BuzzerBeater Forums

It's not about who has the best 1-3 games picked out. We all know that 3 games is piss, when there are 219439 games simulated in a week.

MO (O) vs LI (M)
7/16,40/55,6'3/8'3
PTB (O) vs LI (M)
14/13,36/54,7'2/9'1
LI (O) vs MO (M)
12/16,48/55,8'3/7'3
MO (O) vs LP (M)
7/15,39/57,7'3/9'1
--------
LI (M) vs PTB (O)
12/15,49/42,7'2/6'3 M more in game
LI (M) vs Patient (O)
14/12,52/32,8'3/7'1 M more in game
LI (M) vs MO (O)
10/11,44/39,8'1/5'3 M less in game
LI (M) vs NA (O)
13/16,37/42,8'2/7'3
---------
LP (O) vs Patient (M)
14/12,47/42,7'1/7'1
MO (O) vs LI (M)
7/12,42/61,6'3/8'3
MO (O) vs LI (M)
4/17,43/51,7'2/8'2
PTB (O) vs LI (M)
8/19,37/59,6'1/8'1
OI (O) vs LI (M)
11/12,37/47,6'3/8'1
OI (O) vs LI (M)
14/13,41/42,6'3/8'3
NA (O) vs LI (M)
15/10,42/43,7'2/8'3

M is my team, O is opponent. First chapter hc, second away, third neutral. Offencive reb, total reb, reb rating. I chose all my competitive games this season (which did not involve playing the same offence, or boost to rebounds def tactic). You stated that LI boosts offencive rebounding. Can't really say I outrebound teams on the offencive board, if I play LI. Nomatter what the opponent plays. I even play motion against LI, still I do not lose the offencive board battle. I do outrebound few teams in private league badly on offencive boards, but they kind of lose the overall rebounding badly aswell. Perhaps it's more about how teams are built that run outside attacks. Playing a SG at SF spot instead of a PF, makes you lose on the boards.
I can list you 2 games between 2 teams. (42956794), (42956914). Similar lineups in both games, same team putting more effort into games. Huge rebound difference versus home and away game. I thought that if LI does not boost offencive rebounds, perhaps motion lowers the offencive rebound chance, but those games and my motion game kinda kill that idea aswell.
If someone would create a PL just for the purpose of testing your theory, it can't be a hectic trader small country team. Those teams would have to run the same lineup for a few seasons over and over again.

Last edited by Kukoc at 5/7/2012 7:15:54 AM

if you look at josef studys about rating at least Look insinde boost rebounding, and in my personal feeling i would agree with that from ingame experience.

That you win rebounding battle with both tactics, probadly means that you probadly the better rebounding team. Probadly a mean value, would make more sense cause more misses can mean more chanches to grab the boards to, and a outside offense produces more misses naturally.

I was a bit tired last night and out of line. Removed the inappropriate part.
I do actually care about the data about reb boost. There are just so many variables that might influence rebounding (like shot selection and procentage for example).
I did have a -1 level rebounding difference with MO vs LI, but entu, game shapes and minutes played by players were also different. I find it a little strange though that they mention the defencive effects of different tactics (including pace), but leave this important info out in offencive tactics in the rules. I even considered a possibility of perhaps faster tactics generating more offencive rebounds (as the defence might not have settled well enough yet, to have better rebounding posiotion). But nothing confirmed that aswell in the game stats.

and a outside offense produces more misses naturally.

If this creates more misses, doesn't this actually give you more chances to rebound offencivly? Boggled...

that why i say, you should look for a ratio, instead of totals.

Edit: ok mean value was a bad word, but i meant like you get 10% of the offensiv boards.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 5/7/2012 3:48:48 AM

What ratio are you talking about? % of off reb's from total reb's. Or are you talking about team rebound rating. Team rebound rating get's smashed really easily with forcing a rookie to play 12 mins or so. If look inside has additional rebound boost, the tactic must have a downside aswell, if motion for example lowers the total or offencive rebounds, then there must be an additional upside so the tactics would all be equal in useability.
Currently the playerbase is more suitable for inside tactics, that does not mean outside tactics are weaker. So let's not get into that in this thread.

What ratio are you talking about? % of off reb's from total reb's. Or are you talking about team rebound rating.

about both, the second part is a fact, the first one would be a meaningfull statistic.

If look inside has additional rebound boost, the tactic must have a downside aswell, if motion for example lowers the total or offencive rebounds, then there must be an additional upside so the tactics would all be equal in useability.

you shoot more three for example, and utilize JS/JR a lot better?

Zone defense also effet rebounding, but not all on a positive way ;)

you shoot more three for example, and utilize JS/JR a lot better?

LI utilizes IS,DR better.

Zone defense also effet rebounding, but not all on a positive way ;)

With defences it's pretty straight forward. M2M is a bit more inside based, with 3-2 being it's equivalent on the outside. Neither boosts rebs. 2-3 clumps up the middle, giving up mid range and long shots and makes it easy to pass. 1-3-1 pushes defence to the perimiter making it hard to pass and dribble while rebounding suffers.
But I do find this an interesting approach. So if the inside tactics do raise rebounding rating, what do the outside tactics raise? It can't be easier passing, it isn't the low amount of turnovers. How does pace come into play etc.

so JS is a better training since it trains for skills, and OD just 3?

And i am quite sure, that 3-2 reduces your rebounding.

Edit: but with your weird calculation, motion raises mid distance and long distance shots ;) While LI help just close range and rebounding^^

Last edited by CrazyEye at 5/7/2012 8:04:16 AM