BuzzerBeater Forums

BB USA > Mentoring: A closer look at 1 team

Mentoring: A closer look at 1 team

Set priority
Show messages by
From: Xarn

To: dray
This Post:
00
88540.66 in reply to 88540.65
Date: 5/21/2009 10:00:46 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
3636
You're more then welcome, in my opinion, to post your questions here. The more activity and scenarios I get exposed to, the quicker I'll pick up on the game.

From: brian

To: Xarn
This Post:
00
88540.67 in reply to 88540.64
Date: 5/21/2009 10:25:23 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
So the team ratings are fairly obvious and similar to HT ratings. The matchup ratings indicate how many points you expect that position to score over 100 shots.

In the playoff game Collossus' matchup ratings were much much lower.

The obvious explanation for Collussus greatly reduced matching ratings was you switched to 1-3-1 zone which is more aggressive at stopping his outside Motion attack.

Last edited by brian at 5/21/2009 10:48:26 PM

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

To: Xarn
This Post:
00
88540.68 in reply to 88540.65
Date: 5/21/2009 10:41:07 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
As for the rebounds it was pretty close between the games.

In the league game the offensive rebound rate was:

Collossus - 33%
XSteppers - 28%

For the playoff game:

Collossus - 34%
Xsteppers - 25%

Really pretty close over all and not much you can take from that. On top of this the current rebounding system is kind of random and is being overhauled for next season. The main point here is your didnt get killed on the boards as a result of the change in defense, but you did get your opponents matchup ratings way down and put your team in a better position to win.

Last edited by brian at 5/21/2009 10:42:38 PM

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

This Post:
00
88540.69 in reply to 88540.68
Date: 5/22/2009 8:18:58 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
3636
Thanks for elaborating.

The team ratings, you were right. They are obvious and that's how I had been "scouting" my opponents in the past. The points per 100 shots, I was treating as fluff and inconsequetional. Good to know it actually has meaning.

Message deleted
This Post:
00
88540.72 in reply to 88540.71
Date: 5/24/2009 6:54:28 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
137137
So the question I'm always asking myself, is it better, in general, to go with a tactics that improves and emphases a particular mode (either inside or outside) or better to go with a neutral tactics for fear of being caught going up against the "right" defense.

I think in general I've been pretty conservative and tried to balance my offensive and defensive selections to flatten out my ratings, but then again, I'm still down in series II. :-(


Steve
Bruins

This Post:
00
88540.73 in reply to 88540.72
Date: 5/24/2009 7:00:21 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
2020
But you got a nice chance to go to the NBBA... :)
I'm also in favor of a well balanced attack, but sometimes it's something hard to achieve, you got to make yourself strong in one aspect of the game and then improve the other one, and unfortunately that takes a lot of time.

This Post:
00
88540.75 in reply to 88540.73
Date: 5/24/2009 10:05:34 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
137137
But you got a nice chance to go to the NBBA... :)
I'm also in favor of a well balanced attack, but sometimes it's something hard to achieve, you got to make yourself strong in one aspect of the game and then improve the other one, and unfortunately that takes a lot of time.


My teams should be called the bridesmaids...we've finished second so many times. :-(


Steve
Bruins

This Post:
00
88540.76 in reply to 88540.75
Date: 5/24/2009 10:07:09 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
2020
Then change the team's name!!! :P
I get the feeling you will win this time... :)

Advertisement