BuzzerBeater Forums

For zones I think a mix of OD and SB on your big man is great, especially in a 2-3. If a guard penetrates in and then takes a jump shot, you'll need OD on your big man to pressure the handler, and then SB to pressure the shot. I'm kind of a hypocrite here since both my big men trainees have bad OD and okay SB, but you'll probably get away with running a 2-3 with players like mine in lower divisions. As you move up though, if you try running a 2-3 with players with bad-ok OD and SB, then your player will either get into foul trouble, or the guard will light your team up if he has high Driving and JS.

I personally believe in SB, because it find it hard to think that BBs would have created a skill that is significantly less important than others.

What you say makes perfect sense. If SB had no value in the game whatsoever, then why would the BB's bother implementing the skill into the game, unless they enjoy watching us argue over a skill we know very little about. I highly doubt this though. If Sb had no value, then it would probably just be part of ID, which it may be associated with now, but obviously has characteristics unique enough to distinguish itself from ID. When I think of shotblocking as a skill, i often think stealing should be its own separate skill too, but obviously the BB's did not think so, meaning SB must have its worth.

Last edited by SREZ at 1/2/2012 8:55:59 PM

Sometimes in Brazilian's forum I heard something like '' fucks and laughs '' about one of my words. This word was --->'' Acho bom treinar toco'', Or I think is good to train shot blocking.

I agree with zones. That keeps big men close to the basket (not sure about 1-3-1) and so they can get some use of their high SB, if they have one. But do you think SB is more important when defending layups and dunks than when you challenge a jumpshot? In real bball Jshots are rarely blocked but the challenging is very important in making the shot difficult for the shooter. Inside shots on the other hand are getting blocked again and again. But of course BuzzerBeater isnt exactly real bball...
rubbercube

I am just echoing what someone else said earlier but the problem with SB isn't that it isn't a good skill, it is that the salary formula punished you for having it.

Compate thses three players and tell me which you would rather have.

Player one
All secondaries respectable, all primaries (IS, ID, RE and SB) wondrous.
Salary $114,184.

Player two
All secondaries respectable, all primaries except SB (IS, ID and RE) wondrous, SB atrocious.
Salary $52,292.

Player three
All secondaries respectable, all primaries except SB (IS, ID and RE) prodigious, SB atrocious.
Salary $108,668.

I would think that player two was trivially worse than player one at less than half the cost. It's a no brainer. As for player three, wow, that would be a fantastic big man for the cost. I guess I would like better secondaries because of how cost effective they are but overall he would be brilliant.

Anyone want player #1?

Last edited by yodabig at 1/4/2012 2:09:42 AM

Thank you. Someone on my side ;)

Well still, I would take #1 if I wanted a player to stop Look Inside (maybe not that high IS in that case). If I wanted an offensive center I'd take #3 or #2 depending on how big a salary I can afford.
If everyone picks #3 with those options, well, the result can be seen in B3 games: people kicking each others asses with LI and the winner will be decided mostly based on which one has higher Inside Offense.
So to sum up you're saying that offense is more important than defence (?). I dont think you thought it like that, but that's where it seems to be going.
rubbercube

Last edited by rubbercube at 1/4/2012 4:15:49 AM