BuzzerBeater Forums

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

Shotblocking: Good or Bad?

Set priority
Show messages by
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

This Post:
66
205736.30 in reply to 205736.26
Date: 1/4/2012 12:09:31 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
244244
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.

This Post:
00
205736.32 in reply to 205736.31
Date: 1/4/2012 1:55:32 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
244244
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

From: rubbercube

To: red
This Post:
00
205736.33 in reply to 205736.31
Date: 1/4/2012 3:38:51 PM
Zwölf
II.4
Overall Posts Rated:
687687
Second Team:
Zwölf 2
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

This Post:
00
205736.34 in reply to 205736.26
Date: 1/4/2012 6:38:47 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
455455

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

This Post:
00
205736.35 in reply to 205736.34
Date: 1/4/2012 10:13:07 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
260260
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

This Post:
00
205736.36 in reply to 205736.30
Date: 1/5/2012 1:10:34 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
14651465
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 don't think you have shown that player one is better in any way or that shot blocking is more cost effective, just cheaper. I also think your players with atrocious RE and ID are also horrible but you make an excellent point about a player I will call player four.

Player four
All secondaries respectable, all primaries except IS (SB, ID and RE) wondrous, IS atrocious.
Salary $21, 873.

Now that is a player a lot of teams would kill to have. We will ignore that it is impossible because of secondaries. If you are a purely outside based team how good would he be as a backup big men giving you critical minutes?

It is just the problem with the way big men have their salaries calculated.

Last edited by yodabig at 1/5/2012 1:11:08 AM

This Post:
00
205736.37 in reply to 205736.36
Date: 1/5/2012 3:06:47 AM
Zwölf
II.4
Overall Posts Rated:
687687
Second Team:
Zwölf 2
Perfect outside offense, inside defence big man?
113 771 $/week

11 12
7 7
20 20
1 19
19 19

DR and PA so high cause they dont cost anything in salary. JS, JR, OD, HN maxed so that he wont turn into a small forward. Still pretty easily affordable for league 1 and/or 2 teams.
rubbercube

Last edited by rubbercube at 1/5/2012 3:07:28 AM

This Post:
00
205736.38 in reply to 205736.37
Date: 1/5/2012 4:13:52 AM
Matrix Mighty Dunkers
II.4
Overall Posts Rated:
10011001
but only for RnG and isolation, and position PF I think

Last edited by aMORFIczny at 1/5/2012 4:14:36 AM

Advertisement