BuzzerBeater Forums

I wonder what it would do to a high rebounding team.

But damn... rebounding is soooo expensive!

My center averages 10 rebounds a game.. I am quite pleased with my center therefore am keeping him. Untill I reach higher division or see that I need 20 rebounds a game.

Rebounding is expensive, and i would probably counter the argument that REB is as necessary with SB. I have no math at all to back my claim up, but it feels like i can do reasonably well at rebounding with shot blockers. I'm wondering if i track the blocked shots in game if i would have see a relatively high percentage of shots blocked as being rebounded by the same player. I think that rebounding is the equalizer stat of the defensive side of the equation. It lacks importance to some extent if you can't force contested shots, because assisted inside shots have a decidedly higher percentage chance of being made. I'm sure you could make the case that missing the chances on your shots also could be enough to encourage you to build high rebounding, but i would much rather have a player that can shoot and defend/block before i worry about creating a better rebounding player in the hopes of collecting the shots missed.

Rebounding is increased in significance however if perimeter or even neutral offenses are being played, as OD has too significant an impact on the game at the current moment (in my opinion). Since these shots naturally carry a lower percentage chance than inside shots do regardless of OD's impact, rebounding chances will be higher.

I think what this thread should really be promoting at this point is that you shouldn't necessarily build a player to one strength amongst primaries. The significant IS/ID builds aren't as ideal a build path as they were when there was more salary involved in training SB.

Two things.

The question when looking to add SB to a trainee is and has always been what skill/skills to punt and how much.

What do you mean by "skills to punt"?

So if you want IS your back at square one looking at what skill to cut again.

What offence do you run without IS? Where do you get your offence from without IS? This is considering that LI is the preferred attack.

I have had some success with II, though I'll probably be shot down for mentioning it.

Actually, no, that's not what it means. Obviously you don't get conf-

Haha! Just kidding. Thanks heaps. Good explanation. +1

I'm sure you could make the case that missing the chances on your shots also could be enough to encourage you to build high rebounding, but i would much rather have a player that can shoot and defend/block before i worry about creating a better rebounding player in the hopes of collecting the shots missed.

The way I've always considered it is that Rebounding, Handling and Passing are all "possession" skills, in that if you have a major hole in one of them, you will give your opponents extra possessions and therefore more chances to score (either via failing to collect rebounds or via turnovers). OD is the other stat that can help with possession, as it is used for steals. In the long run, the path to success defensively is to not only minimize the opponent's points per possession, but to also try to minimize the number of possessions they have relative to yours.

Man, John Hollinger over here.

You may or may not have to "punt" a skill on a player. In D.IV, i might have to chop some IS or some REB to get a higher SB. But if i believe that a higher SB leads to enough blocks, and as i said in my previous post i believe personally that blocks have a higher percentage chance of being rebounded by the blocking player currently in the game engine (unproven, but my belief) then i am more likely to build closer to a 13/15/13/15 type of build, which is a bit more expensive than the salary range you are going for, but should be cheap enough. If i'm moving up the chain faster, then someone in the 85-90k range for completion is realistic, and will still fit under most 8 potential caps, so you could push up either defensively or offensively further depending on who you are.