BuzzerBeater Forums

Help - English > How important is for the guards to have a decent amount of PF/C's skills?

How important is for the guards to have a decent amount of PF/C's skills?

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
131524.7 in reply to 131524.5
Date: 2/14/2010 2:39:25 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
344344
Thats true they want multi skilled players to avoid monsters of 400k+ salary that we find on C's. Its pretty unclear for the guards, but i guess other than rebounding guards doesnt need a lot more from big men skills.

Also talking about multi skilled players but still SG should be SG and the C must be a C. After all they are 2ndaries...

This Post:
00
131524.8 in reply to 131524.7
Date: 2/14/2010 2:44:07 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
383383
Also talking about multi skilled players but still SG should be SG and the C must be a C. After all they are 2ndaries...


of course. bulls wouldnt have won 6 championchips with 5 scottie pippens i guess. ;-) what i meant: players on my rosters have do it all, still depending on position.

This Post:
00
131524.9 in reply to 131524.8
Date: 2/14/2010 2:48:12 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
344344
No argument here, but those multiskilled high lvl players are rare and so expensive...especially if we are talking about SF's...

This Post:
00
131524.10 in reply to 131524.9
Date: 2/14/2010 2:57:42 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
383383
hmm, i dont want to highjack the tread. the question was how important are 'big men' skills for the guards and i think i made my point clear. please lets not create another 'wendon-is-god-thread' ;-)

if u take in account that players - independent of position - can be born with a respectable skill, i guess in it can not be false to have at least mediocre/average secondaries. that has nothing to do with (high lvl) sf's

edit: still i would not train those secondaries in priority. i would try to buy them. and if we talk about mediocre/average it isnt that expensive.

Last edited by schubrakete at 2/14/2010 3:18:33 PM

This Post:
00
131524.11 in reply to 131524.10
Date: 2/14/2010 10:54:04 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
To PG, I demand rebound then inside shot, Jason Kidd got many rebound right?

To SG, I need inside shot then rebound, the point is his role is to score and I am playing look inside tactic.

It depends on what kind of player you need to suit your tactic.

This Post:
00
131524.12 in reply to 131524.11
Date: 2/14/2010 10:58:53 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
113113
To PG, I demand rebound then inside shot, Jason Kidd got many rebound right?
.


It's not a problem for a PG if your C,PF,SF have a good level of rebs.Have you seen many PGs good in rebs?
For inside shot, I agree.About 6-8 would be perfect.

This Post:
00
131524.13 in reply to 131524.12
Date: 2/15/2010 3:21:55 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
33
you mean that a player (e.g. SG,PG) with 14/10 JS JR should also have 6-8 IS? Or this fact is valid only if your guards (SG,PG) are your's team top scorers (e.g. at Run 'n' Gun)?

From: Azrail

This Post:
00
131524.14 in reply to 131524.6
Date: 2/15/2010 8:23:28 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
259259
for me, the priority is a little bit different:
1. Inside def
2. Rebounding
3. Shot blocking
and the last one, Inside Shot.

From: JohnnyB

This Post:
00
131524.15 in reply to 131524.14
Date: 2/15/2010 10:29:19 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
344344
Well if inside D is important then you can exploit a low ID guard with a guard with good IS isnt? If IS is not important then why do you need to defend it?

This Post:
00
131524.16 in reply to 131524.13
Date: 2/15/2010 10:44:29 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
113113
I said it would be perfect, not essential.

From: Azrail

This Post:
00
131524.17 in reply to 131524.15
Date: 2/15/2010 10:50:06 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
259259
I didn't say that IS is not important, I only said that is the last one,in my list:)

Advertisement