BuzzerBeater Forums

Excuse me Huzzel....next time I will give 40000$ to my Scouts......sure.......trust me!

Eheh
if this is the system, only an idiot can pay 10k per week... ;-)

I really would like to see at least an appropriate relation between height and position of players, i don´t get this, check out my draftees.. games are supposed to be fun not a joke. Hope next season we have less of this.

PG 5star

Weekly salary: $ 3 798
DMI: 0
Age: 19
Height: 6'6" / 198 cm
Potential: star
Game Shape: respectable

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


PF 5 STAR

Weekly salary: $ 3 600
DMI: 0
Age: 19
Height: 6'2" / 188 cm
Potential: 6th man
Game Shape: respectable

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


C 4 STARS
Horácio Marcondes (4508766)
Weekly salary: $ 2 801
DMI: 0
Age: 18
Height: 6'4" / 193 cm
Potential: 6th man
Game Shape: respectable

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

player position is calculated my player skills only... height isnt a factor.

U have a player with all pitfuls and R and SB mediocre and ID respectable, so he has the skills to be a C

I do think it might be nice to include height in computation of players, at least in the draft. Honestly, many draftees are being selected for training purposes...so what's the point of drafting a 6"2" PF or center or a 7'1" point guard.

Just my opinion...

Steve
Bruins

That´s exaclty why i am suggesting to take the height as a factor!!

Even if it is only for the draft like Bruins coach, Mr. Steve Solana ,suggested.

That´s exaclty why i am suggesting to take the height as a factor!!

Even if it is only for the draft like Bruins coach, Mr. Steve Solana ,suggested.

It might be good to make height visible in general terms (short/medium/tall). I don't think it belongs in ratings calculation though.

That´s exaclty why i am suggesting to take the height as a factor!!

Even if it is only for the draft like Bruins coach, Mr. Steve Solana ,suggested.

It might be good to make height visible in general terms (short/medium/tall). I don't think it belongs in ratings calculation though.

It might be good for the draft to make exact height visible in my opinion!
...and it would be more realistic...

but
but
but...

that is only one part of the problem:

and the age??? and salary???

A player
Weekly salary: $ 7 466
DMI: 0
Age: 18
Altezza: 6'11" / 211 cm
Potential: bandiera della squadra
Game Shape: rispettabile
Jump Shot:.: inept Jump Range: respectable
Outside Def: pitfull Handling: inept
Driving: average Passing: atrocius
Inside Shot: respectable Inside Def: respectable
Rebound: respectable Blocking: respectable
Stamina: awful Free Throw: awful
Experience: atrocius

A player
Weekly salary: $ 3 944
DMI: 0
Age: 19
Height: 6'5" / 196 cm
Potential: MVP
Game Shape: respectable
Jump Shot: atrocious Jump Range: mediocre
Outside Def.: average Handling: average
Driving: average Passing: atrocious
Inside Shot: average Inside Def.: respectable
Rebounding: respectable Shot Blocking: awful
Stamina: pitiful Free Throw: average
Experience: atrocious

We don't know if the first is A+ and the second A- (Vitto's player tell us that this is not sure) but ....let's say the first is A+ and the second A- ...is this difference normal in your opinion or there' something wrong?

I don't think the difference is normal. For the record, I do agree that the draft is a bit top-heavy as far as the ratings are concerned. I was merely pointing out that it is counterproductive to calculate the height in the star rating formula, in my opinion. It should be provide as some sort of a range in the second scouting report instead.

Range would be fine with me, as long as it is a small enough range to understand at least if a guy is trainable.
For example, instead of having the stats from a single game (often times useless like my atrocious free throw shooter who shot 2-2 in that one game), I would MUCH rather know how old he is and if he is taller than 6'8 or shorter than 6'4 for example.

If you have a 7'1" PG, train him in C skills. He will train very quickly because of his age and height. Then you will have a C who can handle the ball and pass and still do the inside work. He will be a better all-around player. Same with the 6'4 C. Train him in SF skills- he already has the inside skills.

Granted, my team is in a league with only a few owners. But, my four best players can play any position and play it well. I have played two seasons now and my combined record is 39-5 and a two-time Champion. So, maybe having a huge guy with PG skills isn't a bad thing, if you develop his bigman skills.

If you have a 7'1" PG, train him in C skills

Not if he has atrocious rebounding and pitiful ID (just an example). It would only be a waste of time