BuzzerBeater Forums

If your Sf fails in a motion attack you are in a slightly better situation that if the Sf fails in a R&G,because you could have more options in attack to make up your offensive situation
Surely Sf is fundamental in both the tactics,but is more fundamental in a R&G

Maybe. But if a SF fails in a motion, he needs to be able to pass it to a better option. Actually, he needs that ability even if he does not fail. ;-) If he fails in a R&G, the importance of passing is not as pronounced. Not only that, but if the SF is an good option in the motion, he will take a lot of shots and score a lot.

So, you need to understand that when I say a SF is more important in a motion, I am not only talking about shooting skills.

Actually, this gets to the heart of the two offenses. In the run and gun the offense will not wait to find a better option (so the SF will probably shoot even if covered). But in the motion he is more likely to pass in that scenario.

Yeah,that's the problem.You have not to see to the best case scenario,where in both the tactics SF will score a lot and with good percentages.You have to see the worst case scenario,when Sf fails
Losing an offensive option damages a lot the offensive flow,because when the GE had to decide to whom pass the ball,it appraise if a mismatch is good or not,so it has more difficulties to find a good shot for all the players of the team.The Ge has more choices in a motion than in a R&G if Sf fails,so the whole offensive flow became worse in a R&G than in a motion

Yeah,that's the problem.You have not to see to the best case scenario,where in both the tactics SF will score a lot and with good percentages.You have to see the worst case scenario,when Sf fails
Losing an offensive option damages a lot the offensive flow,because when the GE had to decide to whom pass the ball,it appraise if a mismatch is good or not,so it has more difficulties to find a good shot for all the players of the team.The Ge has more choices in a motion than in a R&G if Sf fails,so the whole offensive flow became worse in a R&G than in a motion

I see we are thinking along the same lines, but I think you are also seeing your R&G in the best scenario. No matter how you slice it, run and gun puts the emphasis on the PG and SG with a lesser focus on the SF. Yes, if your SF is much better option than your guards he could get a good share of shots. But if he had some passing and handling, he would have had those shots plus extras in a motion.

Motion shifts the focus away from the guards and down to the SF and PF (but still less on the PF than the SF, all things equal). It also puts a lot more focus on passing and handling, while taking it away from jump shot and range. If you want your SF to be the focus of your offense, this is the outside tactic of choice. The SF is the focus, not just in shooting but also in distributing the ball.

Last edited by HeadPaperPusher at 9/3/2010 2:31:03 PM

For the outside SFs is at least behind JS-JR-OD and ID.

I also disagree with the JR part of this. It goes back to our motion vs run and gun disagreement, though. You can build a fantastic motion SF without focusing too much on JR. Something like Wendon's 12-9, for example. Although I would go even further to say that 14-10 or 15-10 might be the ideal NT, motion offense SF (of course, the more jump shot, the better).

Yeah,that's the problem.You have not to see to the best case scenario,where in both the tactics SF will score a lot and with good percentages.You have to see the worst case scenario,when Sf fails
Losing an offensive option damages a lot the offensive flow,because when the GE had to decide to whom pass the ball,it appraise if a mismatch is good or not,so it has more difficulties to find a good shot for all the players of the team.The Ge has more choices in a motion than in a R&G if Sf fails,so the whole offensive flow became worse in a R&G than in a motion

I see we are thinking along the same lines, but I think you are also seeing your R&G in the best scenario. No matter how you slice it, run and gun puts the emphasis on the PG and SG with a lesser focus on the SF. Yes, if your SF is much better option than your guards he could get a good share of shots. But if he had some passing and handling, he would have had those shots plus extras in a motion.

Motion shifts the focus away from the guards and down to the SF and PF (but still less on the PF than the SF, all things equal). It also puts a lot more focus on passing and handling, while taking it away from jump shot and range. If you want your SF to be the focus of your offense, this is the outside tactic of choice. The SF is the focus, not just in shooting but also in distributing the ball.

Run and gun put more the emphasis on SG and SF,with the PG as valuable third option if is a good shooter and/or if one of the two main option is not having a good match-up.Main focus is the SG
Maybe you are right saying that Sf is a good focus of the motion attack,but it give many shots also to the guards and to the PF,but the main focus change game by game due to various condition(match-ups,defensive tactics of the adversary,offensive flow and so on).


