BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Committee for the Rights of Small Forwards

Committee for the Rights of Small Forwards

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
67212.95 in reply to 67212.94
Date: 1/7/2009 10:21:21 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
Everything I post is my opinion. It would be weird if it were any different.


It would be weird if your opinion ever broke from supporting the game as it is in almost every way. You have an almost religious faith that this game was delivered to the BB's in perfect form by a greater being. Any compromise or criticism is a direct insult to your god, or something like that.

I am not quite sure what definition of "well-suited" you use. To me, each player is best suited for the position at which he will provide the best chance for your team to win the game.


As in, that player is in the position they perform best in. Whoever I start at SF is better at another position. On the US national teams, whoever plays SF is better suited at another position.

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
This Post:
00
67212.96 in reply to 67212.95
Date: 1/7/2009 10:25:29 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
Everything I post is my opinion. It would be weird if it were any different.


It would be weird if your opinion ever broke from supporting the game as it is in almost every way. You have an almost religious faith that this game was delivered to the BB's in perfect form by a greater being. Any compromise or criticism is a direct insult to your god, or something like that.

Apparently you haven't bothered to read the forums enough, but that's not my problem. On the other hand, I am definitely opposed to changes that are only designed to make the game easy. But that's just me -- I like to adapt.

I am not quite sure what definition of "well-suited" you use. To me, each player is best suited for the position at which he will provide the best chance for your team to win the game.


As in, that player is in the position they perform best in. Whoever I start at SF is better at another position. On the US national teams, whoever plays SF is better suited at another position.

Then I suggest you organize something in defense of power forwards, since an overwhelming majority of them perform strictly better at the C position... I am sure the US national formations are no exception.

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
From: chihorn
This Post:
00
67212.97 in reply to 67212.96
Date: 1/7/2009 10:41:32 AM
New York Chunks
II.2
Overall Posts Rated:
943943
Buzzerbeater needs to have cheerleaders that affect the morale of the team at home games and for the squads that cost more (of course we'll be bidding on them) they will sometimes even travel with the team for help with enthusiasm on the road.

This in NOT my opinion, but sometimes I post things that are not my opinion.

It IS my opinion that we should just admit that SFs are oddball players without reasonable training options for development at an equal pace as other positions which makes the SF position the weak link in the training system, and this could be simply corrected, as described numerous times above. Let's make this game better, we can deal with changes if they lead to improvements, which in this case I really think it would.

Don't ask what sort of Chunks they are, you probably don't want to know. Blowing Chunks since Season 4!
This Post:
00
67212.98 in reply to 67212.96
Date: 1/7/2009 10:49:22 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
Then I suggest you organize something in defense of power forwards, since an overwhelming majority of them perform strictly better at the C position


The difference is PF have the ability to be trained up from the PF position (JS for forwards, 1on1 for forwards, plus all the bundled PF/C inside skills). People just arent utilizing them all that much, or feel they are not worth the investment in training.

It's not an option for SF.

Even if your example was correct, why would pointing out another similar situation that could use improvement negate the need for the improvement being suggested in this thread?

That's like saying, for example:

"You can't advocate for greener energy alternatives from oil, look at all the coal being used!"

Um, why not work to address both?

Last edited by brian at 1/7/2009 10:50:20 AM

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

This Post:
00
67212.99 in reply to 67212.95
Date: 1/7/2009 10:55:34 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
44
Brian, kozlodoev: cool it! Characterizations like this don't take the discussion anywhere.

From: brian

To: Mike
This Post:
00
67212.100 in reply to 67212.99
Date: 1/7/2009 10:58:47 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
You're right. It's difficult to process these things before I type them, probably because I'm allergic to thinking.

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
This Post:
00
67212.102 in reply to 67212.93
Date: 1/7/2009 11:47:46 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
404404
The primary skills of a PF are almost the same of a center,and this is right also for P and SG.So,if i want to train my guard he could play well in both the position of G,and so on my center-forward
but if i want to train a player in both the types of skill,he never could play at SF position,in same time your center had to change position for his training only for few weeks,and this is true also for your guard
A Sf to train himself never can play in his position(3 postion training...very bad)

This Post:
00
67212.103 in reply to 67212.102
Date: 1/7/2009 11:52:31 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
13361336
Don't you get it? SF can play as PF or as SG. If you want him to play at SF you need to use 3 spot training. My SF can play those spots easily so perhaps look at the TL to get a better suited SF before you start to train him.
SF is all around player so he should be able to play all those positions just like PF can play SF and SG can play SF.
Adapt!

This Post:
00
67212.104 in reply to 67212.103
Date: 1/7/2009 12:09:14 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
404404
and you now ant to tell me this?I am training a great SF,i know how he had to play...but i could train and my players could play in both the roles because i'm not in an high division,so i not lose so much.But if i need in post season for example to train him,i cannot risk to lose playoff because of it,i could have the possibility to make him play in his position

This Post:
00
67212.105 in reply to 67212.104
Date: 1/7/2009 12:20:01 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
13361336
Wow!
So ok once again because you can't seem to understand. When you want to play your SF at SF spot and get training (when there are extream Important playoff games etc) then use 3 spot training or train SF in something else that week(s). If you are not afraid of losing and your most important thing is to train that one player then you could play him at a spot that has single spot training.
Now I am done with this topic about let's make this game simple so it will not be a challenge. What I like here is that there is no easy way out and you have to think and make long run plans.
This topic is moving in the direction that every spot has to have 1 spot training in every skill available in this game. <- if SF get's single spot training and whiners win then it will eventually come to the previously explained outcome (read before the arrow).

Advertisement