BuzzerBeater Forums

The change in the positions.

Thanks

Could a player not also lose salary if his classification changes? Let's say he was classified as a centre before. His inside skills are amazing and his outside skills are only average - just barely enough to get the classification change. Would his salary not drop?

Haha, I now have a 5'11" power forward, is he gonna gouge me on salary?

just pay the man! :D of course you call the shots hahaha

I was looking at the help section that lists the skills of a PF/C:

Power Forward
(1) Inside Shot, Inside Defense
(2) Rebounds, Blocks
(3) Driving, Passing
(4) Jump Shot, Handling

Center
(1) Inside Shot, Inside Defense, Rebounds
(2) Blocks
(3) Handling, Passing

What I cannot figure out is why the first guy below is listed a C and the second guy is listed as a PF. I guess the better JS on the second guy pushes him into the PF category?


Center

Jump Shot: awful Jump Range: pitiful
Outside Def.: pitiful Handling: pitiful
Driving: average Passing: average
Inside Shot: respectable Inside Def.: average
Rebounding: pitiful Shot Blocking: mediocre
Stamina: awful Free Throw: respectable

Experience: pitiful

Power Forward

Jump Shot: inept Jump Range: awful
Outside Def.: atrocious Handling: awful
Driving: pitiful Passing: awful
Inside Shot: average ↑ Inside Def.: mediocre
Rebounding: inept Shot Blocking: respectable
Stamina: mediocre Free Throw: atrocious

Experience: atrocious

Very interesting answer, thanks.

So: both the listed position AND the salary do NOT reflect some underlying TRUE formula for determining player strength. Am I interpreting you and the news item correctly now? Or would one just not see a difference, as you say, because it would be too small to notice?

One could go on to speculate that in the game engine there actually does not exist such an underlying true formula, because otherwise the game developers would be likely to use it for determining such things as listed position (and salary)...

You're assuming that there is one true and universal formula for determining player strength for each position, which is probably incorrect.

What I cannot figure out is why the first guy below is listed a C and the second guy is listed as a PF. I guess the better JS on the second guy pushes him into the PF category?

Center

Jump Shot: awful Jump Range: pitiful
Outside Def.: pitiful Handling: pitiful
Driving: average Passing: average
Inside Shot: respectable Inside Def.: average
Rebounding: pitiful Shot Blocking: mediocre
Stamina: awful Free Throw: respectable

Experience: pitiful

Power Forward

Jump Shot: inept Jump Range: awful
Outside Def.: atrocious Handling: awful
Driving: pitiful Passing: awful
Inside Shot: average ↑ Inside Def.: mediocre
Rebounding: inept Shot Blocking: respectable
Stamina: mediocre Free Throw: atrocious

Experience: atrocious

I think the classification is based on comparing skills.

Sometime go to the TL, and search based on position and search for a single level of skill, and see how many players the search turns up. You might have to also include an age range so that you don't find too many players (I think it is 1000 max).

For a PG, you might find that SB is totally extraneous, you'll might have as many PG with atrocious SB as you have with average SB. But something like passing, there will be no PG with atrocious passing.

And then do something like holding passing constant while changing the JS for a PG. It appears that the classification is based on comparing skills. If you find a PG with awful passing he will have a JS skill of "can't hit barn door" which is below atrocious.

It's also possible that the classification is based on calculating a PG, SG, SF, PF, and C rating. But that is tricky since you have to get the weighting right. If you put a NT SF on your team, he might be your best PG, SG, SF, PF, and C. That is, he might be able to play any position better than your starter. So you have to figure out a way for his SF to show up as his best position, when he is pretty good at all positions compared to ordinary players.

It appears that JS is an important classifying skills for both PF and SF. They've got to have a pretty good JS, relative to their other skills. And a SF has to have a relatively poor IS, or he is classified as a PF.

I suspect that the change was to change it from pretty good JS, to a decent JS.

In the case of your PF, it is his relatively decent JS, given his complete lack of outside skills, and pretty limited inside skills. Beef up his ID, and he might become a C, since his JS would then become markedly worse than his inside skills.

i think height is also one factor in classifying players, although not that big of a factor i think. sure there are 6'6" center, but no way you can find a 5'9" center or a 7'2" pg

I've seen 6'0 players classified as centers. It is possible that skills of generated players are linked together and also linked to height. So perhaps they choose a random height, say a normal distribution with a height around 6'8. And then instead of setting skill values at complete random, they could be linked to the height. So the Jump Range might have a normal distribution, but for a 6'0 player, the mean might be mediocre, and for a 7'4 player it might be awful.