BuzzerBeater Forums

In my game today (13246703) the opponents point guard and center had 3 fouls each after 1 quarter. The other coach chose to let them play. They had 6 fouls in the first 19 minutes and only 3 fouls in the next 65. If you choose to let them play then the other team should go after them or there defense should be weaker as the are in foul trouble.

Very rare do you see coaches leave there players in with 3 fouls after 1 quarter and if you do decide to do so their should be some kind of issue with it. My point guards were 1-4 from the field and 6-6 from the line in the first quarter where there point guard had 3 fouls. They then went 3-14 and 2-2 from the line over the next 3 quarters. My centers did play well against there center ho had 3 fouls in the first 9 minutes and only 2 fouls over the next 36 minutes.

If they can choose to let them play why cant i choose to attack them them. Especially when you losing and struggling from beyond the arc the best way to get back into a game is attack the rim and take foul shots when the clock is not moving.

Was wondering what others thought and if BB have any way of implementing this into the game engine.

Last edited by GM-ksachs at 6/6/2009 4:35:48 PM

I am pretty sure there is a penalty to player defense when that player is in foul trouble. If I remember right foul trouble depends on how many fouls and how late in the game in regards to defensive downgrade.

in real life a player in foul trouble usually goes to the bench for a while. Every so often a coach gambles and leaves his players on the court a bit longer. That player usually goes for less steals and blocks and give his opponent a few easier looks as he does not want to return to the bench. I like the idea of the strategy to let them play. I don't like how often i see a player get his 4 or 5 foul in the 3rd quarter and then play the rest of the game flawlessly with his opponent not taking advantage of it.

Foul trouble is not just the last 6 minutes of a game it is usually considered 2 fouls in the 1st, 3 fouls by the 2nd, 4 fouls by the 3rd, and 5 fouls in the first few minutes of the last quarter.

If Kobe had 2 fouls on hi 8 minutes into the game and Phil Jackson does not take him out, you don't think Orlando will TRY and take advantage of it. I'm not saying he will pick up his 3 but most coaches run a few plays in that direction if they have the player who is capable of drawing that foul.

I still don't understand how my SF who i slightly overpaid for to have a go to guy takes 9 shots in the first half and draws 4 fouls against hi opponent. Then in the second half he stops attacking. He shoots 2 shots in the first 23 minutes and 40 secs in the second half and fires 3 threes in the last 20 secs.

Any team i have ever played for would have put someone in who would attack them, if the starter stopped attacking. If he was off in the second half so be it. But to stop playing offense.

I don't understand how players in foul trouble sometimes pick up 3 or 4 in the first half and still play the majority of the game without getting more foul trouble or play less effective defense.

In real life if your in foul trouble most coaches sit the player and if they leave them in they usually switch them to a player who is less of a threat (which is currently not possible in BB to my knowledge) or the player takes less chances and his opposing player gets a few better looks.

Currently team that have a good starting lineup and who have their team play let them play have more of an advantage in my eyes then deep teams because it is often hard to foul players out and you get no advantages when they are playing with foul trouble. I believe there should be some kind of middle ground. If a player has 4 fouls in the second quarter and has a 10 defense then if he stays in the game his defense should drop to an 8 or something along those lines.

(41006.9)

i often see them to take lot more shots against my guy who is in trouble, usually because he doesn't defend that hard anymore ;) If you got other missmatches through tactic changes from your coach, maybe the engine isn't that intelligent to take the bit worser looks to give him the last fouls.

I had a game when opponent's best player fouled out in first quarter and his center was one foul from it. In addition his second best player was injured and din't play at all. Easy win. Oh memories.

maybe the GE is not smart enough but i also no for fact that it did not take the best tactical advantage all the time. In my opinion the best tactical play is to foul out there best player. He had triple double against me and him fouling out and sitting on the bench is better the him hurting me on the court.

I'm not saying go after him till he fouls out, but if he has a few fouls already then tell the opposing player to go a few times one on one with him and see what happens and take a few more shots and try to get him off the court.

Hi Charles,

I appreciate the response. Everything you said there sounds great but i can only speak for my games and the other managers i have spoken with. In my last game my best offensive player was aggressive and shot the ball in the first half and based on what i understand from you, that the GE had him taking good shots. Then in the second half he stopped shooting as he had 2 shots until the last 20 secs of the game. I have a hard time believing that he could not find SOME quality shots in the entire second half against a player who is in foul trouble.

If everything your saying is 100% accurate then i would suggest that when a player has 3+ fouls in the first 4+ in the second 5 in the second half that his defense should drop a bit more as i don't find my offensive players taking advantage against players in foul trouble.

If team choose the tactic to let them play through foul trouble then they should have to play a bit less physical on defense to make up for not trying to commit another foul.

Hi

i have a question what is the best defence against (run and gun)

and what it is the best offence against 3-2 zone