BuzzerBeater Forums

Playing your players too many minutes per week (more then 90 is lot, more then 100 is terrible idea) and CT'ing a lot of games is a recipe for failure.

Ok, your statement might be right for an amateur league (in which I am probably playing) but I still defend the fact that as an athlete you get stronger, more experienced and more motivated with each game, and on the other hand: what is "stamina" then standing for, if game shape is the fatigue?
I mean, it's not that the players are thrown into the game without any training! They train basically the whole week, so they should be able to take a game's pressure and still bring an excellent performance. To say an athlete gets tired by playing three games a week, while he has practice the whole week doesn't make sense to me.
A "game shape" doesn't get worse for a real athlete by playing lots of games, while he is in practice, unless he reached a certain age.
Better would maybe be an attribute called "Personality" or "Ego" or something, which would influence the decisions the player takes on the field, based on his character (egoistic = almost takes every shoot, although better possibilities are provided; unselfish= passes almost every ball and takes almost no shots; teamplayer: a perfect mix, serves as basis). And in that case we would then have players whose "personality" changes when they play too often. But "game shape" doesn't make sense to me.

1. this is a game not the reality, so use the rules of the game ;)

2. normally you take more effort in games then in Training, so a lot of games aren't the way to get in good form ... Normally it is better to have more training session, instead of a game and a break to cure the muscle ache.

3. The players get more experienced in playing ;)

4. Gameshape is generall fitness, which shows the athelete train/play a bit but not too much, stamina is how hard the athlete could perform ... Higher stamina leads him to play with more effort or more minutes ;)

Just when you mention Baron Davis: He is over 30. I do recognize the limits of age.
What I am talking about is that a 22 year old player with potential to be MVP has a worse Game Shape because he played 2 games in a week, than a 31 year old man with potential of a role player, who has not played a single match in the season. does that make sense to you? To me it doesn't.
I just try to see points to improve the game. I am not saying I lose because of this, but it is not realistic. And yes, it's a game, but it's a basketball game. It's not a fantasy game with monsters and witches, as the basketball teams contain "human beings" as players. Therefore the more realistic, the better. This is my opinion. But I like this game a lot, otherwise I wouldn't play it.

Thanks again for your comments.

and don't forget training ;)

The game shape think is in my mind, something what is pretty realisitic.

And ash if you don't take care of the way the "game" works, is it an reason why you could loose game.

ok, I am sorry for that. I hope Baron didn't read what I wrote :)
He is a great admirable player, a player who can decide games.

And yes, I think you're right, too realistic would probably be too much. But don't you think that "game shape" should be modified? it seems to be a very important detail in this game and I think this detail could be improved.

And crazyeye, I never said I don't care about the rules of this game. I just like this game a lot and try to help people improve it, that's all. otherwise as I said, I would have left already.

I know, I start again with reality, but I think it's important, that you guys understand what I am up to:

You have a 20 year old star player in your team. Now this boy is a very good player and has expectations. One of these is to play as much as possible. Now he played two important league games in a week, and then there is another game (probably a cup game) and you tell him: "Boy, you played the last two games, so you gotta sit on the bench." In this game his "game shape" would not decrease.
In reality, this player will be so angry, and disappointed, which often has a big influence on his "game shape" for next games. He would question himself, why he had not played and will in the worst case lose some of his self confidence. Do you understand what I mean?

I think the decrease of "game shape" is too simple. Maybe it's not "game shape" what is actually in- and decreasing, but "motivation". would make more sense to me.

Ok, your statement might be right for an amateur league (in which I am probably playing) but I still defend the fact that as an athlete you get stronger, more experienced and more motivated with each game, and on the other hand: what is "stamina" then standing for, if game shape is the fatigue?
I mean, it's not that the players are thrown into the game without any training! They train basically the whole week, so they should be able to take a game's pressure and still bring an excellent performance. To say an athlete gets tired by playing three games a week, while he has practice the whole week doesn't make sense to me.

I think the BB have sort of blurred the difference between GS and fatigue. A few seasons ago, stamina would drop if a player would play too few minutes. An injured player might drop several levels. The problem was then that you could only improve stamina with team training - even though stamina is probably the skill that can best be improved by individual effort.

So that aspect of stamina was eliminated, and the current system where there is only a long term decline was instituted. You still have a problem where you have to train everyone to improve a couple of players.

Realistically, fatigue should carry over from game to game, so that if your player has played 40 minutes 3 games in a row, he will be more tired than a player who has only played 40 minutes in one game. So the game shape drop for too much play sort of represents that effect on a delayed basis, and he can recover by going back to a more normal amount of play.

yes I have the feeling, too, that they blurred the difference of these two. Ok thank you for the explanation!