BuzzerBeater Forums

About the big SG from Georgia, we did some tests with revo and it's a fact: this player is incredibly strong in each 6 importants skills.

now that is very nice. And I'd also prefer this one over any other who lacks 1 or 2 or those 6 skills and has some better tertiary skills.
BUT it also means there is a possible weakness in this player, and weaknesses can be exploited.
If you put a strong inside scorer against him, and play an inside focus, he might get in trouble if his inside defense is low...

so it's better to sacrifice 1 level of each of the 6 primaries, if you can get 2 or 3 skills higher in his other skills. Which also means his salary would be lower...

Ofcourse it's also possible the player already has a good mix of all his skills, and has no weaknesses. In that case, the higher salary will ofcourse be an indication he will be better. But we can't realy see that. So that's why I don't like comparing teams against each other based on salary...

maybe Garcia falls in this catergory, if so, then congrats on having one of those players already

thanks. That's also the reason why he didn't get TL-ed when he hit the age of 27.

I think Sen is also such a player, but I still need to verify. Unfortunatly Sen was in bad shape, so I couldn't have him start in the cup...

You also talk about the age of the traditional players has passed... what exactly do you mean?
I am still looking for the same type of player I have been looking for since I started this game. So what has been changed? I should know, maybe I must change my search profile...

if i set up a PF guy as my SF ( presuming i got a PF with lvl 9 OD and good inside skills) and i go inside, then i'll dominate your SF (with lvl 10 on all skills) ... and you going outside? well be my guest, since that lvl 9 OD will be a good match for your lvl 10 JS, JR combo...

==> so your SF needs an extra... he needs an extra in his ID or his OD, or in his shooting... a balanced player is great to have, but when facing extreem orientated inside/outside players, he will get dominated time after time after time... nowadays, we need that extra. and since alot of managers still think the 'classic' way ( no offence ment by it, but i don't know how to describe it otherwise) they don't pay attention to that extra... and sooner or later it will get to it. in ordre to be succesfull to reach to top, you'll need to do some daring moves... but once you are at the top, you need to keep thinking a few steps in advance, in ordre to be able to stay at the top. i know you have remained at the top for several years LoD, but to remain their in the futur, you will have to make some daring moves, as will i have to make some moves to get at the top. and sometimes, you proof to be wrong, and sometimes, you get it right. thats how life goes.

About the big SG from Georgia, we did some tests with revo and it's a fact: this player is incredibly strong in each 6 importants skills.

now that is very nice. And I'd also prefer this one over any other who lacks 1 or 2 or those 6 skills and has some better tertiary skills.
BUT it also means there is a possible weakness in this player, and weaknesses can be exploited.
If you put a strong inside scorer against him, and play an inside focus, he might get in trouble if his inside defense is low...

i'd love to find the player who's got the inside to be effective on the SG position (for an inside orientated attack) AND have the defence to stop a monster like that. you'd be looking at a SF with one hell of good inside skills, and one hell of a OD to go with it... and good allround players are rare nowadays, and even harder to train... try training a SG of 193 cm in Id or rebounding, you'll have a hard time. just as you'll have a hard time training a 206 cm guy in OD to train his Od to a monsterious lvl... that guy shot 50% from the field ( including 3's) with the best defender (in combo with GS) in his face... and his GS was only lvl 7 when he faces use ( thank the BB-god that it wasn't higher than a 7).


Revo

ps: before i knew a few things already, however, i needed somebody to point it out to me before i fully comprehended it, and now, i need to adjust some training in ordre to be able to keep aiming for my goal, and that is to get promoted into the BBBL someday... everyone needs to prepare themselves, and look for changes, and the best way to do thing, is by learning from eachother. sharing info with eachother... but the really matters (other than having fun ofcourse) is what you'll do with that piece of information.


