BuzzerBeater Forums

It's a simple per-game stat.

We don't need complex forumlas.

maybe it could be made per-minute. Still pretty easy formula :)

It's a simple per-game stat.

We don't need complex forumlas.

maybe it could be made per-minute. Still pretty easy formula

Most NBA team sites will give you per-game, not per-minute stats (unless you specifically ask for them). The main reason for that is that performance is not directly scalable.

The easy answer: If your per-game stats are that important for you, play your players more minutes. Otherwise, I don't see how this is relevant at all. Individual stats don't win games or leagues.

Most NBA team sites will give you per-game, not per-minute stats (unless you specifically ask for them). The main reason for that is that performance is not directly scalable.

Normal NBA tems do not have to rotate their players this much to give them proper training :)

The easy answer: If your per-game stats are that important for you, play your players more minutes. Otherwise, I don't see how this is relevant at all. Individual stats don't win games or leagues.

Of course you are right. Individual stats are just for fun. It's a pity though to see on top of the stats bots players just because they play 30 minutes every game.

It's a pity though to see on top of the stats bots players just because they play 30 minutes every game.

Actually, unless you're blowing teams out of the gym in every game, all your starters will play at least 30 minutes per game, often more.

Plus, what's the fun of having someone's third-string center topping all rankings because he played 1 minute and scored 1 basket on a tip-in, thereby getting himself the hefty per-48 average of 48 points and 24 rebounds.

I agree we are talking about a non-problem.

But as long as we are discussing :)

Actually, unless you're blowing teams out of the gym in every game, all your starters will play at least 30 minutes per game, often more.

My best player (a trainee) does (almost) never play as starter. He plays rotation twice a week and between garbage-time and foul-problems he gets more than 48 minutes.

Plus, what's the fun of having someone's third-string center topping all rankings because he played 1 minute and scored 1 basket on a tip-in, thereby getting himself the hefty per-48 average of 48 points and 24 rebounds.

Why do you rescale? In the stats, there should be a minimum number of minutes played. Among 500 minutes played (for examples) the stats in that 1 minute will count as much as those in any other minute. I don't really follow you here...

But you have a point saying that performance is not directly scalable.

Just for the sake of argument

My best player (a trainee) does (almost) never play as starter. He plays rotation twice a week and between garbage-time and foul-problems he gets more than 48 minutes.

I don't know how you manage this. My best players start 1 game and sub in the other. That's because I try to train 6 players a week. If I were training 5, they could start both games.

It makes no sense to me that you wouldn't start your best player at least one game. In most cases, if he plays rotation in the other one, he will get 48 minutes for the week. This translates in close to 25 minutes per game.

Why do you rescale? In the stats, there should be a minimum number of minutes played. Among 500 minutes played (for examples) the stats in that 1 minute will count as much as those in any other minute. I don't really follow you here...

There is no such things as "stats per minute" in basketball. What is calculated is "stats per 48 minutes". Either way, it is essentially the same -- you divide the totals by the number of minutes, and then multiply by 48.

The thing is, the more a player plays, the more his involvement tends to even out in a game. I don't see a point in having 10-mpg players on top of the rankings just because they were lucky to get a couple of shots for their time on the field.

After all, the ranking are meaningful as they are -- the guys on top are the ones that provide the most production for their teams. This is exactly what the stats are expected to represent.

OTOH, basketball is a team game. So I don't see why you worry about rotating your players and not having them in the rankings. There are plenty of examples of mediocre players filling up the stat sheets on mediocre teams

I agree that all sort of stats can be implemented, and the game stands to improve in this department: per-48 stats, sortable team stats, various percentages, etc. There are pretty good criteria about how a player qualifies to be listed in these (certain # of games played, certain # of shots taken, etc.)

But I don't think this is essential at this point, and the per-game statistics are always the ones that count the most.

You're right that this type of thing is not essential at this point but you have to admit...

It would be nice if some time far away they did add these sort of things. It would only make the game more dynamic and more realistic. Nonetheless, not a major concern. For that matter... not even a minor one.