BuzzerBeater Forums

If you want the game to be closer to reality there would be two ways:

1) Easy: JS and JR have cross training with FT
2) Hard: FT affects the speed of training the JS and JR

lets draft an hypothetical guy with respectable JS and JR and atrocious FT

-> Today he can be a monster that is unnatural, being a very good shooter that sucks at FT and you should manually correct this flaw of the game training FT.

-> On the first option you would train the shooting and he would improve on the FT, making him even more monstrous that he is today but closer to reality, being good from the field and from the line.

-> On the second option the monster that can't shoot free throws doesn't exist (his jump shot training speed should be very small at some point) and you should train his free throw otherwise he won't be a monster. You get almost unable to be a good shooter without a decent FT.


I think that everybody wants the game to be closer to reality, but they also like challenges and don't want the game to be easier. What you guys think about the second idea, would it be more tough and also more close to reality or I'm suggesting nonsense?

If you want the game to be closer to reality there would be two ways:

1) Easy: JS and JR have cross training with FT
2) Hard: FT affects the speed of training the JS and JR

I kinda like that idea from a game design perspective, but it's not closer to reality.

Actually, it is.

Free throws are the easiest thing for a basketball player to score. The more effective a guy is in shooting FTs, the better are the chances that he'll hit jump shots far away from the basket.

I think JR would be the key factor, in this situation. It doesn't make sense that a guy that averages, let's say, 45% in 3FG is averaging 22& in FTs. Just saying...

Um, did you even read my message? The one that looks at the results that real basketball players put up, and shows that despite what we all assume, there isn't a relationship between the ability to hit field goals (or 3 pointers, though there's a bit better relationship) and the ability to hit free throws.

Now your point about the 22% FT shooters isn't a bad one, but it's easily overcome by the GM making a good choice. Train FT for a few weeks, and you won't see those type of mismatches. Or maybe people would prefer having an atrocious FT skill hold back their JS and JR training. Cause like Charles pointed out, not many people are arguing it that way.

Um, did you even read my message? The one that looks at the results that real basketball players put up, and shows that despite what we all assume, there isn't a relationship between the ability to hit field goals (or 3 pointers, though there's a bit better relationship) and the ability to hit free throws.

So where are the <50% FT shooters that play guard in the NBA?

Last edited by hupfingatsch ihm sein Knecht at 7/6/2011 2:07:10 PM

So where are the <50% FT shooters that play guard in the NBA?

I know a lot of them. But I'll only tell you if you can find me an NBA player who never trained FTs. Deal?

No I didn't and here's why: I didn't want too.

There were too many letters and it was very, very long.

So there...

PS: I'm just kidding

Last edited by Santos at 7/6/2011 2:47:43 PM

Easy one. Iverson.

I’m thrilled to see some real data brought to the argument. A couple of comments on what I think I see as the methodology of the data analysis, though. First, don’t even try to correlate FT% with FG% since, as I note much higher up in this thread, players with high FG% tend to be big men who take most of their shots from close in and are often terrible FT% (Tim Duncan, Shaq, etc.), though not always (many non-American centers like Pau Gasol, Yao Ming). Finding a low correlation between FT% and 3PT% is very interesting, though. I would suggest that you filter the data with a minimum 3PT ATT if you haven’t already.

The other thing I want to point out is that anyone who thinks that training JS would have no impact on FT%... well, as somebody who’s spent way too much precious time with a basketball in my hands over the years, I think it’s just not true. Sure, practicing FT could mean the difference between a good FT shooter and an elite FT shooter, but the mechanics are so similar. Use the whole body, bend the knees, follow through, shoulders square, etc. In fact, when I go into shooting slumps, I very often work out of them by shooting tons of FT before going back to work on the J since I know that my worst habits are mechanical, and shooting FT is a very mechanical activity, at least it for me. The difference between training JS and FT is probably a lot smaller than the difference between HA and DR (each of which trains about 80% of the other in BB). If we can get a boost in RB when training ID, well… let’s be consistent here, FT and JS are too related not to be tied together with training.

But let’s let the real stats help us figure out how much they’re related. Maybe we can get some complex stats to break down. Maybe somebody can get FT% by shot distance so we can figure out who the jump shooters are without relying just on 3PT data since some players are great shooters in the mid-range but just drop off in accuracy beyond the 3PT line (like I suspect we’d find with players like Luol Deng, Kevin Durant and other forwards, and also big men who can shoot like Brad Miller), but the data might show that I’m wrong in some of my assumptions. Right now, I’m still of the opinion that FT and JS training should each impact each other. And I still stand my earlier thinking that there should be a very small FT advantage for shorter players.

Last edited by chihorn at 7/6/2011 3:11:58 PM