BuzzerBeater Forums

You made my morning.:)

Nash is arguably the best shooter in NBA and somebody can make a case that he is the best ever. (tell me how many players do u know who shoots 50-40-90)? Still he avs 9+ assists for so many years.

Show me one single player in BB that is trained in a Nash-like skillset and then we'll discuss his numbers. I think the only one that might be close is the awesome trained guy from thenewchuckd, but still that one isn't Nash-like good.

I just wanted to point that a good shooter can share the ball too. Not to find a similar player here.

Lets talk about real game then. Whats the last great PG that has won a ring? Magic.

I'm probably going to be banned and cast into the fires of hell, but Isiah won two since Magic.

Thomas had Joe Dummars, Rodman Lambier, Mark Aguirre, Vinny Johnson, Mahorn being the dirtiest team in the history. Thats sounds to me similar to Billubs, Wallace etc team.

Haha...Nash's shooting numbers are so high because he doesn't take as many shots. No way he's a better shooter than Allen and certainly not better than Maravich, Bird, RICK BARRY, the list goes on and on.

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/steve_nash/career_stats.htm.... Find me then more efficient 18PPG scorer in history not being big man. You need to take shots to be able to score 18 dont u think?

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/ray_allen/career_stats.html Ray Allen Stats arent on his favor.

I believe it's not a coincidence that nobody from Italy has joined in this chorus yet ;-)

The GE might be balanced at a top class national team level... it surely isn't for at lower levels.

If you don't see that the limited tactical choice is probably the weakest point (draft apart) of BB, I think this game has got a problem. Offenses like low post, patient and base offense are basically useless. There is practically only one choice if you want to rely on your big men and that's not good. Moreover, imho m2m and 3-2 work too well against look inside (in most cases much better than the 2-3 defense, which was "designed" for that).

Here is an extreme example (but I have seen many others alike)
(17979586)
How is it possible that against such a bad defensive choice there is such a pure shot distribution??? (the offensive flow ain't bad)
Wouldn't be more reasonable is the big men attempted more lower quality shots instead of shooting only when they got a high percentage shot? Or the problem here is that big men were not even able to get the ball?
I am fine with 1-3-1 defense causing more TO, but not with forcing too many low quality outside shots of teams with an inside focus.

Last edited by Newton07 at 12/31/2009 5:02:29 AM

Here is an extreme example (but I have seen many others alike)
(17979586)

It's so amazing...

I know you'll hate me for that,but a .111 3pt% PG isn't really great,is he?