BuzzerBeater Forums

In your previous game against him there were differences anyway, comparison is not that easy. A Run and gun offence is less effective to maximize his PF, the flow is important but shot selection is usually not as good as a good motion. And the 3-2 zone was there, taking away his PF matchup against a big man and shut down his flow. Results: 9 assists and 9 turnovers, the PF with 9 points and 0 assist.

Yesterday, motion was a better offence for him to exploit matchups. There was no 3-2 zone in putting that much pressure and there were more favorable matchup (as ratings highlight). Results: 19 assists, 10 turnovers, more FTs. The PF way more effective with 12 points and 4 assists.


The first thing I believe you have to think about is your generalization. You cannot put all tacticts together as outside, neutral or inside oriented. There are differences among them and the team you need to run those offences is not necessarily the same. RnG and motion are not equal. LI and LP are not equal either.

About neutral tactics: "team gets involved equally" it's a little bit misleading considering patient is likely the most centralizing offence in the game

A lot of what you said makes sense, except I still don't understand how GE decided that my SF should be taking 30 shots, more than my C and PF combined. This makes no sense to me, especially as it wasn't the 1st time I played this tactic and had never seen such bad shot distribution before.

Ofc examples are not 1:1, I also know the Patient tactic as I'm using it a lot, but from my observations Base Offense and Push the ball were not much different from each other, at least not as far my team's performance was concerned. These 30 shots by SF were borderline Patient level.

Last edited by Mod-Rn5ho [SLO U-21] at 1/16/2019 8:56:25 AM

Of course, 30 shots are really a lot, I'm not questioning that.

I do believe the flow was a main factor, I don't know the passing level of the PG, but 6-6-6-8 from SG to C isn't impressive. Against a proficient medium + more effort there's no doubt your flow wasn't at his best to distribute shots.
It could have been better than that? I guess yes. Was ptb a great tactic considering your strenghts and the relatively lack of JS-JR combined with low passing in your team? I don't think so.

Low flow + fast pace could lead to bad shots. And with ptb you don't have the bonus of a RnG or LI

My PG has passing 12. Obviously on top of everything he had his by far the worst game ever - the only other time he ever fouled out in an official game was 4 seasons ago at the beginning of the season in a game that didn't matter, he's a career 1.7~ PF/G and of course he fouled out with horrible statistics after 31mins in the most important game of the season while already everything else was going wrong - and he was in a decent shape also, a rather high 8.

I still think he should be able to distribute ball a bit better than he did, he's an all-around player with both defenses and shots 15+ and 131 TSP. I know there's this random factor in the GE and despite my mistakes, I think I got the the worse end of the luck on pretty much everything.


EDIT: Just saw actually that the reason for this is GE deciding to run my sub C/PF at PG after fouling out instead of my PG/SG/SF sub. Well, this basically explains everything.. as my team went -13 during those 8 minutes.

Yeah not the best of the backups

- Without him at PG position: 35/80 from the field: 44%
- With him: 4/15 so 26%

Considering that he must have had also a bad impact on the defensive end, once your starting PG went off, a game somewhere balanced became totally unbalanced.