BuzzerBeater Forums

Related to the issue of tactics pace and stamina, my argument would be that if pace is not related to stamina, then, why defensive tactics do have pace? Because, it is pretty clear that argument of shot quality is not the point in defensive pace.

It's not clear at all. There are two parties to a shot, an offensive and a defensive one. Both influence the quality of any given shot.

While I will agree that there are two parties to a shot let me ask you this: We know that pace is one of the variables wich decides wich is the shot quality our team will look for in the offense, now, how does that story fit with the role of pace on defensive tactics?

I noted that in JosefKas "what if" service, changing from a higher paced defence to a lower paced increased the offensive rating. This might be the effect of stamina, but it could of course be some miscalculation. The effect was slight anyway.

The relevance of defense to pace should be pretty straightforward: a defense that is listed as "slower pace" is likely one that will make you work longer in the clock to find a quality shot.

If that is true, then slower paces will be very dominating because you are saying they are better defenses (thinking against a rival who can go outside, inside and neutral with equal probability in a hypotethic situation) than higher paced ones.

That is a really strong idea wich I hope will not be true. Because, you will be saying that a 3-2 (when opponent goes outside) is a better defense than a 2-3(when opponent goes inside) just because of peace (thinking in a balanced offensive/defensive theme for you and your opponent).

I'm really not sure if you are considering those kind of consecuences...

Last edited by Zero, the Magi. at 10/6/2009 8:45:18 AM

I like your example. However, it is not exactly how I see pace. I always thought that with a slower pace, the offense would increase their pickiness on shots. So for example:

-with a slow pace, they would wait for an opportunity that would give them, on average, 1 pt per shot attempt
-with a fast pace, the offense would wait for an opportunity that would give them, on average, 0.9 pts per shot attempt

The issue with the slow pace is you hit the end of the shot clock more often and when you do that, the offense will take shots that have a low chance of success.

I think that the pace of the game is a combination of the offensive and defensive choices - when combined they give an overall "pace" to the game.

So this way of looking at things doesn't change the example substantially.

I was replying to your post about the different defenses. It explicitly states in the rules that a 3-2 zone or 2-3 zone decreases the pace, for example. Your post implied that there was no change to the pace, that it just takes longer to find a shot because of the defensive match-ups.

In both of your examples you said: "the opposition still needs a .350 chance in order to shoot".


Last edited by HeadPaperPusher at 10/6/2009 11:58:51 AM

While I will agree that there are two parties to a shot let me ask you this: We know that pace is one of the variables wich decides wich is the shot quality our team will look for in the offense, now, how does that story fit with the role of pace on defensive tactics?

This is not necessarily true: if all your shots are very high quality, then your offensive pace is barely relevant, to give one example. Individual player skill is what determines shot quality

If your offense is way better than his defense, this means almost all of your shots are high quality ones, then regardeless your offensive tactic pace it will be easier for you to find a HQ shot. But, this has nothing to do with wich is quality your players are looking for. Example, your low paced offensive tactic tells your team to find a shot opportunity of .350, but since your players are mucho more better than their matchups, they always see shots of .400 on average; so they take thos shots, but the same match you could use a fast paced offensive tactic so they woul search for shots of .300 but since the average is .400 the result is the same.
But, the shot quality they were looking for was still different even if the result was the same. And since having HQ shots all time is not what usually happens it is important to understand that yes, pace always affects the shot quality your team will look for.

Anyway, how does the pace of the defensive tactic fits in this explanation? lets review your next post.

Last edited by Zero, the Magi. at 10/6/2009 5:46:27 PM

The relevance of defense to pace should be pretty straightforward: a defense that is listed as "slower pace" is likely one that will make you work longer in the clock to find a quality shot.

If that is true, then slower paces will be very dominating because you are saying they are better defenses (thinking against a rival who can go outside, inside and neutral with equal probability in a hypotethic situation) than higher paced ones

.

Not necessarily. My statement implies nothing about the overall quality of shots taken, just about the time you need in order to find a good one, on average.

I'll give you a very simple example:

Imagine that a Man to Man defense gives the opposition a .400 chance to score a basket on both inside and outside shots, on average. Imagine that their offensive tactics require them to find a .350 or better shot before they take one. In these circumstances, the opposition will likely take the first shot they see.

Now imagine I switch from M2M to 2-3, where the chance of inside shots is lowered to .250, but the chance of outside shots rises to .450. The opposition still needs a .350 chance in order to shoot. Now, since the offense is a series of shot opportunities, they might see some bad inside opportunities before they shoot, but will only take an outside shot. This will make them work the clock a little bit until they get an outside opportunity, however the overall quality of shots will potentially be higher.

This is obviously very simplified, but that's how I think it works.

That is so not true for two things at least:

First, you are saying that pace works not as a parameter to select the shot quality the team will look for, instead, it determines how long it might take them to find the required shot quality (perhaps based on matchups, tactics, etc.) they need to look for. This directly contradicts the rules: "A faster pace means that the team will lower its standards for which shot to take and take less time to get it up the court…resulting in more possessions in the game. Slower pace means just the opposite." GE section from Game Manual. I really think you are confusing the causality here: since shot quality standard is increased by a slow paced offensive, then it takes them more time to find a shot able to be qualified enough to be taken (except in the unusuall situation already commented in the previous post)

Second, assuming you are right, your example can not work if my offensive was outside focused because when you make the switch to 2-3 it will be easier for me to find the HQ outside shot. Thus, making the 2-3 a tactic with a higher pace(compared to M2M) in the example you showed. This is something really dramatic, because it will imply that the pace of tactics are determined by the offensive choices of your opponents, making possible for the 2-3 of the example to have either fast(if opponent goes outside) or slow(if opponent goes inside) pace. This also contradicts the rules and starts to make that understanding of pace to crumble.

Either that view of pace has to deal with a lot of really weird consecuences or you need to provide a credible argument for it.

Last edited by Zero, the Magi. at 10/6/2009 5:49:47 PM