BuzzerBeater Forums

By the way, I win my first game in the league against a team rank higher than me, i think i owe it to this prediction thing. my opponent just predicted them both wrong, while i only predicted for the pace, and then it's also wrong, but since my opponent has two mistakes, it cost him the game.

well even though it's a win, winning through this guessing thing doesn't seems right, it takes away the beauty of basketball. I think this will be better if you beat enemies offense through densive adjustments like using zone defense etc. Hell I don't know if these defensive tactics really work, because i also observe that most teams uses man to man, maybe this is the equivalent of look inside in the defensive tactics, hehehe.

well the ranking of the team, also counts. but for two teams that are even, GDP will prove to be decisive...

Strategy: Get good.

For real, though. In real life basketball if a team has great shooters and no big men with any good skills what would you do? You would put more pressure on the guards that probably have to slow the ball down for their bigs. Outside/Slow. What do you do to a team that has amazing bigs and subpar guards? Inside. What about a team that likes to run as fast as they can and scores with bigs and guards? Neutral/Fast.

The guessing isn't really guessing. It's planning for your opponent. Imagine that it is your players planning for specific plays/sets the other team is running, just like what happens in real life.

I definitely agree with the sentiments in this thread that he has been losing games for reasons other than GDP....however that said, I am not a fan of GDP at all. When GDP was introduced its intent was to get teams to mix up their tactics, but why? I have built an inside team...why should it matter if I never play outside tactics?

Using your example from above....You are correct in your assessment in how to defend them....that said, the team with the great shooters and no big men is never going to decide to play Low Post because they fear their opponent knows outside tactics are coming.

Using the Steve Nash led Phoenix Suns as an example...everyone knew what they were going to do every night...super talented teams like the Spurs could slow them down some nights, but the Suns never decided okay, let's abandon our run and gun, let it fly from 3 mentality and just attack them inside tonight with our tiny little big men because the Spurs will never see that coming!

And when the Suns faced a team with Big Front court, they were not magically better defending the paint just because they knew and GDP'd they would be attacked inside.

And as it pertains to BB...GDP could be okay if we had the ability to change during the game or at least make halftime adjustments....if I think you are going to bomb on me from 3 all game long, so I run a 3-2 zone and choose GDP of "They'll attack outside"...but your team comes out moving the ball around looking for the open jump shot inside the arc...I would switch up my D a little bit to adjust to your slight adjustment...not stick with the same losing strategy all game long.

Let's face this, GDP was added because of the overly used Look Inside. And for that, you are all now happy that other teams who love to exploit the Look Inside tactics or like to use them not because they like it but, it is very very, might be the strongest offensive tactics, will now think twice to use it.

In a match between two teams of equal strength, don't tell me GDP, can't be decisive or GDP can't affect the match. A team that has strong outside game is force to change because of GDP, thus that team can't play to it's true strength. There is nothing wrong with being unpredictable but not all likes to be unpredictable or have the luxury to play unpredictable. In my case, i am compelled to change my tactics because of this GDP just for the fear of being predicted. Or else my team will only be a punching bag in the league. I even saw high rank team loss terribly as his game and pace being predicted correctly.

What is unfair, there is the imbalance of offensive tactics, but instead of solving the problem, instead of balancing it, they put this GDP. that is very unfair. they avoid to solve this problem. I don't know if those defensive tactics are also working well. In reality, Look inside in real basketball is not unstoppable. 2-3 zone i think is enought and inside offense is not a good option. But here, it seems that those defensive tactics, are they really working??? Instead of GDP to stop for example the Look Inside abuse, why not use the correct defense to neutralize look inside????

As I said before, predicting how other's played is not enough to neuitralize opponent's offense. After you predicted, you must make necessary defensive adjustments, tactics. I don't see tactics in GDP, that is why i call it a guessing thing.

If you guys are contented with this, well I;m really protesting this GDP thing. Instead of solving the imbalance in tactics, they avoid it and put this GDP, very very unfair!!

Last edited by SirAle at 9/18/2016 6:57:32 AM