BuzzerBeater Forums

Why not simply adding a checkbox in linup if you want to use garbage time for your reserve/backups so that every coach is able to decide how to use it? Would resolve many problems of minute management and give managers more freedom.

Any idea that gives a little bit more control over garbage time is great for me.

Also, I'll say it again: after a certain point (later than the winning team), the losing team should also have to option of going to garbage time. If you are down by 45 after 3 quarters and are still playing your starters, something is wrong.

good idea too

I don't see the value of an additional checkbox, I just think it should be better worked in the attitude setting.

Garbage time in my view should not be a on/off switch based on a certain score difference reached as it should take into account multiple variables. For example, if i'm playing for a playoff spot and point difference is important, I might not want garbage time regardless of the difference in the current game.

the way I see it it should be something like this:
- TIE - I don't really care about the score, I care more about the minutes of my players. so, win or lose, I would expect the coach to work the minutes. garbage time with TIE doesn't make sense to me.
- Crunch time - I really want my players to win or to perform at its best. so it should really be a case of minimum garbage time, maybe if the score is too big one way or another with too few minutes left (but again, it should also take into account point difference in case of playoff implications).
- normal - this is a bit more complicated. it should probably be similar to crunch time, with less strict rules to aply it (like smaller difference and larger amount of time maybe).

I don't like the idea of having a binary checkbox that would enforce or not this option as I think it complicates thing. Like for example, I play TIE and I have the checkbox for garbage time off, what should happen? My starters will play most of the time? Or if I play TIE and the checkbox is ON so it enforces garbage time more easily, my reserves will play more minutes than my starters? then why not make them starters from the begining ?

Meh, I'd say deal with it. It's part of the game and adds another layer of challenge.

Also, removing garbage time won't really solve your problems with minute management.

Last edited by Dreamy at 1/5/2024 7:17:11 AM

I'll never understand this kind of response. Literally everything that could possibly be changed is part of the game. What needs to be argued is that it's a valuable part.

You don't have to argue anything actually. :D

But if you do, start with telling us how this feature will resolve your weekly minute issues?

Otherwise, it just sounds like a knee jerk reaction by someone whose player(s) in reserve got a couple extra minutes.

I'm not the original poster and I'm not arguing anything in particular, except that it's pointless to say "it's part of the game". It does not mean anything. It's an arbitrary part of the game that doesn't bring pleasure to anyone.

In this specific instance, I am probably in the top 1% at knowing how to manage minutes for optimal GS (don't look now, I did manage to screw up my GS this week due to a holiday trip ). Even so, I think the system is a silly hoop to jump through, and no amount of "it's part of the game" blabber is going to change it.

This is important because I actually think there *is* something that is a pleasurable part of the game that I wouldn't want to give up in any modification. I wouldn't want to lose the fact that you need to make plans and anticipate the week.

I'm not the original poster and I'm not arguing anything in particular, except that it's pointless to say "it's part of the game". It does not mean anything. It's an arbitrary part of the game that doesn't bring pleasure to anyone.

Well, forget those few words used in my post, and focus on the underlying point, which is.... Every game has its challenges, that's what makes a game interesting. If you don't like the way part of the game works, you'd have to make a much better case for changing it than the 2 sentences the original poster put together.

Cause as far as I can see, majority of teams got little problem with GS. Most teams I play against have an average GS of 8+ anyway. And there are tons of things to help you too, such as coaches, specialities and training. I can argue, making minute managing easier will make game shape completely obsolete and we'll lose a valuable aspect of the game. :)

Using the "Attitude" set for the match makes no sense in my opinion. TIE is not only used to give playing time to one's coaches, but also in order to accumulate/recover enthusiasm during the season, as well as other levels of commitment.
So we give "Attitude" two very different uses which would make its use very complicated.

Some time ago I also pointed out another thing regarding garbage time, which did not only concern playing time (and very simply the difference in baskets), but also merchandising.
Since it was made public that the team's merchandising is influenced by the presence of the players in the individual rankings, it has become more important to try to get high playing time for the best players (who therefore contribute more to the team).
If a very good player almost always plays 25 minutes per game because his team goes into garbage time, he will tend to have worse statistics than other players who play 35 or more minutes in teams that do not go into garbage time (or that do not have substitutions, the which also goes against all the work that has been done to limit short rosters).

Plus there is an inherent error in garbage.
Many times, having a decidedly stronger quintet than the bench, I went into garbage time at halftime because my team was up by 20 points, but then with my reserves on the pitch against the opposing team's starters the gap always closed to reduce and I often ended up winning around 10 points or sometimes even less.
This makes no sense in any garbage time you want, if a team returns to a recoverable gap the garbage should be removed and we should return to a rebalancing of forces, otherwise it is really a wrong way to evaluate a team better than another .
You can't see games in which a team leading by 20+ points halfway through the third quarter plays the rest of the game with the bench players, making a comeback and risking losing without the coach putting the starters on the field again.

So I am in favor of changes to garbage time, if not to "choose" it explicitly, then at least to regulate its use in a more sensible way.

In my opinion Garbage Time is used to keep the score in real mantinels. Removing this will cause the need of some additional changes to keep the results within realistic limits.