around a little more evenly. One games sub may be the next games starter. Depth is more important here than in the NBA. Often times in the NBA the team with the most depth wins it all.....except last year of course.

(ducks and covers, combat roll out the door)

you guys are totally missing my point.

All I'm saying if points matter, don't limit my ability to score them and don't limit my ability to limit them on the other team. That's what is happening when the starters get benched because you outscored your opponent to much in 3 quarters.

Hopefully everyone's starters are better than their subs....if they are not, then they are not maximizing their team. Would you keep Kobe on the bench when it matters, just because you scored a couple more points than 19? You would want to outscore your opponents by 100 if you could, because points matter in this game!!!! So don't take the starters out, is all I'm saying. Your team is being penalized for no reason, because it has outscored the other team by 20+.

For the record - nothing nedds to be changed.

Yes, someone is missing the point.

This isnt the NBA, as I said before depth matters more here than there. Believe me or not, disagree or not, its your choice. If Kobe played in buzzerbeater, and his team started him for both league games in the same week, Kobe would get around 90 minutes. Most players would tell you this is too high to maintain game shape. Its important. Therefore unless you have two crucial games the same week, you may need to choose which game Kobe starts, and which he backs up.

Several times I have started 3 of my primaries, and two secondaries and have still got too the blowout level. In this case my backups still have 2 starters and I start to pull away even more. If you are having trouble with them catching up regularly, I maintain my recomendation that you need to improve your secondaries. Part of the strategy is to predict how well you are going to do, and who needs to start. If you know you should blow a guy out, maybe let Kobe B/U and you kill two birds with one stone. Kobes game shape, and a closer win that doesnt rely on your secondaries to hold the game.

Just trying to help.

This isnt the NBA, as I said before depth matters more here than there. Believe me or not, disagree or not, its your choice. If Kobe played in buzzerbeater, and his team started him for both league games in the same week, Kobe would get around 90 minutes. Most players would tell you this is too high to maintain game shape. Its important. Therefore unless you have two crucial games the same week, you may need to choose which game Kobe starts, and which he backs up.

I agree I just want to add that there are other options to try than just plain starter-backup way. And of course stamina and other things takes place and if BuzzeBeater Kobe would play against BuzzerBeater Bobcats he would foul out anyway,lol.

Edit:typo (at least one)

Last edited by docend24 at 2/6/2009 11:14:11 PM

ok, if i go on, i'll probably get banned....guess i'll have to live with the silly rule, like everyone else, and accept it. "It's just because", your starters get benched when you are 20+ up at the start of the fourth quarter, just because. ;-)

Last edited by ignots at 2/6/2009 9:13:00 PM

starters and substitutes (both backups and reserves) are just words. It is up to you what will you do. Also follow depth chart until 4th quarter could help sometimes. But it is pretty easy to get a decent backup at your level. After all this is only a small part in succesful long term road...

I just want to clarify that I dont disagree with you, I would prefer this rule to be changed as well. I have seen in many similar threads this very same discussion, and I feel many people would agree with you. I have seen people respond and generally believe that the BB's are trying to avoid having brand new players get blown out by 40 points thier first few games and quit. At least this may be one of the reasons this rule is in place. I wouldnt be surprised if there was some sort of altering of this effect in the future possibly. I will be right behind you saying I am happy for it. I just dont think we can expect this to change right away. I offered some solutions to help alleviate this problem for you because it is that way now, silly or not.

I also dont think it is all that unrealistic to have a B/U be a strong player and good scorer. Look at guys like Rip Hamilton or Lamar Odom, who both come in off the bench and have been known to take over games throughout thier carreers. For me, I couldnt really afford a bunch of equally good B/U's to my starters, so I tried to get cheaper guys who played great defense, in lieu of a more balanced and more expensive guy. This way he can at least limit thier players from scoring alot, even if he doesnt score much. Just my choice, but an example.

Not trying to be adversarial at all. Perhaps having seen this discussion on previous threads I skipped over (carelessly) the part about 'yeah, I wish that was different too' and jumped ahead to the 'but heres some things you can do to help'.

Points differential has its limitation as a valid parameter.
Just today in my league, two teams were playing for first place in the other conference. Their points differential is not exactly similar, but close enough. The problem was that current leader played against a bot (winning 25-0) and the other played against a very weak team.
It was very prausiible that the other team will win with over 25 points difference and take the lead, and the leader could do nothing about it.
Just a simple example.

Still, as I said in a former message, since this parameter requires simpler algorithm, it makes sense to use it even if it is not the best one, since it is not that important.

Just don't try to convince me that the best parameters are used, especially since in a case of a tie in points differences - you prefer the team with more points.

If one team plays against a bot more times during the season and score 25 points per game, according to this parameter, this team is weaker. Is it really?
And if one plays "run and gun" and the other "push forwards", does it make the first one better just because the general score is higher?

This second parameter is completely worthless.

So if the problem is simplicity, stick with the current system, but if you find a way to treat the 'head to head' parameter and still, keep it simple, please go for it, cause by all means - it is a better parameter.

Points differential has its limitation as a valid parameter.
Just today in my league, two teams were playing for first place in the other conference. Their points differential is not exactly similar, but close enough. The problem was that current leader played against a bot (winning 25-0) and the other played against a very weak team.
It was very prausiible that the other team will win with over 25 points difference and take the lead, and the leader could do nothing about it.
Just a simple example.

maybe not in that moment, but when he play against the weak opponent the opponent for place one plays he could win higher to be more points ahead. And the second placed team who advancced during this situation, has a 25-0 win against those team too only a bit earlier.
So what happens when the one team has the 25-0 Wo in the week they against each other, and the other team has a second important match that week so he had to play some backups, that would be unfair or not ;) When we construct examples i would say, this one is better.

Just don't try to convince me that the best parameters are used, especially since in a case of a tie in points differences - you prefer the team with more points.

I would say the ebst ones are used, because you could handle point differential consistence, even in the PO finals where a direkt matchup was silly because of the home court advantage ... And both systems, refelct the teams strength, the one more in 2 single games, the other one refelct the game during the whole season.

If one team plays against a bot more times during the season and score 25 points per game, according to this parameter, this team is weaker. Is it really?

25-0 iain't a bad win, i have pretty less games with such a high differental.

But this is the problem, that the league is changing due to activity this made in unfair anyway.