BuzzerBeater Forums

But then I had worst defense, more points allowed...

BTW, anyone saw the 6:29 part?

Weird...

But then I had worst defense, more points allowed...

NO,You would have worst rating in outside defence,but the game engine soesn't count on the team ratings in the game,you lose many many rebounds and internal defence,so you globally would have a better defence and less points and rebounds allowed with the 3-2 defence

But then I had worst defense, more points allowed...

NO,You would have worst rating in outside defence,but the game engine soesn't count on the team ratings in the game,you lose many many rebounds and internal defence,so you globally would have a better defence and less points and rebounds allowed with the 3-2 defence

So why exist 1-3-1?

Just for the rating?

So if in 1-3-1 I lose more internal defense and global defense, why that exist?

I thought that 1-3-1 is way better then 3-2 for outside defense....and other thing....he didn't scored a lot inside...was outside...

My C have 2 exceptionals and 1 sensacional...isn't enough

But my problem isn't the tactic, or the game....it's what envolved the defeat...coach's decisions...that big error that nobody saw...

Last edited by Coach de bancada at 7/19/2010 4:21:50 PM

But then I had worst defense, more points allowed...

NO,You would have worst rating in outside defence,but the game engine soesn't count on the team ratings in the game,you lose many many rebounds and internal defence,so you globally would have a better defence and less points and rebounds allowed with the 3-2 defence

So why exist 1-3-1?

Just for the rating?

So if in 1-3-1 I lose more internal defense and global defense, why that exist?

I thought that 1-3-1 is way better then 3-2 for outside defense....and other thing....he didn't scored a lot inside...was outside...

Rebounds,especially offensive rebounds,are very important,because they give to your adversary more chances to shoot,and consequentely to score.When you decide to use 1-3-1,you have to consider if what you earn in perimetral defence is more then what you lose in inside defence and rebounds
If your adversary shots 20 time more than you,also if you have diminuished his percentages,he will score more points than if his team had to play against a 3-2 with a little higher percentages but with a lower number of shots(because he could take less offensive rebounds)...and I say 20 times more than you,beacause a weaker defence made by the 1-3-1 instead of 3-2, force your big mans to make many fouls,so giving to the adversary many free throws and forcing your team to play with your back-up big mans in the most important period of the game
Playing away diminuish defences and rebounds; Playing PIC diminuish defences and rebounds(and this isn't show in the team ratings!)...use a tactic that further diminuish rebounds surely is a bad move,and you pay for it

Well, his outside shooting was pretty much dominating you. Your man to man defense just wasn't strong enough to stop him on the three pointers...he got 9-20!

And while your inside game was clearly dominant, I think this is a case of his perimeter defense stopping good passes from your guards. Your offensive flow is pretty low and it ended up in wasted possessions, like your SG shooting 11 shots when he was clearly outmatched...

You would probably win that game most of the time, luck just beat you I suppose...

just my opinion though, as I don't have enough experience to say anything with real confidence...

Horrible Outside Defence, horrible offensive flow (16 assists), playing a PF as PG and 1k players as SG didn't help either and playing a Center on SF doesn't work (3-14 FG) against their SF that shot 10-23 FG

(23315813)
It may not be surprise result but anyway I would like to hear some reasonable comments.

I played home. His flow (playing without real PG) vs my OD sucked but anyway he got most shots in paint with LI tactics. Matchup and Team Raitings are more or less in my favour. I played TIE but still this can't be the only reason? Yes-yes you say he hit with better % and more FT's but reading many posts in this thread discussing inside offense tactics against good OD and not actually getting inside shots then how he managed to execute it this time so excellent?:)

Tactically you were absolutely wrong. 3-2 zone against look inside, normal-tie, this is too much. This is not a surprise result, you could have lost by an even higher margin.