BuzzerBeater Forums

notat the time I played them they weren't

Then they have awful secondaries or are not being utilized in the right type of offense. Again, provide a link to some example games so we can see your wunderkind.

http://www.buzzerbeater.com/match/52662812/boxscore.aspx
http://www.buzzerbeater.com/match/52662828/boxscore.aspx
http://www.buzzerbeater.com/match/52662860/boxscore.aspx This one while playing at PF vs a PF no less, in a 2-3 zone format

The third one is under different conditions, so you can't really use it to compare guard performances. In any case, out of the 6 guards that started for your opponent in these 3 games, 5 of them have 11k or lower salaries. The sixth is a 60k guy who now has average GS and had ratings of 11 and 11.5 in this week's games. When he played against you his rating was 8.5, so I imagine his GS was even worse then. Your guy did have a nice game (16 assists) that time, but he was playing against a full court press of guys in terrible shape, which is probably the best recipe for disaster.

Like I said, and Kumiko added to it, a player may outplay a higher-salary opponent if he has better GS, secondaries, is played in a good tactic, etc. But if both players have "traditional" skills distributions, the guy with the highest salary will have the better skill-set and perform better under the same circumstances.

The third one is under different conditions, so you can't really use it to compare guard performances. In any case, out of the 6 guards that started for your opponent in these 3 games, 5 of them have 11k or lower salaries. The sixth is a 60k guy who now has average GS and had ratings of 11 and 11.5 in this week's games. When he played against you his rating was 8.5, so I imagine his GS was even worse then. Your guy did have a nice game (16 assists) that time, but he was playing against a full court press of guys in terrible shape, which is probably the best recipe for disaster.

Like I said, and Kumiko added to it, a player may outplay a higher-salary opponent if he has better GS, secondaries, is played in a good tactic, etc. But if both players have "traditional" skills distributions, the guy with the highest salary will have the better skill-set and perform better under the same circumstances.

52662812 the guy's salary is not below 11K
2804 I did not include because I suspect the guys GS was below respectable. Same with coming off bench at PG and SG in the last game, gameshape of 31K pg is medicore.

and in 2828 as I stated earlier, His gameshape at that game was fine, it was strong. But I guess, since there was no snapshot picture taken prior to the game to "prove" it, then you'll believe what you want to believe.

and so, I'll throw out there. I'd be fine adjusting his minutes to play him in a scrimmage vs a "respectable+" gameshape PG of your own choosing, to prove my point.


In regards to him playing at the PF position, which you dismissed so suddenly as not being relevant and used to compare guard performances (which I disagree with), I would actually look at that one the hardest personally, and go... "Hrmm, what kind of skill-set does this guard have where he's still classified at PG, but can play at and defend the 4 vs a natural 4 of higher salary, so well? And, is that part of the reason that he "may or may not" be outperforming these higher salaried guards he's playing against""

But again, that may just be, I am somewhat of a critical thinker about stuff like that...

Last edited by LBJisaCancer at 1/2/2013 6:35:31 AM

When I am out of the cup I will scrimmage you with any of my PGs. You can take your pick. I suggest you pick the 14k.

52662812 the guy's salary is not below 11K

Out of the 8 guys that played for your opponent, the two starting guards have salaries $11328 and 11965, so I admit that should be "12k or lower" and not 11k.

As for the GS issue in the 2828 game, it really isn't a matter of what we believe, or what we want to believe. The game rating (especially for players who are no longer improving or losing skills) is very closely correlated to the gameshape. You're saying that he now has ratings of 11 with average GS and that he posted an 8.5 with strong GS, I find it very unprobable.

If your player can play PF and be effective it's a great thing. It means he has a good, diverse skillset, and is able to cause mismatches. But your statement was something like "my 7.7k guard constantly outperforms 15-35k guards", so it's an apples and oranges thing. If you want to compare the results of two experiments, they have to be performed under the same circumstances. In this case, to compare a guard's performance to a different guard's performance, they both have to play the same position. So either we look at the games where your guy plays guard, or at games where someone plays a more expensive guard at PF.

52662812 the guy's salary is not below 11K

Out of the 8 guys that played for your opponent, the two starting guards have salaries $11328 and 11965, so I admit that should be "12k or lower" and not 11k.

As for the GS issue in the 2828 game, it really isn't a matter of what we believe, or what we want to believe. The game rating (especially for players who are no longer improving or losing skills) is very closely correlated to the gameshape. You're saying that he now has ratings of 11 with average GS and that he posted an 8.5 with strong GS, I find it very unprobable.

If your player can play PF and be effective it's a great thing. It means he has a good, diverse skillset, and is able to cause mismatches. But your statement was something like "my 7.7k guard constantly outperforms 15-35k guards", so it's an apples and oranges thing. If you want to compare the results of two experiments, they have to be performed under the same circumstances. In this case, to compare a guard's performance to a different guard's performance, they both have to play the same position. So either we look at the games where your guy plays guard, or at games where someone plays a more expensive guard at PF.

Since short of asking the managers of the other players the exact skillsets of their players, which I doubt they'd share, I have no way of knowing what their skillsets are.

Look Inside, is a... favorable offense these days. PFs and Cs, tend to be more "inside" oriented than outside oriented, so to me that seemed relevant. If he could guard guards, and can guard bigs, I would think that he'd be able to guard LI style guards whom are less shooters than normal guards, and less inside threats than legitimate inside players...



In anycase, this topic has veered way off, and we should have taken this to bb-mail ages ago

Since short of asking the managers of the other players the exact skillsets of their players, which I doubt they'd share, I have no way of knowing what their skillsets are.

That's true, you can't know the exact skills of a player unless he's on your team or on the transfer list. But that doesn't mean the skillset is totally random. For instance, you can use the salary calculator in buzzer-manager.com and see what skills can amount to a 35k PG or SG. A 35k guard can probably be better at all guard skills than an 8k guard.

As for your other point, I'm not disagreeing. Getting good value out of players with lower salaries than your opponents is a good step for success. A 25k guard with decent inside skills and good defense can be much more useful than a 35k guard with high JS and nothing else, for example. And having players that can cause mismatches by being able to play and defend different positions also gives you multiple weapons to use. My point was just that, given what you've showed and told, you can't really conclude that your 7.7k guard has been constantly outplaying 15-35k guards.

They should have a Team of the Week. It could be done by rating or use something like the Efficiency rating that Buzzermanager uses.(it is better than rating because it doesn't care about position)
Again....Hattrick added this two seasons ago, and it is very popular.