BuzzerBeater Forums

well to be fair. the two players manon mentioned had a good 3% pct (30+%)

Well, it´s no big deal to shoot 9 of 10 3-Point-Shots if ur opponent is getting only an OD rating 9 (low) even with 3-2 and right GDP. Look at ur BBB-performance this year, and u get another image with high-quality games, not with weak Swedish league opponents. He´s got 6 from 25 there, which means excellent 24%.

Just simple math: U need two Skills (OD and IS) to make 60% FG% and defend well, u need 4 Skills (JS, Range, ID and Blk) to make 30% 3P% and defend well - whats the smarter way? The 4 Skills needed to train make this players much rarer on the transfer market, u have to pay a lot of money to buy a JS-Range or an ID-Blk-player, and it doesn´t even give u benefits. Players with high OD or high IS in contrast are pretty cheap. I play Outside-Offense atm., but i´ll change that next season, because on a certain level, it just doesn´t work anymore. The GDP, to make it clear, made this problem worse, for now Outside-Teams are totally f***** against 3-2 and GDP (if there is an opponent equal to u).

Yeah. I took a look at buzzermanager and it says that I hold my opponents to 30.1% FG and 17.4% 3pt. Both percentages are the best ones in the league. To be honest I win my games because 1-2 guys score enough and the rest of my team defends like there is no tomorrow ;)

I'm at 27.4% and 11.6% currently without much shotblocking, but OD on the big men.

My most sincere congratulations to the BB team on addressing the "Look inside issue" thanks mostly to the GameDayPrep strategy.
It is a pleasure to finally see these games, along with the fact of enjoying a way richer experience:

(28276)
(28304)
(28248)
(28191)

First match, Italy only won by 4 despite using Princeton and having tremendous outside scoring against average perimeter defence and a 2-3 zone. Both trams also went a combined 0-3 on GDP. That's a horrific match entirely due to the existence and psychology of GDP.

Second match, neither team even played look inside. Low post isn't overpowered; this match even works as an example of that. As an aside, this (excellent) match may have been even "better" (i.e., closer) if both teams did use look inside. Not that I'm advocating that. I'm truly not.

Third match is 4th ranked Czech Republic against 57th ranked Denmark. And it shows. Mind you, it shows absolutely nothing about GDP or look inside. A continuing theme.

Fourth match, neither team used look inside, and the team that got both GDP guesses incorrect and used a 2-3 against a neutral offence won the game. Yet again, a perplexing example.

---

A better solution would have been to severely weaken or remove look inside, you know, because it's outrageously overpowered. The only consistently overpowered offence. An offence that continues to be overpowered. Implementing GDP, a feature that severely affects every offence, introduces a gigantic luck component, and does nothing to actually weaken look inside, is impossibly stupid. The difference between an incorrect and correct GDP guess with all other variables the same is what, 30 points? The psychology of GDP and deterrence of using look inside is the only "benefit". But in a single game sample or in a best 2 out of 3 playoff series, you only need to get lucky with a tactical choice or GDP choice once. That's exactly what it is, too. Luck. GDP makes BB a glorified guessing simulation.

Last edited by Stajan at 5/16/2014 7:50:16 PM

Yeah Stajan, facing it from the coach position in any sport, luck and guessing right plays an outstanding role, therefore I can't understand you're bringing discredit to the decision of implementing GDP.
And you mention it correctly, let me quote you: "the psychology of GDP and deterrence of using look inside". Spot on. Whether the GE works "better" with Look Inside or Base offence is another subject I didn't intend to touch in the thread.
Finally, I usually distrust entirely the qualifications of a match, which is to say, you mustn't understand "Princeton tremendous can´t beat average 2-3". That's just a reflection of the skills, plain numbers, not where the shot is taken, who is shooting against what defense... a 20 OD 4 ID will mark a high OD qualification, but if the attacker uses his Driving, the shot will be close to the basket.
Nice to see we have some debate :)