BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Outside attack too strong ?

Outside attack too strong ?

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
125704.307 in reply to 125704.306
Date: 1/23/2010 5:39:03 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
144144
If you search the right combination of players and skillsets, the inside offense is still very effective. Unfortunately I still see many teams playing the tactic with oldskool players, that's not gonna help you.


maybe vlad romagnoli is an oldschool player.

:D

This Post:
00
125704.308 in reply to 125704.305
Date: 1/23/2010 5:58:31 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
506506

This team f.e Dutch Pacers (38253) managed to make the required changes. I'm still hoping I succeeded as well


(18109987)

greetings.



Scroll up a bit, I already commented on this game, message 250 or something.

Last edited by BB-Patrick at 1/23/2010 6:00:10 PM

This Post:
00
125704.309 in reply to 125704.308
Date: 1/23/2010 6:24:57 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
144144
i read it later but, sorry, i think your reply isn't well-fitting.

i think you can't justify the defeat for the absence of a player or commenting other matches.

give me/us a better clue...

ps: i've seen a game of mine in this tread... (17979586)

it's funny to see this game :)

it's funny to see the MRs of my big men and compare them to competitors :D

a 5 levels superiority attack/defence couldn't be enough to win with a squad who has a 2 levels superiority with equal offensive flow and more of 2 levels at rebound


From: Shoei

To: RiP
This Post:
00
125704.311 in reply to 125704.310
Date: 1/23/2010 8:05:39 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
11
i have yet to see a big man with sensational passing, add that to very high rebs and ID.

sell me i might be wiling to even put 8 million on that guy especially with mediocre JS and JR

This Post:
00
125704.313 in reply to 125704.306
Date: 1/23/2010 9:54:27 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
Actually, this is a pretty good example of how high "flow" can get you what you want in an inside offense. The vast majority of your shots went through your PF and C, I think close to 50%. Sadeh took 11 shots, but no other player was really chucking very much. I assume that the SF guarding Thomas had a pretty good amount of inside d, his pts per 100 is pretty low.

I put the flow in quotes because Thomas is a great ball distributor, which really helped you to get the ball inside here. I'm not sure if that is showing up in the match report, though.

Anyhow, what distribution to your PF and C would make you happy here?

On the other hand, take a look at the rebounding line for the SFs in this game. On paper you should have a rebounding edge, but in the individual match-ups Thomas lost it for you. I don't know if that's the difference in the game, but it was certainly a factor.

Last edited by HeadPaperPusher at 1/23/2010 9:57:45 PM

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
This Post:
00
125704.314 in reply to 125704.313
Date: 1/23/2010 10:47:29 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1919
I will not accept your analysis that Thomas lost the game. It was clear that Romagnoli missing 12 of his 27 shots cost me the game. However, I am slowly becoming persuaded to give Thomas a little rebounding sooner than later. I just wish it was not so expensive for marginal contributions ...

This Post:
00
125704.315 in reply to 125704.314
Date: 1/23/2010 11:06:33 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
196196
I'll lend you a couple of bucks if your short. I'll even gift you the cash for an extra RB level if you leave Romagnoli out of our next encounter!!

Message deleted
From: brian

This Post:
00
125704.317 in reply to 125704.314
Date: 1/23/2010 11:36:37 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
I just wish it was not so expensive for marginal contributions ...


That really is bizarre, esp the effect it has on guards. It's so high you have to wonder if it's a mistake.

Last edited by brian at 1/23/2010 11:36:51 PM

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
Advertisement