BuzzerBeater Forums

LOL I used exactly 4000 letters in the last post, I should thank thylacine he brought up the idea in mind and I should point out that his suggestion for the 'quickness', 'strength', 'athleticism' labeling is actually a great way to actually define a player on how you can improve him from raw to great skill in certain areas and others not, where in BB all players potential to grow in specific areas are completely spread out equal and is up in the air. So all 6'9-6'10 who should be PF for example should not be just as equally likely to be able to shoot the 3 as the rest. There should be some labeling to PF as 'outside shooters' so you have around a Nowitzki/Rashard Lewis/Villaneuva/Jamison/Love who can drain from the outside, and some without labels who would be no 3pts like Griffin/Duncan/Gasol so certain 6'9-6'10 can improve like the rest. Thats why I had the suggestions in potential in labeling in the last example.

They are disadvantage, because as proven by the best of the best out there which can be found in national teams, you see only the 5'9-6'1 or the 7'+ in the roster, on rare occasion you may find someone who's height in the middle. So say you do, that 6'7 dude makes 30k a year when a center in that team makes 400k its a desperation to seek a SF cause simply there aren't good enough around.

So why is it a disadvantage, well if you get a guard he can be a Chris Paul or Ray Allen, or a center he can be a Shaq or Yao. But a SF, can he be a Lebron or Durant? or more like a kicker in a football (American) team?

But also as he pointed out and Coco as well, there is vast difference is performance when it comes to height differential matchups.

Last edited by Coach_Gil at 3/23/2011 11:26:27 AM

Hmmm, I think you don't know what you are talking about. The people hailed as best perimeter defenders in the NBA are Artest (6'7"), Wade (6'4"), Battier (6'8"). It is very hard to drive past these guys. On the other hand, the sub 6'3" players have a hard time keeping up strength-wise or even defending the pick and roll.

but there a lot more people at that size who struggle at guarding the perimeter, and i think the overall picture goes more to people of Wade size then the one of Battier(so that i would say he is more the exception then the rule). People like Ai would be good here, but true in reality they would suffer from there size.

But overall i think the size isn't reflected bad in this game.

I think people here are just comparing too much to the NBA.

I think people here are just comparing too much to the NBA.

Comparing to real life, where in real life the SF is not like the kicker in American Football. NBA is by far the basketball everyone around the world is most familiar with so comparing from the NBA makes most sense than comparing to division II Greenland basketball team (if there is such thing even)

Last edited by Coach_Gil at 3/23/2011 1:10:17 PM

This is starting to get off topic, if you can compare or not compare or how much emphasis comparison is drawn to the NBA its your opinion. Bottom line is that regardless of comparison, SF are inferior and are like the kickers in American Football. More or less you can find good players in PG,SG,SF,PF,C about equally wether in the NBA or Europe. It's blatant that SF are "the crappies" of BB and its blatant that its not like this in real life.

You right, but apparently NBA Live were able to implement realistic player development in their franchise mode, that's something from real like that they were able to implement