BuzzerBeater Forums

And if you have a great JS, you should also have a great driving too ¡

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.

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.

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

In general the more balanced a player is, the better he is going to be. But it really all depends. I think most managers, myself included, think that at higher levels, you shouldn't worry so much about JR keeping up with JS. Say if I had 24 points between JS and JR I would go or 14 JS and 10 JR instead of 12/12.

At lower levels, I think it's a good idea to keep them pretty even. Say if I had 16 points to use, I would go with 8/8 and not 10/6.
But I am a big believer in the well-rounded player.

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?

i personally like it more that JR is around 80% of the JS skill, because JS seems to be more important to me(especially in inside Focus, but also with outside focus games). If you start training your player, it isn't bad to hold them on the same level, and just make the difference at the end of your training, because with similiar skills it should go a little bit faster.

But, in any case HeadPaperPusher said something very important. This kind of analysis needs always some context.

So every time I think about this JS-JR topic, I end up thinking in terms of matchups between a certain combination 10-10 (usually with the numbers of my players) against, say, another number representing OD. Say, 10.

What will happen in that situation? Will be an even matchup? Defense will shut down or offense? Will we have the scorer of the game?

Because, and this is the central thing I've been thinking, for all outside positions (PG, SG and SF also) the combination 10-10 is way more expensive than the cheaper OD 10.

What does this thing tell us? More importantly, if we think that salaries say something about the relative importance of skills in any given position? How will we translate that into how the GE might work in a specific area?

Do you have any thoughts on this subject? How about your experience in this kind of matchups (close JR-JS with similar OD) ???

Im sorry but i totally disagree thats a wrong way of training more JR than JS.

Also his driving is really low, driving helps to improve % in shot attemps.

I never said that jump shot was more or less important for training than jump range, I am simply disputing the theory that a player with high JR but low JS is worthless.

This really depends on what you understand by "high JR" and "low JS" and also, with the kind of defense you're facing. I didn't mean that they are worthless, my question was: What would be better?.

Also, consider that when you look at this sort of data you need to really understand what they represent. And I mean it from a basketball and "theoric sim" perspective.

FG% is calculated taking in consideration all kind of shots (Not Free Throws). Yes, this means 3PT, 2PT shots from different distances but also Inside Shots. Your player IS was 1. Also, he had low driving.

There are other things to also consider when looking this stats. How is the OF of your team? High OF will mean more high quality shots on average, having low OF will mean the opposite. High driving will also increase the performance in this department. Also, if you play a lot outside offensive tactics we will have better 3FG% than if you were playing most of time inside offensive tactics.

There are other "micro-managment" things related to this. For example, I will bet that if you have your PG, SG and SF with similar outside offensive skills and usually focus your attack in that area, it is very likely that your SF will have the better 3PT%. Why? Because it is very likely that managers will focus their best outside defenders first on SG, then PG and later on SF. What I mean with this is that matchups DO matter. And matter a lot.

So... every time you try to use those statistics to make a point, you should be careful. There are many things going on behind those numbers that you might be not be able to see.

We don't have perfect information in BB so I usually develop my understanding of the game based on two things: An interpretation of the motives behind the game developers (why they choose to make it this way and not the other way?) and an interpretation of the actual performance of the players I know best facing the opponents I know best: my roster facing my league.

You will need a lot of data to draw strong conclusion about this and others topics, otherwise, your data is just anecdotic.
Since gathering data is hard and very time-consuming I just try to draw some very theoric conclusion based on the interpretation of what skills are supposed to do.

They seems to make sense to others as well.