BuzzerBeater Forums

well, it's my first season, so i can't compare the new draft system to the old one, but as far as i'm concerned, i like the the 'new' system, although i have a few questions.
first off all, i want to know how accurate the star rating, the grade rating and the potential is. i don't expect that this is too acurrate, but would be nice to know, if a 2 star rating could be better than a 5 star rating, or if that this is impossible (or nearly impossible). i'm just curios because is scouted a point guard twice (star rating 2, grade D, potential 1) but he went for 36 points on 14 of 17 shooting. i know, i know, it's only one game, but 14 of 17, that's very impressive. on the other hand, there's a 5 star rating center who pulls down 0 (zero!!!!!!) rebounds in an 27 minutes effort.
so, would be nice to know, how strong i should consider the given ratings, like could a scouted 1 potential be an all star, could a 5 star rating center be a eddy curry like guy or could a 2 star rating pg with grade D be the next cp3 (i'm still impressed, 14 of 17... O_o).
So, the other question is, i scouted the players 1 to 27 (1 to 7 twice). So, is every one in my league scoting the low number players first??? so, players above 40 something wouldn't be scouted at all and everyone had to take there best guess. and is my player 1 the player 1 on everyones scouting report.
I'm sorry, if some of this had been already discussed, i read some parts, but not all with all this debates about injuries..,
thanks

Not sure I understand this scouts.
I have few 5 star players which actually played a very bad game (according to their statistics of course).
Why do they get these 5 stars?
For example:
A center
26 2 - 11 0 - 2 4 - 6 3 6 0 2 0 2 0 8
this one actually has 5 star potential.

another example:
Center
23 1 - 6 1 - 1 1 - 1 1 4 2 3 1 2 1 4

Oh, that will be a really interesting draft for you as you are low in the picking order. According to my (very limited) statistical investigation you still have quite a good chance to pick him though. Best of luck!

A center
26 2 - 11 0 - 2 4 - 6 3 6 0 2 0 2 0 8
this one actually has 5 star potential.

He might have respectable ID and Reb and SB and a bit lower IS... ratings are more important than the box score, as far as I am concerned.
But the box score might help to understand the skill distribution :)

Interesting...
thanks

Another question:
If scouts of different teams scout the same player, do both see the same game? If the answer is yes it's bad because users will be able to share their information or decide which user takes which player...

Last edited by yanivsag at 4/21/2008 10:06:12 AM

I guess they must have thought about that, so you probably see different games.

I trust the BBs,
I only want to be sure...

Why is everybody talking about stars? Isn't the "Grade Rating" the most important information??
The way I see it, the grade rating is(by far) no. 1, the potential is no. 2 and the Star Rating is no. 3.
Does anyone agree, or am I far out???

star rating is better for positions you don't plan on training...but if you train a certain position you want them to have a high potential otherwise you're just wasting your time.

star rating is better for positions you don't plan on training...but if you train a certain position you want them to have a high potential otherwise you're just wasting your time.

OK, but it's still relative, right?
I mean, A player who has a A- rating, but only a 2 star potential, should be better than a player with a C rating and 5-star potential. Unless you train the latter for 2-4 years...

I've got a 5* with 5 potential on my list. He'll be my top target but since I'm drafting 15th, I probably won't get him and he's a centre. However, I am guaranteed a 5* player because I can see 15 of them, which is a very nice surprise.

This new draft system is excellent. I like having a box score for each scouted player and a position played, and I have lots of decisions to make (eg. do I take a SF and hope I can train him at SG?).