BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Princeton offense, a joke?

Princeton offense, a joke?

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
133577.22 in reply to 133577.21
Date: 3/11/2010 2:54:59 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
458458
Not sure if this was intentionally directed to me or not, but one game is a very small sample size. Maybe every incredibly sweet back door pass from your PG was dropped or the layup was missed. Or maybe your point guard was totally shut down by his defender. Who knows? It is one game. You would need maybe 100 or 1000 or 10000 games to begin to be able to make an accurate assessment of assists per tactic.
As far as my belief that Princeton causes an increased number of big man assists, your game seems to prove that point.

Once I scored a basket that still makes me laugh.
This Post:
00
133577.23 in reply to 133577.21
Date: 3/11/2010 2:55:12 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
458458
Not sure if this was intentionally directed to me or not, but one game is a very small sample size. Maybe every incredibly sweet back door pass from your PG was dropped or the layup was missed. Or maybe your point guard was totally shut down by his defender. Who knows? It is one game. You would need maybe 100 or 1000 or 10000 games to begin to be able to make an accurate assessment of assists per tactic.
As far as my belief that Princeton causes an increased number of big man assists, your game seems to prove that point.

Once I scored a basket that still makes me laugh.
This Post:
00
133577.24 in reply to 133577.20
Date: 3/11/2010 8:06:43 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
I definitely think that big men who pass well will have increased assists in the Princeton offense


Maybe, I am just saying that with his game I would not make that conclusion.

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
This Post:
00
133577.25 in reply to 133577.19
Date: 3/11/2010 8:20:48 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
this assumes that having JS<JR is a good idea to score threes. If I had 20 points to distribute between JS/JR and wanted a JR-favorable distribution, I'd probably do 10-10. I have never seen a player with like 7-13 be effective at all. By contrast, I have seen 13-7 score a ton of threes in the right tactical situations.


This goes for Plotts' examples, too, but it is really hard to talk about distributions like this without some context. I might be perfectly happy with a 13-7 SF up against a SF with 8 outside d. However, I would never play a 13-7 SG up against a guy with 14 outside d in an offense that is 3 pt heavy.

I have had pretty good success the past couple of seasons with a SG who has 15-14. I personally think the reason most people start to love the jump shot monsters is because they look at individual stats instead of looking at the big picture.

I do agree, though, that some balance is needed and that if I only had 20 pts I would probably go 10-10.

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
This Post:
00
133577.26 in reply to 133577.25
Date: 3/11/2010 6:46:07 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
409409
well... it's very likely that all of us will agree that a 3-17 player is about to be shuted down by an OD of 6. Even is we only think of 3pt shots.

Will a 17-3 player be shuted down by an OD of 6?

The thing is JR needs JS to work (is the opposite true?). In fact, JR is a skill used to modulate the decrement of JS depending on distance. (So it is safe to assume JS decrease with distance increments).

Against an OD of 10 and thinking in long distance shots. What would be best?

A: 10-10
B: 11-9
C: 9-11

Why would you bother to have high JR if you don't have high JS? When you reach both (say 14-14) Wich is going to be more effective: 1 more JS or 1 more JR? (Against a OD of 15 and thinking in long distance shots).


This Post:
00
133577.27 in reply to 133577.26
Date: 3/11/2010 8:23:23 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
Great comments and I agree with all of them. Also some great questions to which I do not have the answers.

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
This Post:
00
133577.29 in reply to 133577.28
Date: 3/11/2010 9:06:13 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
The two are mutually exclusive.


Perhaps in real life but not in BB. In my mind Demian hit the nail with his analysis.

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
This Post:
00
133577.30 in reply to 133577.26
Date: 3/11/2010 9:47:08 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
916916
And if you have a great JS, you should also have a great driving too ยก

Anyway you can have a lot of JR as Demian said, but if you havent a bit of JS, its going to be a bad scorer.

This Post:
00
133577.31 in reply to 133577.28
Date: 3/11/2010 10:53:09 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
458458
I believe that Demian was talking about the game, in which JR is an added function of JS when taking long jump shots. It is not mutually exclusive.
And while Michael Jordan began his career with a pretty poor long distance shot (who needed one when he could go by anybody and dunk over everybody at any time) in the last 9 years of his career ( not including his comebacks) he shot 37% from behind the line, which is very good.


Once I scored a basket that still makes me laugh.
This Post:
00
133577.32 in reply to 133577.31
Date: 3/12/2010 1:35:24 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
55
I am a bit of a noob but one of my mentors told me when training my players to try to always keep JS and JR about the same. Was that correct?

Last edited by Hawkman at 3/12/2010 1:35:44 AM

Advertisement