BuzzerBeater Forums

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

Hmm, well that's a silly way to look at it, comparing 1 and 2 is just not fair.

Using my salary calculator(yeah I know it's a bit off now, but the point remains). All have respectable secondaries.

Player one
All primaries wondrous.
$139,156

Player two
Atrocious SB.
$62,888

Player three
Atrocious RB.
$30,875

Player four
Atrocious IS.
$30,875

Player five
Atrocious ID. Yes, this one is silly because you obviously need both SB/ID to be a good defender.
$28,452

Seems obvious to me that SB is actually the most cost effective of the inside skills. Using your example of removing one skill and raising the other skills to a salary level similar to that of the all wondrous I'll do that with IS.

Player six
Atrocious IS. Colossal in other inside skills
$134,406

I could get Colossals in Rebounding/Inside Defense/ and Shot Blocking, he may not put the ball in the hole, but he'd hold his own defensively/control the glass, especially against some triple 16 dude.

Good point, a true cost-effectiveness study would be much more in detail on the actual effectiveness of the skills and not just cost.

Edit: And my first post was really just to argue the post it replied too, so I do believe it filled it's purpose there.

Last edited by Eminence Front at 1/4/2012 2:03:06 PM

Great sum up post! (+1)
And for the defensive big man (with lets say 14 in ID/RB/SB) instead of even 10 IS you could leave it even lower and give him JS and JR instead. Those two skills dont cost a thing for his salary (Im pretty sure, could check if I was on computer) but they do make him valuable for your outside offense.
When it comes to testing the cost-effectiveness, very difficult I think but if sb does that it will be much appreciated, from my behalf atleast.
rubbercube

Anyone want player #1?

Based on the current school of thought, no. Player #1 is clearly the least desireable.

However if we're going to think outside the box for a minute here, that thought being why are all the top teams in BB all playing and succeding with LI offense, then maybe it's these same undertrained SB skills that have helped this become the case?

I don't know if this school of thought is correct but I do think it's worth exploring and discussing. Maybe player #1 is exactly what you need to beat the LI offense and should be considered the most desirable player in your list, only we've all been convinced/brainwashed that the opposite is true? Maybe. ;)

Last edited by Beener not Beanerz at 1/4/2012 6:55:27 PM

I agree, maybe :) I'm beginning to become convinced that somewhere along the line, someone threw us off on purpose. Conspiracy theory... :)

Last edited by SREZ at 1/4/2012 10:13:22 PM