BuzzerBeater Forums

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

ranting section of those having an upset

Set priority
Show messages by
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

This Post:
00
12837.26 in reply to 12837.25
Date: 1/17/2008 11:28:43 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
You're right, I did misread that. I just went and checked Toys BC's (his opponent) fouls for the last few games, and I found this:
23, 10, 18, 17, 13, 19, 21, 13, 17

There is a pretty large variation there, but the average of those is 17 fouls, which leads me to believe that CT (it it was a CT) doesn't affect fouls.

Also, the last time sharkboy played this guy, the fouls were 28 to 17 in favor of Toys BC, so it's not too far from the result this time.

This Post:
00
12837.27 in reply to 12837.26
Date: 1/17/2008 11:33:32 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
What I'm thinking right now is that there wasn't a CT in a first place.

It makes sense to me that Defense effects fouls and opponent FG%. According to the statistics, Fouls and FG% hasn't been altered. Which makes me question if the opponent indeed used a CT....

This Post:
00
12837.28 in reply to 12837.27
Date: 1/17/2008 11:40:28 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
Frankly, I agree. I think sharkboy's upset isn't much of an upset at all. ;)

This Post:
00
12837.29 in reply to 12837.28
Date: 1/17/2008 11:43:47 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
Hope he reads this, otherwise it was all for naught.

This Post:
00
12837.30 in reply to 12837.29
Date: 1/17/2008 11:56:59 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
5050
Oh, I don't know. I've enjoyed it ;)