BuzzerBeater Forums

Well the guy who was defended by my SF was the opponents SG. He went down in the second quarter and by then he had already taken 11 shots in 15 minutes (scoring 17 points).

so any assumptions made that 'their best offensive player is the guy who shoots the most shots in the game' is actually not always true.

This is the game: (79191134). You're a supporter so you can run the play-by-play through Buzzer Control or other software. Moutlinho/Hrudey already found out this though: (220862.1) and specifically (220862.9).

I must admit I did use OBox1 both because I thought my opponent would play patient and because I knew they had that discussion in the past and wanted to double check.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 2/27/2015 8:58:43 AM

its interesting, because in that thread, the same assumptions are being made.
the assumption is that - best defender will defend the best offensive player (who is the player that takes the most shots).

or in those threads, they have made the assumption, that because Player X, was being defended by player Y, that player Y was selected as the best defender.

And this is my point - MAYBE - this is an incorrect assumption. Hear me out.

In the scenario in that linked thread, they clearly identify player X as the key offensive player. Which id say is right.
However, the assumption is made that - because Player Y defended the majority of the shots that Player X took, that Player Y is the defender assigned as the 'And 1'
..... think about real life basketball. If you are the 'And 1' M2M defender, the opposition will generally screen you, or try to run pick's and plays, which make you NOT defender. ie: Backdoor cuts, which make your team-mate the defender.

So MAYBE in that linked game, the defender identified as the 'And 1' was NOT the PF who defended all the shots. Maybe Player X just dribbled into the corner, had the 'And 1' screened off the ball, and as such, the PF had to come out of the box and defend player X.

Am i making sense?
IM not saying im right, im just debating over the assumptions that are made and that we know whom the 'and 1' player is.

Last edited by Coach Regan at 2/28/2015 4:44:03 AM

its interesting, because in that thread, the same assumptions are being made.
the assumption is that - best defender will defend the best offensive player (who is the player that takes the most shots).

or in those threads, they have made the assumption, that because Player X, was being defended by player Y, that player Y was selected as the best defender.

And this is my point - MAYBE - this is an incorrect assumption.

I missed this thread earlier, but there's one other assumption that is being made - if you read the game manual for the box and one defenses (in the tactics section), it never says the best defender is the man to man guy, and it always refers to it as the "fifth player" or "fifth defender".

I tended to see my SF picked a lot way back when I tried out these defenses.

You forgot one ...

4) Mismatch: The best defender is an outside defender and the best offensive player is an inside player, or the other way around. Chaos ensues.

That's covered in option 1.

That's covered in option 1.

Nope.

1) the defender sucks ...

is not the same as what I'm saying. The defender could be great and if he doesn't guard the best shooter(s) you'll still get a mismatch. You have to try to be sure that your best defender is guarding the guy you want to stop.

The defender doesn't suck no but the result is the same; the attacker scores at will. Wether that's because the defender is bad overall or just in that matchup doesn't matter very much.

All right, then by your reasoning Nachbar had too many possibilities. By your reasoning there are only two possibilities, it works or it doesn't. The different reasons WHY it works or it doesn't don't matter.

That is no help in learning to make it work, though.

I had a terrible experience with box: (79066268)
I knew already I had to stop his C, PF so I thought to use what should be the best defensive tactic following the rules but probably something has gone wrong...