BuzzerBeater Forums

It has occurred to me (which means all my opponents already knew this) that rather than focusing on my SG offensive skills, I should work on his defensive skills, with an eye of course to shutting down my opponents SG. Following this line of thinking, I wondered if I my SG were to develop his passing, and my PG his shooting, would my coach recognize this and more or less run the offense through my SG? Would this help my team's offensive flow, etc., or does the coach think of the PG (or for that matter any position) as a rather rigid, constrained set of skills and functions and will, by god, run the offense through my PG?

I already figure the SF is a jack-of-all-trades, which is why they are so valuable. And it is my experience that PF and C are more or less interchangeable, with the C emphasizing the qualities of a potted plant. But if, essentially, I swap my PG for my SG (reversing who is responsible for shooting and passing), then I figure I might gain a slight advantage over some team who has trained their players more traditionally.

I don't know if this is a result of the game engine but after my SG was struggling to make his shots last year I began playing him as my PG (mainly as an experiment) and there was a major improvement in his game play (which has continued).

He was seeing a lot of the ball as SG however since the change he has played as many minutes, taken a similar number of shots but is offensive output has improved. If you want your SG to be your main guy...maybe try the same?

well, it's the morning, and i'm still ugly . . .

thanks for the response. that's sort of inline with what i was hoping to hear. but, tell me, how did your overall offense function with that change? did your SG become the assists guy (if that is the nature of your offense)?

There was an increase in his ast/game though as part of the switch I have added princeton into my tactics book which has seen my PFs in particular increase in the number of assists (as they open up play back to the guards).