BuzzerBeater Forums

I don't weight matchups like you do, because I know I would be doing something wrong and I would generate poor information to take deiciosions. That is why I don't make that analysis like you do.

I prefer to assume that I don't know the shot distribution and work from there.

So, I watch live games in order to understand what is happening in the court to later constrast it with the information provided by the game resume.

One of the main issues of the game resume is that it doesn't provide any meaningfull information about time. What I'm really intrested are the "real" matchups that ocurr during the development of the game. Because, that is what is going to determine what happens or not in a game. Not the game resume.

this is from BB-Forrest:

"..the matchup ratings are a measure of offensive efficiency and will continue to be calculated in exactly the same way. Obviously how efficent you are is a function of who is guarding you, so in that way they are affected by defensive swaps i suppose.."

what i understand from this sentences is; even if you don't watch a game where zone defenses are used, you can have some useful informations about the shots by looking at the match-up ratings because they take the swaps into account..

Sorry, I still can't find the way to see the matchup value of my starter PG against my rival starter PG, my bench PG against my rival starter PG, etc.

Because, one value doesn't provide you that info, right? So, it doesn't tell you the story when considering time, right? Then, game resume doesn't consider time* while viewing the game live it does, right?

*In that sense of time, because it's clear you can see how much time your starter and bech did play. But you can not see agaisnt who, for how long, and what happend in those scenarios.

That is why I argue that game resume doesn't consider time and my claim before it was that while you don't consider that variable your analysis will provided poor(and maybe misleading) information.

That is why I argue that game resume doesn't consider time and my claim before it was that while you don't consider that variable your analysis will provided poor(and maybe misleading) information.

if you remember i have proposed 2 possibilities by looking at the results..

1. random factor is huge..
2. match-up ratings are nonsense..

you don't accept that my analysis method is right but you don't propose another analysis method..
i mean, you say that you totally don't care about those match-up ratings..
that means you go with the second option; match-up ratings are nonsense..
if you think that they are worth looking at, please tell me your method of evaluating those numbers..

I believe there is something we can agree: the game resume is not z}a perfect tool to understand a game. Like any tool designed to resume, a lot of info is lost on the process.

My claim about the method you empleyed, in fact, did not provide you with another (hopefully better) tool. What I can do is to try to enforce you the approach and importance of the live game when evaluating a result.

Personally, I believe this was intentionally designed this way. There are clues you can fin watching the game that are not captured in the resume. You can still use tools like the performed distribution to weight the matchups, but you have to consider the limitations of your method.

How do I read them? Work in progress. I don't feel comfortable by releasing something I know have flaws. So I will pass on this one...

BTW, How much important do you think it might be the most common training patterns for inside/outside players in the discussion about tactics?

Last edited by Zero, the Magi. at 1/30/2010 6:43:52 PM

let's celebrate, today i won playing low post (17981240)
my attack rating was "only" the double of his defense, but i still won it in the OT

Last edited by mark_lenders at 1/30/2010 8:33:12 PM

My PG has 4 in JS, 14 HA, 13 DR and 18PA. He is averaging 7 FGA and 7.5 AS per game (26 minute average). My PG knows that he isn't a great shooter so he is assisting the team. On the other hand, i have a good shooter, green in JS and yellow in JR and he shoots even if I play LI, and this is good for me, as I know that he is going to shoot so a lot I let him play. If it isnt necessary for him to play (the opponent has strong OD or I am certain that I can win on SF/PF/C) then i use my lower-shooting-skills guard with higher passing skill

And, BTW, I like Low Post, it is a good overall tactic if you want both inside and outside shooting. Put a good guard and a good PF and C and you have all-around shooting match

Thats not the debate, Im not saying that run&gun is bad, I just say that both tactics have their pros and their cons. The same happens with Spain, their outside players are elite. Then Italy cames and defeat us with Look inside man to man, but our best way to attack is outside.

I have a super-specialized team that it has been made to play in just one way. I cant choose (at least for now, I hope I will in the future). I wouldnt have any problem in making a super-specialized team that only play inside, like Mod-MOS team, you can succeed with both systems.

Anyway, if all the people think that outside is better... easy solution, just go outside. No problem.

let's celebrate, today i won playing low post (17981240)
smy attack rating was "only" the double of his defense, but i still won it in the OT

So maybe you shouldn't be playing a $13,000 salary SG at PG?

This team (76662) is specialized in inside attack and is not very expensive. In fact he is the 2nd of the East in ACBB, while he is the 12th in salaries. And he has been sometimes unlucky.

I recognize that at the same wage, is easier to see better outside players than inside players, mostly because they have been trained better. But also inside players use to be cheaper.

Last edited by LeYeNdiNhA at 2/1/2010 12:53:36 PM