Last edited by Steve Karenn at 9/3/2010 5:34:45 PM

For the outside SFs is at least behind JS-JR-OD and ID.

I also disagree with the JR part of this. It goes back to our motion vs run and gun disagreement, though. You can build a fantastic motion SF without focusing too much on JR. Something like Wendon's 12-9, for example. Although I would go even further to say that 14-10 or 15-10 might be the ideal NT, motion offense SF (of course, the more jump shot, the better).

As I disagree with the users that think that an outside Sf can be simply a guard with a little bit of ID,I think that an outside Sf however had to focus a lot on uìoutside skills.12-9(Js-JR) is a pretty low value if this is your best attack,or if you don't have an equal IS(balanced AP).Jr is secondary towards JS,but if we remains with the relationship JR=Js-3, good for a guard, it could remain the same for a SF,you can't think to undervalue the importance of Jr for an outside SF.
An outside SF for an NT should have at least a 15/16-12 Js-Jr,as there's however difference with a guard of that team that could reach a 18-14

Last edited by Steve Karenn at 9/3/2010 5:42:36 PM

Just to prove a point I went motion tonight. See: (25684272). Big surprise, my SF leads the way in scoring. He also picks up 5 assists. And actually, looking at the match-ups this seems like an off night for him on this occasion. You may also be surprised to know that his jump shot is not that high. And his jump range surely would not meet your requirements.

In any case, we probably will never agree on what a motion does, mostly because you insist that run and gun SFs are the cat's meow.

Last edited by HeadPaperPusher at 9/3/2010 10:43:01 PM

An outside SF for an NT should have at least a 15/16-12 Js-Jr

And I am pretty sure how this player's passing and handling would look inside your mind. I personally would take that 15-16 jump shot, but transfer 3 levels of that jump range training to something that would allow more flexibility on offense (or even defense).

But we can all have our personal preferences, right? ;-)

I know I am a bit off topic but I want to say something about pf and outside tactics.

I've got a pf with 11 JS and 7 JR, not great I know, but I think would be enough to exploit the opposition pf's OD in my league. At first I was thinking exactly the same thing like you and tried motion. (My pg, sg and sf all have passing >/= 8.) But every time I play motion he just doesn't took that many shots from outside and the FG% is more or less 20-40. I can only get him "work" by playing RnG. Now he averages close to 50% in FG and 3FG. Besides, I found that my team is actually able to divert a bit more shots to my pf when he dominates from outside by playing RnG. This completely changes my understanding of RnG and motion and make me believes that if my guards passing is high enough RnG can still exploit the matchups. I have never tried princeton though because I have some pretty bad experience with it. I want to try patient more in future games.

Mind you. Josef once said something like motion is like 3 little man playing with each other and shooting from outside. RnG is your whole team throwing everything they can from outside.

You will have to give me examples. I started looking at your games and it is funny that the first one I saw was: (23332410). ;-)

My guess is you got this one backwards:

Mind you. Josef once said something like motion is like 3 little man playing with each other and shooting from outside. RnG is your whole team throwing everything they can from outside.

PF and C are pretty much out in a run and gun.

You will have to give me examples. I started looking at your games and it is funny that the first one I saw was: (23332410). ;-)

My guess is you got this one backwards:

Mind you. Josef once said something like motion is like 3 little man playing with each other and shooting from outside. RnG is your whole team throwing everything they can from outside.

PF and C are pretty much out in a run and gun.

Ok I have done a bit of number crunching for all his games in pf when I play RnG and motion. These games include league, cup and private games.

Motion
[7 game] [33.7 min/game] [0.35 pt/min] [45.3% FG] [38.9% 3FG]

RnG
[9 game] [32.2 min/game] [0.51 pt/min] [46.9% FG] [48.3% 3FG]

What annoys me most is against very poor opposition he simply didn't take as many as shots as I would like when I played motion:
(23332437)(25708341)(23332421)
14 shots only in 85 min left me scratching my head.

Where in RnG I am guaranteed at least 9 shots in 36 min in those 9 games.

Last edited by 7ton at 9/4/2010 2:51:36 AM