BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Point Guards in Buzzerbeater

Point Guards in Buzzerbeater (thread closed)

Set priority
Show messages by
From: Elmacca
This Post:
00
155542.80 in reply to 155542.79
Date: 9/11/2010 6:41:44 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
387387
I think it's fair to say that PGs need different skills depending on the offence you are running.

Typically, generally playing a balanced offence, I'd want a PG with Handling and Passing being three levels higher than driving (say 14-11), but if I played Low Post all the time instead of some of the time, I'd be happy to have a PG with 7-9 in IS and 14+ in driving, 12+ in handling and passing.

Adjust the figures down to your league but I'd doubt you'd want IS to ever be below 5 if your PG is going to try a lot of lay ups.

Last edited by Elmacca at 9/11/2010 6:43:40 AM

From: idorux

This Post:
00
155542.81 in reply to 155542.79
Date: 9/11/2010 8:34:09 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
77
That is interesting but my question is which zone - 3-2 or 2-3. I know that it would make sense that to combat an inside offense you would use a 2-3 but so many managers feel that it is poorly implemented in BB. What is your take on that.

From: idorux

This Post:
00
155542.84 in reply to 155542.83
Date: 9/11/2010 2:46:02 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
77
Thank you - so you think that 2-3 is a viable defense under certain conditions. I personally would just as soon use man to man where I might be tempted to use a 2-3 even against a team with only decent outside shooting. Thanks again.

This Post:
00
155542.85 in reply to 155542.84
Date: 9/11/2010 2:48:43 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
522522
I think a 2-3 is definitely a viable option in a variety of circumstances.
If the other team has really good big men but bad guards then I think 2-3 can be a good option.
If the other team has good passing guards but the guards are not good at shooting then 2-3 can be a good option.
If the other team is playing an inside offence and are not good at 3 point shooting then it can be a good option.

I think a 2-3 zone is underrated. I still think a 3-2 zone is better in most cases, but a 2-3 zone can be used to create upsets if done correctly in my opinion.

This Post:
00
155542.86 in reply to 155542.78
Date: 9/11/2010 2:48:55 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
404404
Am I correct in thinking that driving is a form of scoring in itself?

No,as driving isn't understood as in real game,and isn't a third kind of shot to use with jump shot and inside shot.It is intended as the ability to create a their own shot,so increasing the percentages of the player with high driving,building on the base of the two shots,because he can find more often better shots than players with low driving

I also have a theory that shot blocking is a skill primarily designed to stop driving layups.

There is no proof to say that.

This Post:
00
155542.88 in reply to 155542.87
Date: 9/11/2010 3:03:22 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
522522
You can't use that as an example. Both teams played a 2-3 zone. Using a 2-3 zone against an outside tactic is often suicide. But using a 2-3 zone against look inside can be good.

This Post:
11
155542.90 in reply to 155542.89
Date: 9/11/2010 3:22:35 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
522522
Some people think 2-3 is broken and using it at any time will lose you the game. I am just saying that I think there are times where it is the best defence.

Advertisement