BuzzerBeater Forums

Princeton is rarely used. I like Princeton, but I'm not sure this game runs it properly. The C is the focus, he gets assists and hits 3s yet mine, who is my second best player, and tailor made for Princeton, seems to just play like a regular center in games. He never atttempts more than 3 3s in a game and usually he only attempts 1. That is not at all accurate to Princeton's style.

The way I understand Princeton, the majority of the shots should be taken from outside and from right under the basket.

Somehow, I don't see Princeton producing too many inside shots at all -- it works like Run and Gun with lower pace.

Agreed. If you look at any Princeton footage or coaching books, whatever your source, you'll see all 5 players at the top including the C. That's how every set starts...

______________
' O '
____
x X x
x x

Well when I posted this all the x's and stuff aligned to the left.

Then it's all passes. No dribble drive stuff, just screens and cuts and everything runs through the C. Who has to be an excellent passer and all five players should be able to make 3's. The inside shots are a result of backdoor cuts to the basket for uncontested lay ups. Lot's of movement is involved and it results in high percentage shots.

There should be lots of assists too, but alas, this is the one issue I really have about BB, their version of Princeton is just not accurate. And because of this, Princeton is widely considered useless in the context of the game.

Trust me, I have Princeton specific players and yet I yield poor results as far as shots, threes and assists goes. Not ratings or wins and losses, but the actual numbers are just way off. That's why I only run Princeton in PL and Scrims.

Last edited by Plotts at 3/28/2009 3:23:55 PM

Then it's all passes. No dribble drive stuff, just screens and cuts and everything runs through the C. Who has to be an excellent passer and all five players should be able to make 3's. The inside shots are a result of backdoor cuts to the basket for uncontested lay ups. Lot's of movement is involved and it results in high percentage shots.

I don't think the GE is as complicated as this.



Last edited by GM-kozlodoev at 3/28/2009 4:21:39 PM

Well then Charles and the guys should consider pulling Princeton or replacing it with another offensive set. I am a huge supporter of you guys and I will play this game until the bloody end of days, but if the GE can't run it, then take it out.

I don't like the idea that I may be wasting money and time on players and strategies that are misrepresented.

Well then Charles and the guys should consider pulling Princeton or replacing it with another offensive set. I am a huge supporter of you guys and I will play this game until the bloody end of days, but if the GE can't run it, then take it out.

I don't like the idea that I may be wasting money and time on players and strategies that are misrepresented.

That's not a problem of not being able to run it -- I just don't think the GE differentiates between a "back door cut" and a "good quality inside shot", so to say.

The problem is that the way the game is designed, what happens prior to the quality of the shot being determined is a "black box" -- i.e. you get a realistic approximation of where the shots should be taken from and what the quality is under any given tactic. However, that doesn't happen by running picks, back door cuts, or isolation plays.

So if the tactic is 2-3 and I run Princeton (48% of my shots are 3s) I should get higher quality shots from the outside correct? Still, my C should have the ball most of the time, because in Prin. the C plays the point. Just like T. Will plays point forward for Louisville.

Yet, last game he had no assists despite being tied for the best in passing on the roster with my PG and tied in handling as well. In fact, I only average 12 assists a game despite Princ. being a catch and shoot offense with little to no driving.

My counter-point is the numbers don't add up.

So if the tactic is 2-3 and I run Princeton (48% of my shots are 3s) I should get higher quality shots from the outside correct? Still, my C should have the ball most of the time, because in Prin. the C plays the point. Just like T. Will plays point forward for Louisville.

As I said, I have no idea whether the GE is that sophisticated. My simple way of looking at the GE is that serves to determine who takes the shots, from where, and how good are the shots.

Yet, last game he had no assists despite being tied for the best in passing on the roster with my PG and tied in handling as well. In fact, I only average 12 assists a game despite Princ. being a catch and shoot offense with little to no driving.

My counter-point is the numbers don't add up.

There is no saying that Princeton should give you more assists. You will be better served by interpreting tactics from how they're described in the rules page than by what you know about them in theory.

Last edited by GM-kozlodoev at 3/30/2009 6:51:18 PM

Ahh, well that's what I was doing, but I thought about how the guys would have formulated the tactics and where they would pull information about set from. There is only so much information about Princeton out there and all of it falls under the same few guidelines. That's how I thought of it, which is probably waaay off, but that's how my brain works.

I would assume though simple commands like

PG brings the ball up
looks to pass
priority
C
then
whoever is open
passes
no pass open
looks to drive

C always starts at top of key and all four players start a the three point line for Princeton so I would suspect that's where they gravitate toward at the start of the possession...

then after those first few commands obvious mathematical mayhem ensues, but the first few steps should have less variables. Know what I mean?