BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Analyzing Motion

Analyzing Motion

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
210204.115 in reply to 210204.111
Date: 3/14/2012 1:12:55 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
108108
Awesome analysis! Really interesting. Can't wait to see more!

"Falling in love is not at all the most stupid thing that people do but gravitation cannot be held responsible for it."
This Post:
00
210204.117 in reply to 210204.116
Date: 3/14/2012 7:21:51 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1212
I know it's ideal that both big men have some passing (theoretically for Princeton this is a must), but I wonder if it's more necessary for the PF or for the C. I hope this research solves that question.

Last edited by King Calucha at 3/14/2012 7:23:11 PM

This Post:
00
210204.118 in reply to 210204.117
Date: 3/16/2012 11:05:37 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
6060
For what I find it more logical, passing is more important to PFs.

This Post:
00
210204.119 in reply to 210204.118
Date: 3/16/2012 12:56:45 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1212
In real life, Motion and Princeton offenses rely on 4 players moving around the ball handler (with certain rules) until one of them gets open for a layup or an outside shot.
- In motion, the ball handler changes in each rotation.
- In Princeton, generally it's a big man.

Since in BB's outside offenses most of the shots are taken by the PG, SG, SF and PF, the most logical conclusion would be that the ball handler is the C (at least in Princeton).

However, I've learned that some things in BB don't make much sense compared to real life situations. Could you elaborate a little further on your argument?

This Post:
00
210204.120 in reply to 210204.117
Date: 3/17/2012 4:02:06 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
146146
i could be wrong but from what i've read on the bb-usa blog, passing is generally more important for centers than pf's

This Post:
00
210204.121 in reply to 210204.119
Date: 3/17/2012 4:24:40 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
6060

However, I've learned that some things in BB don't make much sense compared to real life situations. Could you elaborate a little further on your argument?


No I can't sorry, it's only a guess.

This Post:
66
210204.122 in reply to 210204.121
Date: 3/19/2012 9:06:26 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
952952
Second in line for analysis is Starcrow Trail Blazers ( (173499)). His starting five are pretty much on same level, especially position 1-3. I'm still waiting for his players' skills if he will be so kind and send it to me, but in the meantime analysis gave plenty of answers too.

First table's name is »Team %«

3p (3 pointers): Out of team's 3 pointers, how many were attempted by position
2P (Jump shots): Out of team's Jump shots, how many were attempted by position
IS (Inside shots): Out of team's Inside shots, how many were attempted by position
DR (Layups): Out of team's layups, how many were attempted by position
PA( Pass attempts (not assists!)): Out of team's pass attempts, how many were attempted by position
%SH: % of how many possessions each of five positions used for a shot
%PA: % of hos many possessions each of five position used for a pass attempt

Example: Out of 138 Jump shots taken by whole team, 19% were taken by PG, 30 % by SG etc.


POS	3P	2P	IS	DR	PA	%SH	%PA
PG 27 19 0 26 35 23 35
SG 25 30 1 42 22 28 22
SF 39 20 9 19 15 23 15
PF 7 12 38 12 12 14 12
C 3 12 50 2 15 13 15


I found an interesting twist here. PG, SG and SF are using same % of team possessions for shots (23, 28 and 23 respectively), but the distribution of types of shots is quite different.

If you compare SG and SF, you see SG is shooting way less 3P than SF. Out of 100 shots, SG takes only 25 shots while SF takes 39 3P shots out of 100. This probably means SG has low JR for his position and SF has a high JR for his position. Furthermore, his SG is responsible for almost half of team's shots for driving, so we have a great example of »inside« SG for Motion who can't be guarded by a player with great OD and bad ID. I can't wait to see the skills!

PF and C don't have a great role here; out of 100 possessions, they are shooting the ball 27% combined.


2nd table is »Individual %« and shows what each position has been doing in his possessoins (it takes into account shot+passes attempts)

3p (3 pointers): Out of individual's shot+pass attempts, how many 3 pointers were attempted by position
2P (Jump shots): Out of individual's shot+pass attempts, how many Jump shots were attempted by position
IS (Inside shots): Out of individual's shot+pass attempts, how many Inside shots were attempted by position
DR (Layups): Out of individual's shot+pass attempts, how many Layups were attempted by position
PA( Pass attempts (not assists!)): Out of individual's shot+pass attempts, how many passes were attempted by position

Example: Out of 100 shot+pass attempts taken by PG, he took 36% of 3p attempts, 24% of 2p attempts, 4% of IS attempts, 12% of DR attempts and 24% of pass attempts.

POS	3P	2P	IS	DR	PA
PG 20 35 0 11 34
SG 19 42 1 18 21
SF 35 33 4 10 18
PF 10 33 25 10 23
C 4 33 33 2 29



This table shows us player's preference, a.k.a. what does he like to do in offense. In previous table we saw SG was responsible for almost half of team's Driving shots, but this table tells us Driving isn't preferred choice of the team – it's rather jump shot with exception of SF who likes to shoot 3P more than 2P.

So we haven't still find either a Pass-first PG or Driving guard, or even a dominant PF for Motion, but we are getting there.

Starcrow Trail Blazers features PG and SG, much more different than RakBa's; Blazers' PG and SG are not so outside oriented and prefer their Jump Shot to Jump range. SF is a different story. It's also interesting PF and C have more tendency for passing than SF and SG. Speaking of that, I think this team is a bit low on Offensive Flow and could use more passing on their SG and SF.

I think this analysis will also show passing on either PF or C is very important for Motion.

Last edited by Koperboy at 3/19/2012 9:11:58 AM

This Post:
00
210204.123 in reply to 210204.2
Date: 3/19/2012 11:17:17 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
6060
It's not that I don't trust your data, I do, but I'd like to see Motion winning against LI in similar strong teams (preferably B3 level).

Unless that happens, I won't even consider using Motion over LI.

This Post:
11
210204.124 in reply to 210204.123
Date: 3/19/2012 11:30:23 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
952952
this will likely happen in two cases.

1. Somebody builds a team, designed to bring down li defensively and other options are being seriously considered after that

2. Somebody builds a specialized motion team

in either way, this probably won't happen anytime soon. I'm currently in the middle of realizing 1st option and doing the analysis for 2nd

This Post:
00
210204.125 in reply to 210204.123
Date: 3/19/2012 3:16:03 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
206206
(18524)

Good enough for you?

Advertisement