BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Outside attack too strong ?

Outside attack too strong ?

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
125704.313 in reply to 125704.306
Date: 1/23/2010 9:54:27 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
Actually, this is a pretty good example of how high "flow" can get you what you want in an inside offense. The vast majority of your shots went through your PF and C, I think close to 50%. Sadeh took 11 shots, but no other player was really chucking very much. I assume that the SF guarding Thomas had a pretty good amount of inside d, his pts per 100 is pretty low.

I put the flow in quotes because Thomas is a great ball distributor, which really helped you to get the ball inside here. I'm not sure if that is showing up in the match report, though.

Anyhow, what distribution to your PF and C would make you happy here?

On the other hand, take a look at the rebounding line for the SFs in this game. On paper you should have a rebounding edge, but in the individual match-ups Thomas lost it for you. I don't know if that's the difference in the game, but it was certainly a factor.

Last edited by HeadPaperPusher at 1/23/2010 9:57:45 PM

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
This Post:
00
125704.314 in reply to 125704.313
Date: 1/23/2010 10:47:29 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1919
I will not accept your analysis that Thomas lost the game. It was clear that Romagnoli missing 12 of his 27 shots cost me the game. However, I am slowly becoming persuaded to give Thomas a little rebounding sooner than later. I just wish it was not so expensive for marginal contributions ...

This Post:
00
125704.315 in reply to 125704.314
Date: 1/23/2010 11:06:33 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
196196
I'll lend you a couple of bucks if your short. I'll even gift you the cash for an extra RB level if you leave Romagnoli out of our next encounter!!

Message deleted
From: brian

This Post:
00
125704.317 in reply to 125704.314
Date: 1/23/2010 11:36:37 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
I just wish it was not so expensive for marginal contributions ...


That really is bizarre, esp the effect it has on guards. It's so high you have to wonder if it's a mistake.

Last edited by brian at 1/23/2010 11:36:51 PM

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
This Post:
00
125704.318 in reply to 125704.317
Date: 1/23/2010 11:39:52 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
196196
I just wish it was not so expensive for marginal contributions ...


That really is bizarre, esp the effect it has on guards. It's so high you have to wonder if it's a mistake.


And this was the thing that killed me the most when the introduction of new potentials came in. I'd carefully added or bought RB and ID for all my guards then found I couldnt go back and continue with anymore traditional guard training...

Guaqueta, Fournet, Soler, Cristiano - miss you guys - IF they had had MVP potential who knows what I might have gone on to achieve!

Last edited by Superfly Guy at 1/23/2010 11:41:03 PM

This Post:
00
125704.319 in reply to 125704.318
Date: 1/23/2010 11:44:02 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
All along in the early seasons i thought my guards with 6-7 rebounding and all around decent inside skills were perfect, a testament to the preaching about multi-skilled players...

...and then Joseph Ka cracked the salary formula... *head explodes*

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
From: jbmcrock

This Post:
00
125704.321 in reply to 125704.320
Date: 1/24/2010 2:39:37 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1919
As in our other discussion of this game, you make a lot of sense. The one thing I still don't quite get is why my pg with 14 passing would take 11 shots when he has a 23 pts per 100 (you mentioned that happens with you as well - although I am sure that your ap has much better inside skills). Surely passing the ball to any other player would have yielded a better shot. In any case, I will experiment a bit and change around my guards (wipe some dust off of Vyberal) to see if that makes a difference.

This Post:
00
125704.323 in reply to 125704.314
Date: 1/24/2010 9:11:07 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
I will not accept your analysis that Thomas lost the game.


I think you misunderstood my analysis. I did not say that Thomas lost the game, just that he lost the rebounding advantage for you. But I would not say that his rebounding contribution was marginal. He had one defensive rebound while the opposing starter hit double digits, including 3 offensive rebounds.

15 for 27 is a really good rate and I suspect if you did the real vs expected points per 100, you would come out damn close to the predicted value for the C spot (Romagnoli went 4 for 6, too). I'm not sure how you can complain about that match-up. I can see the point that Alavi had a bad shooting game but he also drew some fouls off missed shots that gave him some points, too (I am guessing those 4 fouls came off solid passes to the inside).

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
Advertisement