BuzzerBeater Forums

BB USA > Mentoring: A closer look at 1 team

Mentoring: A closer look at 1 team

Set priority
Show messages by
From: Xarn

This Post:
00
88540.55 in reply to 88540.54
Date: 5/17/2009 11:02:51 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
3636
You're right. I was the home team. I beat them by 10 when I was on the road but that was a PIN v PIN.

So general consensus is that my enthusiasm vs their POCT is a wash and it comes down to talent?

Maybe I should POCT and worry about Rd 2.

Last edited by Xarn at 5/17/2009 11:03:33 PM

From: brian

To: Coco
This Post:
00
88540.57 in reply to 88540.56
Date: 5/18/2009 8:20:22 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
having considered all the risks I'd probably PON anyway.


yeah, and he can be certain this guy will run motion and 3-2 zone cause he hasn't logged in since 4-24.

prob better to go 1-3-1 zone knowing that.

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
From: Xarn

This Post:
00
88540.58 in reply to 88540.57
Date: 5/18/2009 10:30:49 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
3636
Doesn't the 1-3-1 Zone kill my rebounding?

From: brian

To: Xarn
This Post:
00
88540.59 in reply to 88540.58
Date: 5/18/2009 10:38:49 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
It will lower your rebounding and inside def a little more from a 3-2 zone, but it will also kill his outside attack.

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
From: Xarn

This Post:
00
88540.60 in reply to 88540.59
Date: 5/18/2009 10:45:17 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
3636
Okay. So I understood the pro's and con's properly. That's encouraging.

Looking at his team, however. I don't see that I can afford to sacrifice rebounding in favor of outside defense, given his inside scoring strength as well. I'm hoping to maintain my edge by leaning on his outside scoring a little, to take away his strongest sector and by controling the glass.

Is this philosophy correct?

From: brian

To: Xarn
This Post:
00
88540.61 in reply to 88540.60
Date: 5/18/2009 10:57:56 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
Okay. So I understood the pro's and con's properly. That's encouraging.


The only reason I wouldn't play 1-3-1 is if it wasn't certain he'd be going outside.

I don't see that I can afford to sacrifice rebounding in favor of outside defense, given his inside scoring strength as well.


Based on your last meeting, im not seeing his inside scoring as being an issue. Though, he did hit 8 of 27 from three so a 1-3-1 would have likely done better at lowering that.

take away his strongest sector and by controling the glass.


3-2 will still give up rebounding from M2M though. You're still giving up the inside def and rebouding a little, for a little more OD. I'd rather give up a few extra offensive rebounds for a lower shooting percentage.


"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
From: Xarn

This Post:
00
88540.62 in reply to 88540.61
Date: 5/19/2009 10:17:04 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
3636
Thanks for the great advice.

We pulled out the win. It looked grimm at half time. Slight 1 pt lead but we were getting crushed on the boards.

From: brian

To: Xarn
This Post:
00
88540.63 in reply to 88540.62
Date: 5/20/2009 8:22:17 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
Yeah, it's a game of huge swings as I was down 11 in the 1st and up 4 at half but ended up winning by almost 20.

This meeting you gave up 6 more offensive boards, but the trade off is his greatly lowered matchup ratings (ie, the best measurement for how his offense would expect to perform on average)

At every position his ratings were lower, and at SF and PG they were just about cut in half. While the result was just about the same you looked like a bigger favorite yesterday based on ratings.

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
From: Xarn

This Post:
00
88540.64 in reply to 88540.63
Date: 5/21/2009 5:08:48 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
3636

This meeting you gave up 6 more offensive boards, but the trade off is his greatly lowered matchup ratings (ie, the best measurement for how his offense would expect to perform on average)

At every position his ratings were lower, and at SF and PG they were just about cut in half. While the result was just about the same you looked like a bigger favorite yesterday based on ratings



Would you mind elaborating a little bit on the bolded part. I guess I don't understand how the individual position ratings are more important than the results of the events. (ie he got more Offensive rebounds this game, therefore had more shots, therefore could've shot a lower percentage and still come out ahead on points)

I"m trying to put together the way the ME makes sense of things.

From: dray

To: Xarn
This Post:
00
88540.65 in reply to 88540.64
Date: 5/21/2009 7:39:18 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
55
Wow. I'm a member of some feds with some of you guys but never even knew this forum existed.

I'd love to bounce some things off some or one of you guys if anyone has the time. Just want to make sure I'm on the right track.

Advertisement