The best argument in the thread was ignored completely. Prior to GDP (extra credit for guessing right) you could prepare for an opponent that played the same tactic all the time. Once BB put everyone on notice that points are gained by guessing correctly, then you turn it into a guessing game--if I choose to play along and try to counter those teams that use GDP by changing my tactics. Before, I just got beat by a team that adjusted their tactics to match mine--if teams are evenly matched; or I got beat by a style of play I couldn't defend with my roster.. You could still scout and adjust tactics; GDP changed none of that; it's a gimmick to counter one choice of tactic that was dominating the game.
I use it, but make no mistake: I adjust tactics to keep other teams from feeling comfortable guessing, not because changing tactics enhances the game for me in any way. I much preferred "scouting" pre-GDP. The credit was already built in and it forced teams to adapt by building balanced rosters (or making other adjustments), instead of adapting by guessing that your opponent will play a certain tactic (who, in turn, knowing that you might guess at a tendency, changes tactics so you guess wrong--that is the very definition of a guessing game and it replicates nothing in real basketball that wasn't here prior to BB.) It's the functional equivalent of awarding style points to the score at the end of the game. We don't need synchronized gymnastics here; this is basketball.
In short, GDP is a guessing game gimmick.
PS: God, that was bad even by my standards:
1) GDP adds nothing to the game (but style. points) that didn't exist in the game before.
2) Analyzing tendencies is part of the game; that was possible before GDP.
3) I change tactics to keep people using GDP effectively, but I could do that before GDP if being predictable was costing me games.
4) Creating a roster to counter various tactics is a significant part of the game; all of that could be done without GDP.
Last edited by LDR at 9/29/2019 1:33:39 AM