BuzzerBeater Forums

thats funny, those cross training up will affect their salarys by nothing - but ok you think also that when your inside attack hits no basket it have the reason that you play 3-2 and not the opposing defence.

As Knecht said you if you want to train the IS of an outside player with 1n1 or JS in SF-PF is really easy to do it.


If you guys want a training system where 1+1=2 then it's a really boring one. That's the direction, we go to an easy training system, next step is training the players individually because ''it would be more realistic''...


Being realistic doesn't mean it will be more funny i'll repeat you, that if you want something realistic go play 2k11 or try a chance being a coach.

Last edited by Marot at 7/31/2011 11:08:00 AM

That's not realistic.
Cross-training is.

That's good to know and something I had not noticed occurring with sufficient regularity to chalk it up to anything more than a training bonus; certainly nothing I'd count on--again, the reason for the mystery is lost on me, but apparently others enjoy it.

When I play a simulation, I'm not looking for simple (complex is good) just something that makes sense; the settings for training don't allow you to train IS for a guard without playing him out of position. There is nothing straight-forward about getting pops at IS when training 1on1. I have no problem with that occurring but it is no different than the random pops people are complaining about here. You should be able to train a player at the position you decide to play him at without guessing about settings. That results vary based on player coding, trainer ability, fatigue, etc. are understandable and that is where the variation should occur.

If anything, the randomness gives us more control, and will stop any of those kinds of noticeable developments that you talk about. As a result of it being random, it will tend to be spread out over time. Now if players had a hidden attribute, that determined where the 10% always went (for Pippen it might be passing) then it would be more interesting. But it's just not going to go one place often enough for players to feel like they have a "personality" to them. But the occasional pop will still be neat.

While I agree that there is some cross-over in training certain skills--and not to pick nits too finely here--improving skills such as outside defense is not likely to come from practicing free throws. I can see some cross-over between rebounding and defense, for example, because positioning is important in both; if you are playing good defense you're likely to be in position to keep your man off of the boards. You also learn physical play doing rebound drills which can help you to hold and improve your position in post play. I just trained free throws and had a player with a pop at outside defense; while I agree with the general theory of cross-training, some work could be done in the specific correlation between some of the skills.

i dont get what everyone is freaking about :(

where talking about 10% of training going to a random skill

so unless that skills sub level is insanely high and almost about to pop you are not going to see a change.

we all ready pay salary for sub levels so where talking about a very minimal rise in any salary due to a unwanted pop.

realistically the only issue is that training will be 10% slower in the areas we want to train, this will most likely cause an imbalance in national teams as players will take longer to catch up to the old style trained players.

so i expect to see older players in national teams sticking around longer , making it harder for new comers to break into there nationals teams.

The first part is true, but the second part I doubt. I guess that 90% of current NT players in most countries are not being trained for fear of further blow up in their salary.

Which we all know is silly if the fear is based on cross-training. Salaries take sub-levels into account so a blow-up from cross-training would actually be nothing more than a slight sniffle up.