BuzzerBeater Forums

Threads clamoring for immediate radical change can be disconcerting, and would be more productive if the participants knew there was a mandatory waiting period.

I think this is a reasonable opinion and I agree with you on that - but again, a whole year?!

A year is like a whole life in the IT world today, thats too much.

I find it odd that these "illogical and incorrect" points have garnered six people to +1 RiseandFire's first post.

Why? There are 60,000 players, I would find it odd if you couldn't find 6 that would agree that the earth is flat and people that believe such things would love to give a ball to one of one of their fellow flat earthers. If I spoke too harshly I apologise. But no changes, for four seasons, what a great way to kill the game.

Charles is giving clues about how to make it work by mentioning shot blocking everytime but it's a big risk to test this, especially for the top division teams..

but when it is like over 90 of team just playing inside, sb is even with mtm valuable in my eyes. My problem with this skill, is that especially against outside tactics, it seems pretty unimportent not like OD which is everytim important. An SB and D cost a lot money on a high level.(a good beginning what a a better communication in the game viewer when a shot is affected from a blocking try)

to sum all of this up.

people need to complain less about changes and bb's need to fix a very broken 2-3.

done.

my thoughts on both matters , people do need to complain less in global and help forums but here in the suggestion forum let rip , there is plenty of thing this game could add that would make it alot better. like a revamped pl set up system where you can set up divisions conferences and stuff like that.

as for the 2-3 issue, if you dont think its majorly broken your in denial , go look at all the top teams , top national teams .
what defense do they play against a inside attack ? man to man ofcourse because 2-3 is suicide ,a instant loss.
look at the games where they do use 2-3 and lose , look at the main point scorers .
so guards scored most of the points they must have exploited the 2-3 zone outside right ? wrong actually watch the game and the guards get open inside shots over and over again.

thats the major problem with 2-3 zone driving guards rip it apart , over and over again open shots near the ring.
as one poster in here said maybe the forwards dont have od ? well generally an open shot under the ring doesnt use outside def...... generally :)

now ive looked at plenty of games n i read almost every post put in major forums on this game and ive read plenty of top national managers and div 1-2 managers taking a look at this help def , and shot blocking amounts.

almost all the time in a 2-3 zone the help defense coming over is a guard not one of your high sb forwards .
so i ask when ? when does high shot blocking become useful ? when is it going to be worth the stupid amount it adds to salary of a player ?

and lastly when if ever is a change going to be made where people can openly see that shotblocking is something useful other then an instant dont train.

not 1 national team i know of tells there managers to train shotblocking they say the exact opposite.

1) Open shots by guards at the rim have everything to do with help defense? If the OD of the forward is poor, guards can drive to the hoop from the wing all day and finish with open layups. I'm a Knicks fan, so I know this all too well
2) NT managers have motives for telling managers not to train SB, but this has more to do with them wanting their team's centers to have high IS/ID/REB to compete with other behemoths, does it not?
3) I think managers of the top teams and NTs would agree with me that they don't have the personnel some have described ITT as being ideal for a 2-3 zone. It may indeed be broken, or it may not. It just hasn't been tried enough.

Last edited by RiseandFire at 4/22/2011 11:11:26 AM

It's four BB seasons. A long time, but it's still 25% of the time in which BBs may already implement change.

A year is an arbitrary time period, I admit, but even if it's two or three seasons, the sentiment remains the same.

Personally your lack of any reasoning for your opinions is what bothers me, with the harshness of your tone a distant second. Your last sentence indicates that you still haven't read the first post.

It's four BB seasons. A long time, but it's still 25% of the time in which BBs may already implement change.

A year is an arbitrary time period, I admit, but even if it's two or three seasons, the sentiment remains the same.

I don't know that a blanket moratorium is the right answer either. I think that if there's a real problem, a change is needed, and if there is not, no change is needed. For example, all this 2-3 talk, they looked over it and said essentially that it's working as it's intended to and that people aren't using the right type of players to make it be the effective defense it could be. That seems perfectly reasonable. If, on the other hand, they had seen that, for example, they had failed to balance it properly (e.g., not counting the guards' OD skill when considering the opponent driving, making offense way too successful), then they should definitely make a change.

Essentially, and I mean this in as positive manner as possible, not only should they not make changes because people are complaining, but they should also not refrain from making changes because people are complaining about change.

Very good point. I'd say that BBs need not refrain from making changes, but a moratorium lets both sides go about it more reasonably.

The BBs generally do a very good job, but making changes such as this season's in every offseason would be a dangerous path to go down. The point is that the severity of a change needs to be understood by both BBs and managers, so the process should be more rigorous than complaint/response. And when a change is implemented, the BBs should be so sure it's right that they can't stand to think about it anymore.

Same principle behind, for example, the arduous process required to amend the US Constitution.

Last edited by RiseandFire at 4/22/2011 12:41:57 PM

1 - help defense has nothing to do with od in this game - bb's have directly said that help defense is controlled by sb

2- NT managers have motives yes , and yes its cause they want a behemoth , now shouldnt we be able to make a pure defensive shot blocking behemoth thats effective at stopping these players ? no we cant because sb is crazy expensive and ultimately flawed.

3- your thoughts on this is flawed as well , there are what 50k , 60k uses in this game ? and no one has a team that can run a 2-3 effectively ? think of it along those lines , 2-3 is broken its that simple , it may indeed work how they intended it to work but if so the bb's view on how a 2-3 should work and what type of players are needed is ultimately flawed.

dont get me wrong i think the bb's do a great job with almost everything in this game , its just too risky for any team to give 2-3 a go , to try an build a team that can run a 2-3 bb's have hinted the shot blocking is the key , yet to train shotblocking you need to give up something , so you have to ask what you can give up that will not cripple your player ?
from my point of view and id guess many others theres nothing you can give up for it , without giving up to much.