BuzzerBeater Forums

In theory I think this could work out very well it's true. But in practice it could be very difficult to pull off. At most you're going to be able to train 2 of these players, and you'd have to count on being able to pick up the other 3 off the market. Along with being generally uncompetitive for like 5 seasons while training your guys out of position. And don't forget you'd need to have funky backups too!

I also believe teams with more balanced players could take advantage of all of your defenders except the SF. (I'm assuming if you have the capital to make this kind of team you'd be in at least D.II, where you'll see SGs with 12+ IS, and big men with 12+ JS). So basically if this was a US team I believe it'd be the type of team that would be borderline D.II/NBBA team. Though it's possible that your team passing could offset this(I'm not sure a team with passing that high has ever been put together so I'm not sure how it'd work)

Finally, I'm not so sure your basic assumption that all perimeter defenders need is OD is true.

Thank you for your response. I'm not at all sure if it would work, that's why I'm sharing my thoughts on the forums. I just started playing last season so I have no idea how higher divisions and their players look like, so these actual numbers will probably not be ideal. I noticed that I put in too few of the other defensive skill indeed, and if I were to try it of course I would do a lot more research what skill levels to aim for. As you said, the overall passing is very high and probably unnecessary, so that's where I could shift things.

To get a team like this together is a problem in the current situation I know, I just thought maybe if this setup could become a trend, it would be easier to acquire players like this if managers find out it can work. Or maybe a group of people that want to find out can work together and train players like this (is that allowed btw, cooperating with teams to train players and exchange, without the aim being profit or cash exchange?)

And about OD being the only important thing for perimeter defenders, that's why I was asking if that was the case. I don't know, I couldn't think of other skills that were necessary for them. Does anyone know if a player is a less effective defender if he has the same OD but lower guard skills besides that?

I'm not really sure on if it's allowed or not. SB has some contribution in my opinion, and I've seen some evidence supporting increased HA leading to more steals as well.

And actually the high passing on everyone was something I really really liked, as I said, I've seen it do wonders for my team.(and I don't have a single player on my team as high as any of those)

Yeah high passing is great but I went a little too crazy, I was thinking what was possible for the salary and not so much wether it would be managable to achieve. Maybe just regular stats and only switching OD/ID would be more plausible.

The bigs in this setup don't have lower SB than guards would have so that wouldn't make them worse perimeter defenders I think. They do miss the HA, but I guess overall they'll do pretty similar right? In any case, thanks for your input.

At some point their designated position would change, and salary as well due to that fact I believe. So it would seem that you can't have it both ways - both low salary and high ID for instance. But it depends on how high are we talking about here.

Yes.
This was going to be something I brought up, then it becomes simply wasted training... having trained a shorter guy for bigs training or a taller guy for guards (given that they won't train as fast). Better off to train a guy with those starting stats/height as an all-rounder/SF type.

If they don't switch, then it might be an interesting experiment and kudos to you for thinking outside the box... however, if it goes wrong: then it becomes pretty damn expensive! G'luck...

Last edited by malice at 2/1/2013 7:36:48 PM

I've seen this idea mentioned a few other times. I think it is great but it is very hard to implement for reasons others have pointed out, the big one being you would need someone else to train the opposite type player. Also the players would need to play 48 minutes or you would need backups with the same type of builds, which would be very hard to find.

You should do it IMO.

Also the elastic effect must be considered when you have od and is so low its going to KILL you when training .

Meh not really, the elastic affect for OD is small compared to a skill like HA, and even with HA it's not a huge deal.

The training for this would be more difficult but not as much as people are saying. The real difficulty is filling your roster with the players you need outside of the ones you train.

Thank you for your reply, I agree with your main point of difficulty. That's why I'd like to know wether it's allowed to cooperate with other managers to train players and exchange them later, without the aim being profit or transferring cash?

At some point their designated position would change, and salary as well due to that fact I believe. So it would seem that you can't have it both ways - both low salary and high ID for instance. But it depends on how high are we talking about here.

If they don't switch, then it might be an interesting experiment and kudos to you for thinking outside the box... however, if it goes wrong: then it becomes pretty damn expensive! G'luck...

Well I have no experience with the training, the only things I can go by are the s17 Salary Calculator, the one in Buzzer Manager and the salary estimation in the Training Simulator. I used those to find out the point where it changes, but for Bigs you can add as much OD as you want if you keep the other guard skills at a reasonable level. It's a bit harder for guards as you'll want not just ID but also RB and IS at a decent level, but I think with some careful planning it's pretty safe.

Your idea sounds very nice and I like it. Actually I think I'm applying it, but not at the scale you are describing it. I use it only on my bigs : i'm trying to develop big guys with inside def skills, and outside attack skills. But the rest of the roster is rather based on a "classic" scheme.
This strategy of "Hybrid players" leading to an optimal roster costs is realistic, but becomes harder to implement on the entire roster of a team.
10-12 average height players with inverted attack/defense skills will take time and energy to develop.

Still you can start with focusing on those who will be your 3 inside guys and developping them for X seasons (i took 3 guys for the 1 position training which is the most efficient). The rest of the roster should be kept "classic" so your team stays competitive. Once their training gets slower (around 23 to 25 y.o.), then go for the guards. Develop 3 PG/SG, (1+2 pr 2+1)... all this would last for approx. 12 seasons ! During this time, you should have made enough money to buy 2/3 all around SFs to complete the roster (we have 9 players out of 12). The last 3 ones will come at last, from your market or from the next drafts ...
"Working" with other teams and exchanging players is a bit hard to control : a player on the TL will be available for all the managers. How can you be sure the traded player will go at the price you and your "partners" will decide ? And even working with partner teams, it will last more than 12 years to get your ideal roster anyway...

The result of it will become a roster of "cheap" players with great skills ... is the salary difference worth a 10 season work ? how long will it take before it becomes more efficient financially than a more "classic" approach ? (I ask those questions and will try to figure it out, because as I said before, i'm quite interested in this kind of approaches !)

Thanks for your reply. I'm just putting the idea forward hoping others agree, and maybe help trying. Maybe more and more managers will see the benefit and we can bring forth a shift in strategy. As more managers train these type of players, completing your roster will become easier. It sounds a little like a utopia, but I like out of the box ideas.

I think the bigs are easier/faster to train, because you only need high levels of IS and OD, and then some RB and a little of the other skills. If you can get them to finish training at age 23, you'll be approaching an ideal starting 5 pretty quickly.

About trading the players with partners, what if both put a player on the wire, and bid on eachother's players? As you bid, the other guy gets more cash available allowing him to bid more on yours, so you can do the same. Basically you can big 5 million on eachother's player. I don't think that high a price is desirable for the transfer market and possibly forbidden, but seeing as the players won't fit very well in regular teams, I don't think other managers will want to spend a lot on these players. If you bid at the high part of the market value, I don't think regular managers are gonna outbid you.

And wether it's worth it? I don't know, that depends on what you want. For me, I think it would be worth it to be succesful with my own strategy that no-one else uses. Also, to be the best you gotta have a real good advantage (or real good luck), and having a roster that only costs you 1/3rd to 1/2 of the salary of competitors, I'd say you'd have that kind of advantage. If you want to win it all, you need to put in a lot of work, so if you aim high I think it's worth a shot!