BuzzerBeater Forums

i believed in this discussion was more post about shot blocked just affect blocked shots, and also should do it in the future because you don't like to have to skills for one propose ;) Also from your side, so we could discuss the effetiness from shot blocking on such "quotes" or not?

Or why we could discuss about shotblocking on even older post, that shot blocking was in ID RATING, which wasn't used in game(OD Rating bug with JS) and only a try to make the engine easier to understand.

If it changed, and sb now alters block i would be happy if you told us for us and in this case i change my way in judging about SB as a skill. but with the given point of information, Blocking is just for blocked shots, and we should view it like that if it still a skill which makes players weaker(potential, salary for nearly no effort) or get useful with the change.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 7/29/2009 8:31:55 AM

The point of the discussion is that often in NBA the ability of a player in defence is measured only by blocks and steals,but they are not so good method to evaluete the defence of a player.It is true that a good shot blocker can influence some inside shot,but a good defender is a good defender also if he don't jump as a donkey to make some block,but if defend hard with body and with the brain
In a game in which the ability to block shot had to be differenced form the ability to defend,it's hard to estabilish the real weight of SB skill in the contest of the inside defence,and it is right that SB skill has less importance than the pther skill for the big mans

i don't want to kill inside defence as a skill, but i like to see blocking skill worth what you pay for ;)

And as a said three or for times, good blocking don't means high blocked numbers for me, it also includes the decision when to jump off for a block. Many of the good blockers in numbers i know act like a an "boomer" and jump of in every possibility and give easy shot that way. But also a try to blcok a shot often altered shots instead of punshing it away, so it would be possible to influence the Inside defence skill with the blocking skill to make it more useful.

But also a regulation in salary and potential things would be ok for me, because it doesn't punish people who doesn't train it before.(even if the blocking training is in this case still a pretty useless function)

Last edited by CrazyEye at 7/29/2009 9:06:35 AM

A regolation in salary could be made on all the skills,not only for SB
And is known that in temrs cost-benefits SB is the worst skill in the game.And the decison to jump for blocking skills,as you say,could be good for players who have yet a great inside defence:they decide to jump thanks to thier defence ability at right time to influenced the shot.But at that point,however SB skills would be useful for what si paid
And I think that if someone made wrong decisions training too much SB,it's fair that the potential and salary "punishes" him,as if they train at legendary level handling with an awful JS

1 and 0. Although I didn't find the "1" and I am guessing I could search around and find cousins to this. It is super unusual...and I get that...but 200,000 games? I thought we were talking about the relatively few games in comparison with the new engine?

You GM's can explain and defend it however you want, but

GMJuicePats says he sees "88-44"
GM K says look at it as 50-1 on one side of the floor, and 38-43 on the other
Some say look at it 38-1 to offensive rebound margin.

How can ANY of those be defended? We are just saying "hey..check out this weird game. Do you think it is the new additions to the system?" I understand you are going to defend it and you should. It will work out. You know more about it than we do. ..but to blow "look at it this way" smoke with THAT game? No sir. Nope. THAT game is F'd up ...and maybe a "that IS weird," as opposed to "you are looking at the numbers wrong" would do sometimes. I am guessing that would cut down on threads by appeasing us little people.


Last edited by Burger Chef at 7/29/2009 12:58:11 PM

for example in rebounding they make the skill mroe worthfull in high regions, in going to absolute difference and not taking relativ one anym more which amke the different lower.

And also SB, nearly have a effect on game only on salary, and for example in the newby help sticky it is one of the important skills for the centers. In the past there are many misleading pos, because of altered shots who was think to be a part of the game also becuase of the pst of charles about the ID rating.

In the other skills i see improvement when i training then, even if it in high categories expensive but in my eyes it sis tstill worth. And for SB i know people who thing also high starint values for trainees are bad, and they have succes with it.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 7/29/2009 10:06:37 AM

can i ask what margin you think would be appropriate for a 3.5 level difference?

Someone seemed to suggest that 30-9 was more appropriate (the difference between 3 pointers).

(now first off I don't accept that 3 pointers are the same as rebounds in terms of how they distribute based upon ratings differences... but even if i do)

than you are talking about the difference between 38-1 vs 38-9.... and i would hold that probably 38-1 was really fluxish, and if you ran the game again you would probably have more... maybe the average is 5 boards... now you are really complaining about a difference of 4.... and then really what are you arguing about?

of course when you are so dominated on the offensive boards, the noise involved in small numbers can make the proportional numbers seem huge.. but just cause you got 1 this game doesn't mean that happens all the time.

If newby help sticky is wrong you have to change it,not the game.And Yeah,maybe the coefficients for high levels could be lowered,but this is not related to SB

I don't know what would be appropriate. That is up to you dudes putting it together. I am merely saying "crazy game here." I know it doesn't happen all the time, but I dislike it being defended by telling me I am looking at numbers wrong. If we can't know all the metrics involved, then don't tell us in such ways.

I see what I see. 38-1 in Offensive Rebounding margin is just that. 50-1 on one side of the floor? Come on guys. It shouldn't happen once. But since it did = "crazy game" not "you are looking at this wrong."

38-9, to me would be the bottom end of "fluxish" ..not 38-1.

(not suggesting this, just examples) It is a HUGE difference between 38-25, 38-20, 38-15. ....but 39-5? 39-1?
38-25 on the O-boards should win you a majority of your games. The funny thing is...the guy who got out rebounded on the offensive boards 38-1 .....WON!

I accept 38-1 OR for 1 game, maybe my players were lazy ok.

But, the point I wanted to reach with my first message was if my rival would get same amount of OR playing "individual defense" or "3-2". And no one answered to this.

I´m aware of 3.5 levels are too much, but this is a consecuence of his "2-3 Zone" that made him really strong on his zone but I also think in mine <--- That´s the problem.

38-1, 38-8, 38-20, I don´t care about this if you assure me that playing another kind of defensive strategy would make him get all those offensive rebounds.

Bye

Last edited by Mr.Mac at 7/29/2009 10:59:28 AM

I disagree. When a player is in the corner, he is being defended on two sides already. This allows the wing who covers the corner to overplay any return pass plus it limits the options for the offense. As well, with a third man free throw line extended instead of down low, the skip pass is more easily defended. In a 3-2 zone, the top three players move as a unit, with a slightly wider spacing. Any penetration between must be pinched by the defenders on either side of the attacker.
As for your point about 2-3 defending better in the corner, my problem with that has always been that on one side of the floor it will be a big man who has to close out an outside player. I assume you have played and you know that moving from the block out to the corner while playing a 2-3 zone is not an easy skill. When the match-up is the other team's best driver against a lumbering big man, the results are not great. On the other side of the court, with the small forward down low things are better. But I prefer to have my three best and quickest players defending on the perimeter.

I do agree with your first statement about the origins of playing zone. If a team couldn't its outside shots, pack all five guys in the key and get some rebounds. I think that zones have developed into more complete defenses. The 3-2 is an adaptation to keep rebounders down low but extend the range of the zone, and 1-3-1 goes even further, often including aggressive trapping in the corners and when a perimeter player loses his dribble.