BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > unrealistic Free Throw %

unrealistic Free Throw %

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
187744.144 in reply to 187744.143
Date: 7/12/2011 3:02:17 AM
Kitakyushu
ASL
Overall Posts Rated:
12341234
I actually like the training how it is now...but we got into this a good Jump shooter doesn't = a good free throw shooter......so here is a list of pure shooters...in fact the 20 best( I don't agree with all of them) but look at the FG% and then look at the FT%...
(http://bleacherreport.com/articles/430516-the-20-greatest...)

This Post:
00
187744.145 in reply to 187744.142
Date: 7/12/2011 3:23:20 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
147147

Please do


Chuck Person. Dan Majerle. Vernon Maxwell. Derek Harper. Clifford Robinson. Mike Miller.

To name a few.

All of this misses the point that's already been proven: FG% and FT% are independent of each other.

If you'd like to disprove the data, go ahead. You're going to need more than vitriol and a few easy examples though....

This Post:
00
187744.146 in reply to 187744.145
Date: 7/12/2011 5:00:44 AM
Kitakyushu
ASL
Overall Posts Rated:
12341234
Chuck Person. Dan Majerle. Vernon Maxwell. Derek Harper. Clifford Robinson. Mike Miller.

Are you kidding me.....If those are the PURE shooters you came up with I have already proved my point. Cliff Robinson..yikes, his jumper was flat..he could hit a three every once in a while but a pure shooter..NOPE sorry....Mike Miller., Veron Maxwell you even put Chuck Person on your list...Please tell me that isn't the best you could do.
All of this misses the point that's already been proven: FG% and FT% are independent of each other.

Yeah...In Buzzer Beater they are independent of each other...but in Real life...sorry...The mechanics are the same( talking about the arm extention, follow through, elbow pointing to the place where you are shooting)..You have to convince me with somebody better than Derek Harper...hahahahahahahhaa You probably think John Starks was a better shooter than Allen Houston....

This Post:
00
187744.147 in reply to 187744.146
Date: 7/12/2011 5:08:11 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
204204
I wouldn't even say that I'm surprised about the fact that FG% and FT% are independent of each other. FGs can also be inside shots, and those are way more efficient than mid-range jumpers or so. The 3FG% example was better - but I'd want to see more data on that before concluding all that much.

This Post:
00
187744.148 in reply to 187744.147
Date: 7/12/2011 6:26:17 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
406406
I think the real world shooting percentages correlate in the following way:

FT% > FG% > 3P%

I had a player that shot 45% FG, 50% 3P and 20% FT. Thats not realistic and those players should get fixed, worst FT- shooters in this game should at least make 40% of their attempts.

This Post:
00
187744.149 in reply to 187744.148
Date: 7/12/2011 6:59:00 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
3939
I had a player that shot 45% FG, 50% 3P and 20% FT. Thats not realistic and those players should get fixed, worst FT- shooters in this game should at least make 40% of their attempts.


Difference being, in real life players train/practise/perfect all of their skills day in day out, 3 players wont spend a week working on their perimeter D, while the rest of the team stands and watches, then the week after do the same for jump shots? You argue for realism, then perhaps training itself needs to be completely changed.

Would it make it easier for you if there were just 2 training options? Forward fundamentals, and guard fundamentals.

I can accept failure, everyone fails at something. But I cant accept not trying. - MJ
This Post:
00
187744.150 in reply to 187744.149
Date: 7/12/2011 7:24:45 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
I had a player that shot 45% FG, 50% 3P and 20% FT. Thats not realistic and those players should get fixed, worst FT- shooters in this game should at least make 40% of their attempts.


Difference being, in real life players train/practise/perfect all of their skills day in day out, 3 players wont spend a week working on their perimeter D, while the rest of the team stands and watches, then the week after do the same for jump shots? You argue for realism, then perhaps training itself needs to be completely changed.

Would it make it easier for you if there were just 2 training options? Forward fundamentals, and guard fundamentals.



and also the training process is complete unrealistic, you don't process so fast ;) So maybe erasing all the training would be much more realistic, then that what we have currently.

This Post:
00
187744.151 in reply to 187744.148
Date: 7/12/2011 7:30:48 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
12061206
So You should use FT training and Your problem will be solved ;-)
If You don't use FT training and You want to have better FT% it means You want to make this game unfair. It will be unfair for other managers who trained FT, spend their time to do it and therefore they have worse other skills.
In the same way I see corelation between blocks and rebounds. In real life very often player who is great shotblocker is good rebounder too. And what does it means? I could train only SB and then open new thread and wanted to all my players with great SB but weak RB have more rebounds in match ;-) It would be unfair for other managers who trained RB.

This Post:
00
187744.152 in reply to 187744.151
Date: 7/12/2011 7:55:07 AM
Kitakyushu
ASL
Overall Posts Rated:
12341234
n the same way I see corelation between blocks and rebounds. In real life very often player who is great shotblocker is good rebounder too. And what does it means? I could train only SB and then open new thread and wanted to all my players with great SB but weak RB have more rebounds in match ;-) It would be unfair for other managers who trained RB.

Not really....Training SB gives you sub levels in Rebounding and ID... but the player wouldn't be able to tip the ball in due to a lack of IS training...

This Post:
11
187744.153 in reply to 187744.152
Date: 7/12/2011 8:12:20 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
12061206
Yep, it gives sublevels but they aren't decisive. I can imagine player who have SB=20+ and RB= ~8 and he will be crashed under baskets in every 1st or 2nd division.
But in real life there are many unrealistic players (Manute Bol, Magic Johnson, Dennis Rodman, Shaquille O'Neal, and many more in weaker competitions) so in BB they should exist too ;-) If somebody want to have player without FT (because he don't want to train FT) he should get what he want ;-)

From: Tangosz
This Post:
22
187744.154 in reply to 187744.153
Date: 7/12/2011 9:42:48 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
573573
I don't know whether the resurrection of this discussion depresses or elates me.

Depresses me because it shows people can't/won't read and don't know anything about statistics.

Elates me because it means those people who know something about statistics will have a nice competitive advantage (and thus enable the success of moneyball-type approaches).

Advertisement