BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Shotblocking: Good or Bad?

Shotblocking: Good or Bad?

Set priority
Show messages by
From: SREZ

This Post:
00
205736.19 in reply to 205736.11
Date: 1/2/2012 8:55:12 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
260260
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

From: Saltori

To: SREZ
This Post:
00
205736.20 in reply to 205736.3
Date: 1/2/2012 11:28:54 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
177177
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.

From: rubbercube

To: SREZ
This Post:
00
205736.21 in reply to 205736.18
Date: 1/3/2012 5:12:43 AM
Zwölf
II.4
Overall Posts Rated:
687687
Second Team:
Zwölf 2
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

This Post:
33
205736.26 in reply to 205736.25
Date: 1/4/2012 2:05:30 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
14651465
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

From: Bballin

This Post:
00
205736.27 in reply to 205736.26
Date: 1/4/2012 2:26:21 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
968968
Thank you. Someone on my side ;)

This Post:
00
205736.28 in reply to 205736.26
Date: 1/4/2012 4:15:07 AM
Zwölf
II.4
Overall Posts Rated:
687687
Second Team:
Zwölf 2
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

Advertisement