Last edited by AthrunZala at 2/3/2010 9:26:12 AM

if i set up a PF guy as my SF ( presuming i got a PF with lvl 9 OD and good inside skills) and i go inside, then i'll dominate your SF (with lvl 10 on all skills) ... and you going outside? well be my guest, since that lvl 9 OD will be a good match for your lvl 10 JS, JR combo...

I'm sorry but I don't realy get that part, or at least, I don't get what you try to say.
But as far as that goes, yes I think Rio Garcia might be able to handle your PF guy (read get a positive balance on offense/defense compared to your player you put at SF), who as it looks isn't realy a PF but a SF. (yes PFs with that high OD are actually SFs to me ; ) )

i'd love to find the player who's got the inside to be effective on the SG position (for an inside orientated attack) AND have the defence to stop a monster like that.

just any PF would do, or maybe a SF with good inside attack. Don't worry about OD. Just let the SG defend as PF (or SF) and have someone with high OD play at PF spot defending as a SG. There's options opened up to everyone.
As you said we must always look out for changes, and adapt our ways. We have been given new ways of dividing our attacks and defenses on the court. We must learn to use them. ;)

I still didn't get an indication why I should change the way I prefer my players. It might be new to you, as you point out you didn't see it in the beginning and someone showed you. I have always valued secondary and tertiary skills, in a reasonable quantity.
there is a very delicate balance in skills that are needed for every type of position. When I say balance I never meant each skill should be equally high, I meant the player needs the perfect mix.

the first 2 or 3 seasons I spend adapting the perfect mic for my players. Last 5 seasons I didn't change them at all. I am probably off the exact ideal. But my formulas have been working for me since many seasons, and I didn't see any indication why I should be adapting them yet...

EDIT: no you won't get my formulas!

Last edited by Lord of Doom at 2/3/2010 9:54:29 AM

the first 2 or 3 seasons I spend adapting the perfect mic for my players. Last 5 seasons I didn't change them at all. I am probably off the exact ideal. But my formulas have been working for me since many seasons, and I didn't see any indication why I should be adapting them yet...

well, if you are confident with your skills, then all the better. maybe you are one of those managers ( and i am not sarcastic here!), who have been steps ahead of everyone, and don't need to do any fine tuning now, because you were so many steps ahead of the others...

or maybe, it's just because you sticked to your gameplan all the time, and that we others all have been changing our plan continuously to try in an attempt to deal with whatever came our way. maybe you are one of those lucky coaches who've understood the game way before us, and because of that, was able to assemble a team that you liked and that fitted your game plan. i am still learning alot, and i learned very much this season (thanks to Joe!) about BB, and without any dought, i'll learn even more in the seasons to come...

EDIT: no you won't get my formulas!

no offence ment, but i don't want them either. cause your formulas will work for your team, but that doesn't mean they'll work for my team. each team (and manager) is unique and theirfor, each team has a unique 'perfect' mix...

so i rather not get yours, since i might be tempted to try them out, and theirby, i'd end up screwing up my own team...

Rev

hehe, no man, my formulas are universal. I had many diffrent players over the seasons, and every time I need to buy a new one it's not a player of my team and they also need to work on them.

Siontis was the proof that they work. With his high wage he came out at around 90, while Kenez hits the 97 as a SG.
But that's just an abstract number. I then use it with some extra info on the player to get what I call the rating for my player.

Some of those ratings come close to the real ratings they get in the games, others are a few units off. But overall the players with the higher rating in my formula, also have the higher rating in the game. So that's quite a relief to see that with my ratingsystem I have the opportunity to opt for the best player at THAT time (very important, as it somethimes changes due to the form). Ofcourse it's not absolute as some players who have a lower rating can have the specific skills needed for a specific match-up.

