BuzzerBeater Forums

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

The solution could be another couple of skills that would be faster to train the closer the height is to 6'7. i.e. vertical leap that could translate into JS and RB.

leaping is normally a stuff, the small guys could be better, and your system works exactly like the system today ;)

Yeah, but it's not about how far their feet are off the ground, is it? It's the leaping ability together with height and reach. Up to 6'7 you don't generally see a lot of loss in athleticism, but thanks to their height these players are the highest flyers in the game. Then towards 7'0 you generally see a notable reduction in leaping ability, which is however partly offset by height. So to make athleticism train fastest for SFs would make a perfect sense.

If you got a D.3 team in USA comparing it to a NBA team makes no sense at all imo.

What does it matter which level you play at. A 6'7 guy should still be more athletic than a 5'10, or 7'2 guy.

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)

Why is it called NBBA then? If it weren't for NBA, basketball would be as popular as volleyball and this site would probably never happen.

The more I think about the more brilliant the idea seems. New skill:

Athleticism!

1. It follows BB's training speed trend e.i. it depends on height. Here 6'7 being fastest, 5'9 and 7'5 slowest.
2. It transitions smoothly with NOBODY getting short changed. The SFs some people worked so hard on get a slight advantage due to initial skill set up. 6'7 respectable, 6'6 and 6'8 average and so on with 5'9-6'1 and 7'1-7'5 atrocious.
3.The salaries balance out, what a miracle!
4.You can play SF trainees more as SFs. Athleticism training: SFs/Wingmen/Team
5.Players of all heights can be valuable not just 5'9 and 7'5 players.
6.BB will become more realistic, which will increase interest in BB! Athleticism will affect JS, OD some, IS, ID, RB, SB some more.
7.Shot Blocking can gain strength and cease to be a useless skill, another winner!
8.The introduction of Athleticism will bring a lot of excitement to existing BB members, stopping them to give up on BB.
9. There aren't any negatives. Of course a lot of work needs to be done. But since there's a commitment to change and improvement by BB anyway, why not this?

Last edited by thylacine at 3/23/2011 8:45:39 PM

I think at this point the bigger objective is not to convince a better method for SF training because many good suggestion were made and I like yours alot. But the biggest and I mean biggest objective of all is trying to convince those that for whatever apparent reason love how SF are so inferior, that those people need to be convinced what is the obvious and that is SF in BB are like kickers in American Football. The reason to being blind of this blatant perception is, and I qoute from my earlier message:

I know people would start disagreeing with this, because its all about what people are used to, so if from the begining you had an option to name players Nacho Cheese and if you did then they become good as Michael Jordan, then now everyone be saying don't get rid of the Nacho Cheese labeling I think it's good idea cause it keeps around Michael Jordan. Sounds absurd? well tell me this, there is no way we can get players like Lebron James or Kevin Durant in our league, and thats not absurd??? Oh wait, that's how BB started it, so its good we don't have LBJ or Durant keep it this way and don't change it.

If we had a good training system for SFs from the begining and we could have Lebron James or Kevin Durant (or if you don't like NBA comparison, then I used a hypothetical player name Andrew McPartyPants who is equally good and qualifed as your average NT starting PG/SG or Center. The arguining of NBA comparison or not is completely pointless) like players, now if you took the SF training away and make it exactly like it is today, people would think its nuts and stupid and pointless. But no it started that way so its nuts and stupid to implement a good SF training.

Ok don't believe me, how about lets no longer have training method for SG so no more JS/JR strictly available to them, now its stupid we take it away, right. But if from the begining it wasn't available, it would be stupid to implement it, just as it is stupid to implement better training for SF. Then you have everyone also saying how they like to keep the no SG training with JS/JR, how they love to have them very cheap, they would ask why are SG are disadvantaged, why make comparison to NBA players like Kobe Bryant, Michael Jordan, or Dwayne Wade, and say you don't just do it based on real life. Those that would think that way would in that scenario be contempt to keep SG system that way and not change it just as they do with SF.

But no one like to see that happen to SG, but if there was the fair training for SF from the begining and not one for the SG, we be having this exact same conversation about SGs instead of SF, and all would opposed snatching the fair SF training just as they would with snatching the current SG training.

Let me just be clear here so there won't be confusion, I'm not suggesting whatsover to change anything with the SG trainings this is simply used to make a very valid point across.



Last edited by Coach_Gil at 3/23/2011 9:36:47 PM