BuzzerBeater Forums

before i report this as a bug, i wanted to see if my experience was in the realm of reasonable . . .

i had a player (19246895) get hurt for two weeks. naturally, his game shape dropped in that period, down to average. i think it had been strong, possibly proficient, and so i thought the drop a bit precipitous, but, whatever, them's the breaks of the game.

when he finally came back, his first full week in a while, he got 74 minutes. his GS on Monday was average. i thought that strange, but figured it was one of those random things built into the game.

the following week, a second full week, he played 70 minutes.

i was astonished to see this morning that his game shape remains at average.

does this make any sense? has anybody had a similar experience, somebody whose poor GS seems immune to playing time? or is this a bug?

thanks for the response, but i am not talking about a further drop, but trying to bring a player back up to 8-9 GS.

my boy has been at a 6 for two weeks, despite having played minutes within the recognized optimum range of 55 - 80 minutes for both of those weeks.

even if GS is a rolling average of minutes for two weeks (something i have read on these boards), then i would have thought my player would have made some progress -- at least up to 7 -- this last week.

to put it another way: i thought i had 2 weeks to get a 6 GS up to 8, in time for the playoffs. with 65 - 70 minutes a week (my team's averages). in fact, i did not think this would be much a problem. now, with playoffs starting this Tuesday, this player is practically worthless to me. if you had told me two weeks ago that two weeks of around 70 - 75 minutes each week would not move a GS of 6, i would have thought that impossible. i have never had a player recover in this fashion.

Game Shape is probably affected by at least the last 4 weeks. So the 11 minutes he got the week of his injury and the 0 the week after that are still holding him back. Looks like your team would have took advantage of a week of GS training.

My theory is that its the number of possessions played per week towards an ideal set by stamina and age, and not the number of minutes. So a faster offense needs fewer minutes and if both teams play a faster offense, even fewer.

I tend to believe that 70 minutes + is too much.

I generally see that 49-65 seems ideal. Note that I've only EVER used massage doctors.

Also I see players sit at respectable for awhile even with good minutes. Generally if they get 49-65 each week they will be proficient in most cases towards the end of a season. Sometimes they will be strong (25%). Seldom they will be respectable (10%).

However sitting at average I would blame over use of the player.

Also I am not certain but playing low minutes 3 times a week seems better than 48 all in one game but that's just my experience.

but your own data shows that the break point -- when GS is likely to fall -- is on the other side of 80 minutes.

estimating, if peak minutes (around 60) produces what looks to be 60% likelihood of a GS increase of 1, then at 70 - 75 minutes, the likelihood (only) drops to around 40%. it is still positive (likely) to produce an increase, and two weeks running -- i have no skills at statistics -- but wouldn't that make very likely to produce an increase?

i will grant the point that what happened to my player is statistically improbable, minutely possible. in other words, bad luck.

Maybe it's just bad luck. I don't know. I know that most, if not all of my players had those types of minutes, they'd probably be in 8 GS in the very least. Do you have a massage doctor?