BuzzerBeater Forums

I still can't believe why there is such a huge thread about a 50-50 game, in wich 1 team just choose the wrong tactic (Slow offense, and barely subs) and logicly lost the game. Choosing a wrong tactic in a 50-50 game is just killing, just as you saw in the endscore.

This rather belong to the 'OMG HOW DID I LOSE THIS' thread than a different topic on global, since this is just another standard, nothing special, loss.

Last edited by BB-Patrick at 11/10/2008 8:24:22 PM

Well said.

C'mon, you've got to be kidding me man.
Are you saying that Costantinopolis deserved their loss for choosing a wrong tactic?
And what do you say about Boston Celtics so?
He decided to defend 2-3, completely wrong, against a Motion (or R&G).

C'mon, you've got to be kidding me man.
Are you saying that Costantinopolis deserved their loss for choosing a wrong tactic?
And what do you say about Boston Celtics so?
He decided to defend 2-3, completely wrong, against a Motion (or R&G).

I'm not kidding at all, I'm just getting a little tired about a not-so-very-special game, although some others might think different.

Boston choose a wrong defensive tactic indeed but a nice offensive one, but Constant choose a mediocre defense tactic and a wrong offensive tactic. I think we can expect top class top division teams know that slow paced tactics are generally worse than fast paced offenses, especially since the BB just announced that and since the topic starter said these words:

This thread is funny, I can understand the level of other leagues in the world.....

So why would one chose the slow pace offense again then?

And it almost seems like 'pericle's fans' (pls dont take that too serious) don't even look at offensive flow. Everyone is just looking at offense vs defense, why is that? The importance of the OF is underestimated.
You can have a legendary offense vs an atrocious defense, but if you have nobody who can bring the ball to the other basket by passing or handling the ball well, you won't optimally use your legendary offense.

Ok 13 points might be a little too much for a 50-50 game but hey it isn't that special as it seems.

Last edited by BB-Patrick at 11/11/2008 7:59:21 AM

Boston choose a wrong defensive tactic indeed but a nice offensive one, but Constant choose a mediocre defense tactic and a wrong offensive tactic.

Uhm.... perplexity*

He decided to defend 2-3, completely wrong, against a Motion (or R&G).

Please note Motion is an Outside/Mid-range tactic.

Ah, ok.
Thanks teacher.
And 2/3 is an inside/mid-rage def? XD

I can agree to you about preferring Run and Gun to Motion, but to me it seems really worse what Boston Celtics did, instead of claiming to how silly Pericle was.
At the matter of fact, Pericle choosing the right way of attacking, from mid/long range against a 2-3 zone.
Maybe he would have chosen Run and Gun, but brand42 did a so worse mistake by choosing 2-3 zone.
If Boston Celtics decided to defend Man to man then I would absolutely have been with you about the 50-50, about OF, about everything you said.
But to me the difference was too much between the two teams for saying so easily that it was not ridiculous losing a game like that.

We can say everything we want but it's obvious Pericle got screwed. Probably, if we play the same match 10 times, Pericle will win 9 of them. Unfortunately for him, he took the only match unfavorable

This has turned into one of my favorite threads in BB.