I think you might be getting the idea why I take so long to put my line-ups each week for my games. There is a lot of info to put in the formulas, and even then I need to look for specific skills on some players. In the end I need to make a good dividing over the 3 games to get them the minutes, and a good training.

this game is actually realy though.

nice discussion...

and imo you're both correct...
I even wonder if you both had to go f.i. for a SG on the TL and you've had the choice between 3 SG...
you wouldn't both go for the same...

nice discussion...

and imo you're both correct...
I even wonder if you both had to go f.i. for a SG on the TL and you've had the choice between 3 SG...
you wouldn't both go for the same...

hehe, probably yes.
The diffrence is I would have gone for the same 3 seasons ago, and Revo would possibly have picked an other back then
;)

Go Belgium!

Hi man... as I told you one month ago I'm not stupid :-)

Cyprus finished 5-2 as Belgium and Denmark... you should be a little bit disturbed by England that didn't crunch last match allowing Denmark an easy W.

Anyway my tactic was right... as someone said some posts before (I don't remember who) I can't decide points difference on other matches! I've done what I could do on my opinion with a 59th team ranking.

You faced 4 CT, but JoeMaverick is a really good coach (I appreciate him) and if England would play CT against Denmark you could be in...

My post is not "I'm cool, I'm right, I'm awesome" :-) it was just to point that I'm not stupid as you said on 29/12 and I think that I show that I'm not with results.

@JoeMaverick: you had a bad schedule, that's why it was so hard for you reach the second place... you were really near, but I don't know why... England decide to play CT against Germany and Belgium... and not against Denmark...
We will see on Consolation Tournament next season. Good Luck!

Last edited by Steve Makis™ at 2/9/2010 7:21:18 AM

i had this discussion with revo too.

even if we would have CTed the last game for the NT we would have lost by more than 6 or 8 points, whatever it was that Belgium needed. It is so easy to point fingers at England. Belgium didnt not qualify because we played with a very low enthusiasm in the last game, and because we did not CT, they did not qualify because they didnt score enough points themselves...

Why did we need to CT? To help Denmark and not help Belgium? I dont see a difference. We were out so why not try something new (not saying this was elboss idea, cause I dont know, but we didnt need to win).

It was logical we CTed vs Germany. at that point one more loss would have ment we were unable to qualify. So we needed to win, so we CTed.

I respect what Cyprus does with their NT and U21. A great example for many. But the ranking system is greatly flawed. We won 5 from the first 6 games and dropped 10 places. That isnt a good system, the wins most recently should decide rankings and not what happened 2 seasons before... Also you arent playing the same teams every season. I dont think it matters either who you beat, just win or loss is registered. a Ranking system like chess would be more suitable. In your case, your team is alot better than 57th and we all know that :)

Anyway enough said. I just wished people on these forums would point less fingers without having facts or ask first what the thoughts were/are behind certain decisions...

Last edited by Astragoth at 2/9/2010 7:26:00 AM

if I said you where stupid, I am sorry. I might have, but it was a bad choice of words. English is not my native language. If I used the word stupid I meant it in the way of making a mistake.
I don't think you are stupid. I think you made a mistake. And no matter your result, I still do think you made a mistake.

If you truely understand the effect of enthousiasm on games, and what it means for future games you will get what I mean. Until that time, it's pointless to discuss it. This does NOt mean you are stupid. Let that be clear.

England didn't have any reason for CT, so why would they tear their enthousiasm down? No I'm not distrubed in the least about them not CT-ing. When I said I hate it when other teams influence the standings of some, whitout getting better of it themselves, I also meant it when it would be positive, or negative for Belgium. I would hate it to qualify in someone else's stead if they where punched by some other team, just as much as when Belgium would not qualify when we get punched and some other team can qualify because of it...

No hard feelings or anything either. It's just the way things go.

What I do wonder however is, ... wouldn't you have qualified if you'd normalled against Belgium and won? Maybe you wouldn't win, but still I think you might have, ... I am prety confident your chances for qualification would be higher. So I still think, yes, you did make a mistake... Ofcourse you don't have to agree. It's just how I see it.