BuzzerBeater Forums

Forget inside shot if have nearly no impact on a PG,

Where were you in that other thread where I was telling a guy that driving was more important for guards to score inside shots? He told me that inside scoring was the most important. ;-)

rebounding seems to be the most efficient inside skill for them blocking is actually not useless but there will be a change.

Inside d is actually very useful for guards, too. It shuts down their opponent's drives to the inside. It doesn't have to be great - strong is probably as high as you need. But with atrocious inside d you're asking for trouble.

i have problems to figure out the effect of inside D, some say it is important some say it isn't and in the end both can't prove their point. Even if a old guard from me with low ID hasn't that poroblems against inside teams, but this is a very subjektive view.

With inside shot, i got in the past several guards with IS 1 and also some with IS 7 which is good/bad for a guard i think. The contribution to scoring with LI and Outside focus strategies was nearly the same, especially a IS 6 with poor outside offense qualities doesn't really scores on inside games where you could espect it(when it have an impact(several zero points games).

That driving is more important then IS even says a BB, in the forum day, i believe jbmrock still have a link to this answer if you like to ask him ...

Edit: but i won't overate driving with inside tactics, good jump shot did well too ;)


Last edited by CrazyEye at 07/03/2009 11:15:12

i have problems to figure out the effect of inside D, some say it is important some say it isn't and in the end both can't prove their point.

This is my theory based on what I've seen in recent matches. I am currently training SFs and have been playing my SFs as guards these days. Whenever anyone plays look inside against me my PG (SF trainee) always shuts down the opponent's PG (sometimes less than 30 points per 100 shots).

Now, my SF trainee has pretty high outside d and inside d. So you could say that maybe it is the outside d that is stopping the PG's inside shots. However, I never see results like that against teams playing an outside game.

With inside shot, i got in the past several guards with IS 1 and also some with IS 7 which is good/bad for a guard i think. The contribution to scoring with LI and Outside focus strategies was nearly the same, especially a IS 6 with poor outside offense qualities doesn't really scores on inside games where you could espect it(when it have an impact(several zero points games).

You are right, guards have absolutely no contribution to IS or ID in the "team ratings". However, a guard with good inside skills and/or driving can score lots of points on a look inside offense. You can only see that by looking at the points per 100 shots - not the team ratings.

Now, if your inside guys already have good match-ups, your guard won't get many opportunties. So there's the rub. ;-)

That driving is more important then IS even says a BB, in the forum day, i believe jbmrock still have a link to this answer if you like to ask him ...

Edit: but i won't overate driving with inside tactics, good jump shot did well too ;)

Yes, I've seen GM-jbmcrock say that but I can no longer find the thread (believe me, I looked). I'll ask him.

i never understood the team rating, i even struggle to reconstruate that ;)

But player take much shot if they have the oppurtunity, i have a defensiv first center with nealrly no attack his shooting percentage in the past wasn't bad, but he takes no shots. The shooting percentage is more sinking, because in the shot he takes there are a lot we have no time on the clock why i got the ball shots:

(2269189) - IS 5 both reb and ID 10 - so he is still useful to grab some minutes.

i never understood the team rating, i even struggle to reconstruate that ;)

But player take much shot if they have the oppurtunity, i have a defensiv first center with nealrly no attack his shooting percentage in the past wasn't bad, but he takes no shots. The shooting percentage is more sinking, because in the shot he takes there are a lot we have no time on the clock why i got the ball shots:

(2269189) - IS 5 both reb and ID 10 - so he is still useful to grab some minutes.

That's kind of my point. Your team is always looking for the best shot. So this guy will hardly ever shoot because he doesn't have the shooting skills of the rest of your team. When he takes shots he will be wide open, so that explains why his shooting percentage is good but also why he doesn't shoot very much.

Of course, when the shot clock is about to run out, he has no choice but to shoot (and probably miss).

I would not read too much into the team ratings. From what I undestand, they are just to give you an idea of what is happening on the court. The actually match-ups are the most important. So if you want to know why you lost or won a game, the best place to start is the points per 100 shots.

Last edited by HeadPaperPusher at 07/03/2009 12:55:53

so why my guards with high inside shot shot less, then IS 1 guys with a little better JS when i playing LI and IS is important to finish?

. So if you want to know why you lost or won a game, the best place to start is the points per 100 shots.

So i win this game because of my good C -> (13107676)

I like to watch the taken shots more, and then i see that talipov and Rocha takes the most of my shots, thats were probadly my missmatches i used to score. I can not see how they calculate the 100 shot rating, and very often you have weird matchups leading.

so why my guards with high inside shot shot less, then IS 1 guys with a little better JS when i playing LI and IS is important to finish?

