1. Big Njord mentioned his opposing viewpoints in these two posts
(313583.1)(315023.15), and I think they are worth reading.
2. Besides the fact that the Leaderboard and Jersey Sales favor strong teams that choose to disable garbage time,
what I'm more curious about is whether losing by a larger difference would affect later Fan Surveys and attendance. (Can BB confirm this?)
3. If strong teams play two blowout games in a week and chooses to enable garbage time in one and disable it in the other,
team ranked lower in the league might complain that he all faced strong teams who disabled garbage time, while another team with the same record faced strong teams who enabled it, resulting in a worse point differential and a sense of unfairness similar to what cataplasma mentioned
(315023.12).
- I've considered changing the tie-breaker, but there doesn't seem to be a better solution than the current one.
(8988.1)(223277.1)(275710.1)- If garbage time were disabled for regular games, it would lead to side effects such as more monotonous playing time with less variation, and strong teams losing some control over time management.
4. Losing by a larger difference might feel worse psychologically.
(16163.2)- If the losing team could also choose whether to enter garbage time, it might at least allow better time control.
But this could lead to tanking for time management reasons, such as intentionally underperforming in games they expect to lose in order to ensure the score reaches the condition that triggers garbage time.
5. When using a lineup with only 7-8 main players and disabling garbage time in blowout games, if the setup and player combinations are good, I've seen cases where maximum playing time was kept within 38-39 minutes.
(136211103), milano rockets, max 39 mins
(136211112), milano rockets, max 39 mins
(137523521), Młoty Stargard, max 38 mins
If this can be done consistently, it appears workable for weeks with two blowout games.
6. I suspect BB originally designed garbage time with a specific intention:
to make it not workable to rely on only 7-8 main players throughout a full regular season (excluding scrimmages).When a team with only 7-8 main players is in a close game, starters often play more than 40 minutes.
In blowout win games, with too few substitutes, several starters stay on the court, often resulting in some players playing more than 40 minutes.
In my view, playing more than 80 minutes a week is already beyond acceptable.
Even in weeks with two blowout wins, relying on only 7 main players seems unworkable, whereas 8 main players with rotation might work.
7. If disabling garbage time makes it more workable to rely on only 7-8 main players throughout a full regular season (excluding scrimmages),
it would weaken the importance of roster depth and reduce the strategic value of game management.
8. Suddenly thought of something:
if garbage time can be toggled, how would people who don't know about it realize that disabling it helps ensure the success of a 48+ strategy?
And if there's a way to inform them of that, then why not just directly tell them the blank-starting-position 48+ strategy?
Last edited by little Guest at 11/9/2025 11:57:28 AM