BuzzerBeater Forums

didn't know that a Beal trade was something that Denver would want. He's a great shooter and definitely a great player...I just fail to see how Denver will handle playing at a faster pace. Wouldn't that pull Jokic out of most offensive actions? Some of Denver's most epic losses this season where on the back of Murray rushing the game and Jokic becoming a tiny bit of a liability (not to mention that now Murray..or well, in past few matches, started to take more 3s). I watched around 10-12 matches that Denver played this season and I think half of them were losses (might be just me bringing them bad luck), including the last 2 losses against Cleveand (?!?!) and the Dallas demolition

Not to mention that there were rumors of Utah being interested in Beal (I guess that Mitchell becomes an option then), but I don't really believe that sort of talk. I do believe though that Wizards could do with some more first round picks,but then again, who would say no to that.

That being said, I am up for anything that will make NBA even more engaging and interesting. Whether that means that a team like Denver will light up the league in a couple of seasons or some old but gold players will still impress, I really don't care Anything goes as long as the entertainment value keeps increasing (that being said, I am one of the few that doesn't get the Giannis hype ...but then again, I know so little about basketball).

But getting back on the topic of this thread, out of those players that I've listed, which ones would you consider for a 3-men training plan?

I'd go for the 68, 58 and 47 TSP guys, but it would be nice to know their height to see if they're compatible to train together.

If you go with the tried and true 1v1 training first to increase the elastic effect, you can keep training all your players for the time being, as it trains 2 positions. If rebounding is in your plans too (probably not if you're training guards), you can train that after that as it's 2 positions too.

so basically training a double position ID right now is one of the worst things I could have started my training experience with

I guess I was blinded by Denize's looks and by the fact that most of my points scored against me were from the paint (which could just be my bad interpretation of the ID I guess)

the 68 is Height: 6'6" / 198 cm
the 58 is Height: 6'1" / 185 cm
the 47 is Height: 6'4" / 193 cm

now that I look at their heights, I feel even more stupid for training them in ID


my 52 is Height: 6'7" / 201 cm
and my 97 is Height: 6'8" / 203 cm

not that keen on training rebounding (unless I am missing something and it is actually a top skill)

uuhhhh, so I did fail massively by starting with ID
at least now I know

I managed to bring my young "star" center from 6 to 8 in half a season in ID + he got one more pop in IS (now he is at 9)

PS: I just realized that in the beginning I had 2 weeks of IS training, but at that point didn't know what's up. However, I did get 6 players to pop in those 2 weeks

Nobody starts training perfectly right out of the gate, so don't worry. Training ID on small players early isn't bad if you do want it on your players, because at a young age it won't go as slowly as later on. However, the consensus is that starting with 1v1 forwards is best for total training speed. It's also the most fun because you get the most pops.

Seeing their heights reinforces my opinion to focus training on those 3 together as guards, for now. If you train 1v1, you can train the other 2 as well though your 23 yo doesn't need any 1v1 training (I suggest selling him as he's not a strong player, but someone else might want to train him to become one). At the start of coming season you can check if you get lucky in the draft and get a better player to replace one of these, or you might feel like buying a better trainee on the market.

You can get lucky with some quick pops when training a new skill, because skills have sublevels. Your players might have had high sublevels in IS (like 6.9) and therefore quickly popped at first. The 2nd pop would take the regular amount of training time (roughly, because that first pop could have gotten him to 7.3 or something, so only 0.7 left).

I will be working on fixing my training then
I did want ID for all my players, because other than that low TSP Center (which I don't know why I don't play more often ) and my young Center (who keeps getting fouled out in most matches - started fiddling around with various types of defenses just to see which one doesn't get him fouled out), my players don't really have any decent ID, so I get butchered in the paint against any sort of human opposition (would like to have a team ready to compete when the time comes).

And speaking of a competitive team, I'd have a hard time finding a replacement for my 23 PG/SG as he puts some fairly decent numbers on the score board every single match, even when I play him as a C. I've trimmed down my squad as much as I could - heard 10 is a good number - so ditching a starter might not be the right move as of now, especially that I feel like he's not going to fetch a good price either.

The fast pops make sense. There were nice to experience in my early phases of the game experience nonetheless.

@Sakiz105: I did kind of get the general idea behind it, but could and will definitely use those numbers you've provided me with. So cheers for that. Having a quantifiable perspective always spurs on my appetite for petting the thin lines of efficiency

As of now, the salary doesn't seem to trouble me. Or I am not comprehending the scale of its influence. But the coaches' influence is definitely something that I want to wrap my head around. I must say though, that I was expecting a bigger difference from one level to another, giving the huuuge difference in staff prices and their salaries. Kind of feel cheated if anything, for having just recently bought a level 6 coach

are there some numbers behind the elastic effect? I might need to start more sheets in excel if I am to understand this correctly

I am guessing @NJ's numbers are mirroring that

that is simply awesome! cheers
I like the training plans a lot, though I kind of see a lot of values rounding up at 15. Is that a minimum default reachable for all levels of potential? I kind of feel like the height element is going to mess up a lot of my training plans in the future. And the physical stats seem to be assigned so randomly that it might be a while until I manage to train the right lads for the right position.

for now though, I am kind of exploring how converting positions works.Turning my PG into a PF would be awesome if doable