Maybe for a number of reasons. As you said, driving is more important for inside shooting when it is a guard. Maybe your centres were getting the better looks? Maybe your opponent's guards have good inside d compared to your guards? It is hard to know without seeing the player's skills on both sides.

So i win this game because of my good C -> (13107676)

I like to watch the taken shots more, and then i see that talipov and Rocha takes the most of my shots, thats were probadly my missmatches i used to score. I can not see how they calculate the 100 shot rating, and very often you have weird matchups leading.

The short answer is no because your C didn't shoot that much.

I said that pts per100 are a good place to start. You used an outside tactic in this game. Even if your Cs inside looks are great, he tends to pass it off when you're using an outside tactic. So his inside looks have to be outstanding for him to shoot. This artificially inflates his pts per 100.

You have to remember that pts per 100 is only based on the shots that the player actually took, not on the quality of all the "looks" he got in the game.


Last edited by HeadPaperPusher at 07/03/2009 13:33:58

Here is the link from GM-jbmcrock for inside shots: (33639.14).

GM-jbmcrock seems to interpret this the same way that I do: this is in reference to driving lay-ups only. Now, what a driving lay-up is in BB is open to interpretation. ;-)

You have to remember that pts per 100 is only based on the shots that the player actually took, not on the quality of all the "looks" he got in the game.

My PF shot 13/24(27 Points) no additional free throws etc., now i multipli this number with 4 and got 52/98(108 Points) now explain me why they score 103,5 Points with 100 shots when they already score 108 with 98?

So my center shot 2-7 + 7/9 freethrows, so maybe i try 7 shots eleven points which i multiply with 14 and got 140 points with 98 shots which is to much so i have to include the free thorws another way. 16 shots and eleven points is obviously less then 100 point per 100 shots. So now i take the free throws as the shots they were(3 two pointer and one three pointer) and got 11 shots and 11 points this is the most sensefull formular but with 100 points per 100 shots far away from the 123,8 points the system calculates for it.

I don't find a formula where this fit, and thats not the uncommon it is much harder to find a example where the points are fitting. So it mades no sense as how good they shoot, and it makes no sense how important there impact is on your game.

So why should be number important?

Last edited by CrazyEye at 07/03/2009 14:24:22

So why should be number important?

First, I don't think that FTs count for the points per 100. Maybe they do but my feeling is that they don't.

Second, you cannot take the stat too literally. You could have a player go 1 for 20 shooting but have a 120 pts per 100 shots. Why? Because the pts per 100 shots is based on the probability of him hitting all the different shots that he took. So for example, if a player only took 4 shots in a game:

-he takes a 3 pt shot and missed, but the probability of the shot going in was 0.5
(in this case, the pts per 100 is 150, 3 times 0.5 times 100)
-he takes an inside shot and scored, probability of the shot going in was 0.5
(pts per 100 is 100)
-he takes another 3 pointer and missed, probability of the shot is 0.20 this time
(pts per 100 is 60)
-he takes a final 2 pointer and missed (at the buzzer), probability of the shot is 0.1 this time
(pts per 100 is 20)

He scored 3 points on 4 shots. If you take pts per 100 literally, he would be averaging 75 pts per 100.

However, pts per 100 is based on the probabiliy that his shots would go in. So his pts per 100 is actually: (150 + 100 + 60 + 20) / 4

=330/4
=82.5

Does that make sense now? As to whether FTs count, I seriously doubt it. It would be too many things to calculate.

So you are saying that this is the most likely matchup, is that right?

On the other hand you say, players who have had prohabilities bad don't take a shot. In this case the centers should have good possibilities, too. But why they take the smallest amount of shots?

Jump Shot: awful Jump Range: atrocious
Outside Def.: atrocious Handling: respectable
Driving: mediocre Passing: mediocre
Inside Shot: mediocre Inside Def.: prominent
Rebounding: prominent Shot Blocking: strong
Stamina: inept Free Throw: prominent

Experience: average

who luckily also plays 22 minutes as a center in this game, against an id 12 or 13 center ;) Ok he didn't shoot but also the other center don't take much shots.

Another fine example with him: (10301647)

Qualtinger seems to my second weakest option in this game, and also thecenter from abbove seems to be the perfect scoring maschine against the strongest player from the opponent. if you tell me that my OD monster Rocha also got good schanches to score i would believe that, but wait he isn't stronger then Qualitnger.