BuzzerBeater Forums

No, I don't get it. Because in the BB game, JS and JR control a players ability to hit jumpshots and 3 pointers. You are arguing that the real life FG% and 3P% don't influence FT%, why on earth should JS/JR be linked with FT in the game? That makes absolutely no sense at all.

If a player is so horrible at shooting FTs, but is good at jump shots, it doesn't take much brains for the player to shoot a jumpshot as his free throw. (A free throw shooter is allowed to jump, as long as he doesnt step over the FT line before the ball reaches the rim.)

Looking at the guy posted in the first page of this thread: http://www.buzzerbeater.com/player/7095293/overview.aspx
you can see that he shoots 0% in over1000 free throws in his career, while this season he is shooting 0.483 from the field (I assume a lot of these are JS given the fact that he only plays PG) and 0.287 from 3-pt range (obviously jump shots--excluding any full-court buzzerbeating heaves) in over 350 attempts. This player has been around for 10 seasons already.

The reason players shoot FTs without jumping (jumping without a violation) is that it is easier to shoot a FT without jumping, because the motion of a FT is a more compact and more reproducible than the motion of a jumpshot. However, if for whatever reason, shooting a traditional FT is harder than a JS, then the player can (as long as he doesn't cause a violation) shoot a jumpshot for his FT. Thus, (even with nerves being factored in) it doesn't make any sense for a player's FT% to be drastically less than his JS%.

(Note that this is not an argument meant for logic. Making 0 FT in over a 1000 attempts is obviously illogical, unless the player is purposefully trying to miss by throwing the ball in the other direction.
This is an argument relating FT% to FG%--particularly for guards, who can have their FG% (or 3-PT) related to their JS%.)

No, I don't get it. Because in the BB game, JS and JR control a players ability to hit jumpshots and 3 pointers. You are arguing that the real life FG% and 3P% don't influence FT%, why on earth should JS/JR be linked with FT in the game? That makes absolutely no sense at all.

I didn't say that.
Moreover bewtween "JS" and "FG%" there's a difference. Not small. JS is the skill, your skill. FG% is influenced by many factors (yes JS but also game shapes, defenders, defending strategy, etc...)

Last edited by Biffo (*DT Member) at 7/12/2011 5:33:25 PM

This is a good variation on the notion of implementing a floor on FT shooting. I agree it would be more realistic that way. I don't support it from a gaming perspective, but I can see how it would be more realistic.

To be more realistic as well though, we'd probably need a hidden cap on each player's maximal FT ability.

In any event, if people can find good stats tables with position, FG%, 3P% and FT%, I could break things down by position (to remove the centers and bigmen whose FG% is likely higher due to shot type selection). Best would be if people have stats broken down by court location. That might let us separate which type of shot making ability correlates best with FT% (if any).

No way....50% isn't good enough...I have 3 players under average and I plan on training FT in two weeks...

Uhm, that was me and not the poor Japanese user.

...I am from The USA but thanks for thinking about me...I just live and work in Japan. But hey, don't worry about that fool who wanted to try and insult me..sticks and stones...bounces off me like I'm wearing a teflon jacket...
I do think we have figured out a good fix though....start FT's at awful..

I do not have an opinion on ANYMORE on this issue.

I do believe that it is unrealisitic for a player to shoot nearly over 1000 FTs and miss all of them especially when he can shoot a jumpshot. I do believe that no player should shoot under 20% from the free throw line.

I do think if JS is strongly linked to FTs it will reduce the value of player that is already a good FT shooter. It would not be fair to those who take the time to train FTs.

Something should be done so no player is missing 1000s free throws. But remember BB's with the new cross training don't link JS and FTs to strongly.

But remember BB's with the new cross training don't link JS and FTs to strongly.

Are you saying that JS and FT will not be linked strongly in cross training? Or are you suggesting to the BBs not to link them strongly?


(Personally, I would prefer for them to be linked strongly, even though I already have strong FT shooters.)

But remember BB's with the new cross training don't link JS and FTs to strongly.

Are you saying that JS and FT will not be linked strongly in cross training? Or are you suggesting to the BBs not to link them strongly?


(Personally, I would prefer for them to be linked strongly, even though I already have strong FT shooters.)

News say:

now improvement in one skill will in addition be linked, more weakly, even to seemingly unrelated skills

"more weakly" does not indicate a stong link to me.

News say:

now improvement in one skill will in addition be linked, more weakly, even to seemingly unrelated skills

"more weakly" does not indicate a stong link to me.

hmm... But are JS and FT "seemingly unrelated skills"? Because to me, they do seem to be related.

And if they are "seemingly unrelated", are all of these unrelated skills trained/ is FT one of them?

Edit: A seemingly unrelated skill would be (IMO) FT and SB, or even FT and IS.

Last edited by j9s3 at 7/13/2011 6:35:05 PM

Well, the better idea would be a FT floor, and a cap. Seeing as people over their career(most of them), don't really alter their percentage in a major way. FT should start at pitiful/awful the least, and you shouldn't be able to have a lot of players with say 12+ FT skill. Only in this condition would the JS/FT correlation make sense(IMO)

I really don't get how anyone can think JS and FT are unrelated. I can see IS and FT being unrelated, but shooting jumpers from even 6 feet out should help the player when he steps to the line. Let alone JR training, which should be very very strongly related to FT.