BuzzerBeater Forums

Thank you, I think if more managers see the benefit of this setup, it will be easier to put together a team like this. And you need to view things in perspective; for the level of skills I portrayed here, you'll need a PAS/Superstar trainee yes, but if you compare it to a traditional player with the same skill level you'll need a lower potential because your player will have 1/3rd to half of the salary of the traditional player. If that's a problem you can start with a lower level of skill as your goal.

Actually I think finding trainees will be easier than finding them for a traditional build, because you'll be training big and small skills, so overall the training speed will be about the same wether it's a 6'3", 6'6" or 6'9" player. Also having holes in the skills of the player will not matter that much; a big with ID below 5 won't be a problem for this type of player, and since it's not ideal for the traditional player build, the trainee might even be cheaper.

Reading the topic about B3, I see that any effort towards trying to win on the high levels is a big one. And since money is such a bottleneck on the high level, can't this idea be a solution for them?

This timeout on login is killing me, wrote a message as long as yours, hit sent and was just 0,5s too late to copy my text because I realized I would be logged out... Lost it =/

First of all thank you for your thorough reply, it's much appreciated. I'll respond to problem #4 right away, as it's part of why I do this. I like to use creative thinking and solution finding to find exploits and weaknesses in a system, prove it so others can learn from it and the system can be improved. I like basketball as much and in as many ways as you do, and I'll like Buzzerbeater better as it becomes more realistic, and I do hope my efforts will help achieving that. I don't aim for my idea to be a long term succesful one, I just want to prove it works and bring positive change to the game.

I think problems #1 and #2 are addressed quite well in my example roster. There's RB and JS across the board, and though maybe not as high on the traditional places, but overall I think it's the same level (15, 10, 10, 15, 17 RB and 14, 15, 14, 14, 10 JS). You could argue that having RB spread isntead of concentrated isn't as good, but I don't think it has that much of a negative impact, if any. The C still has 17 RB which is the highest skill level of the build, and the guards have higher than normal RB. In any case, with these skill levels the salary is still way below the salary of comparable traditional players, so even if the levels are too low, there's room to make them higher. Maybe my view on traditional players on the 14-17 skill levels is wrong, but I think they costs about 150k in salary, and then my 75k guards and 60-55k bigs are a lot cheaper with comparable skills (if any of this isn't true, please let me know).

Problem #3 is something I indeed haven't thought about. I've used balanced models for my players; G's with both IS and JR and bigs with both IS and JS. On defense, I forgot to put reasonable OD on my guards (what traditional bigs would have), but I think there's room to put it there. Otherwise they have the same defensive qualities, albeit inversed. I think with the current skill levels the players are pretty suitable for either outside or inside offense and defense, but it can be adjusted to do either in a better way, while keeping the salaries low.

In short, if you want please take another look at my example roster (which is really just a first draft and could use some tweaks), and see what is missing compared to traditional players of the same skill level (14-17). I don't think there's all that much missing, and if there is my players are so much cheaper than normal that a little extra salary woudln't hurt. If you could find some time to reply again that would be great, then I can work out the skills to be effective, and focus on them being trainable next

Thanks again!

Great! Thanks for the effort. How would you say this kind of lineup compares to traditional lineups? How much cheaper is it compared to a traditional lineup with the same skills, or how much better is it compared to one with the same salary?

The PG is hard indeed because it needs something of everything, and the OD still inflates the salary even if you keep it at 9. However, you'll have RB and SB across the board, and you can pimp your bigs greatly. I mean 20 OD, and then you could even choose to make IS 19 if you keep SB at 5 and ID at 7 for the Center (a traditional PG doesn't need that much ID right?)

If you want a commited PG with the same skills but regular OD and 1 RB, you can still only get OD to 15 for 101k. We could try to work out something else, but I think the PG we have currently isn't that bad.

If we make a LI team like everyone else does, the JS won't be much of a problem right? Or is it too low for LI as well? Even so, I don't think we should aim for the perfect solution with this build, that would be unrealistic. I think we can live with some minor flaws (the PG, the lack of high JS) if we get other big benefits: much lower salary and high RB, PA and SB across the boards.

Yeah working out the entire lineup and weekly rotation is the next step. I must admit this is going a bit beyond my reach since I only started playing halfway through last season, so I don't have enough experience to answer these questions properly.

However as far as I can tell, I think the 8 man rotation would consist of the starting 5 which we described, with the SF being a traditional guy. As bench players you'd need another hybrid guard and big, and then another traditional SF/wingman. So 6 hybrid players. I guess the extra cup players can be traditional as well, keeping a regular lineup for the cup?

I don't really understand what the blank lineup strategy is... Though I think that LI might be easiest to build for with hybrid players as the guards are the toughest, and if you don't need high JS and JR you can keep their costs down. They're hybrid anyway, so LI might suit them best too, plus I believe it's currently the most effective strategy.

About training and where the team is... I guess we'll need some time to prepare, the first few seasons in which we need to do the out of position training, but I guess that goes for traditional trainees too right?

I'm sorry if I misled you, I just wanted to share my ideas with the established players, on one side to bring some new insights for our common knowledge of the game, and on the other side because I just like out of the box thinking and solutions. I realize I'm not in a position to apply this strategy to the full extend, but I wanted to know wether it would be possible when I am ready. Also, it would be great if others can use the strategy succesfully; I don't need the succes myself, but the fact that others can use my ideas to be succesful is great for me too.

I might try this idea myself on a smaller scale, lower skill levels and just a PG and a C. If you like the idea yourself, feel free to try it out, you don't have to do it for me. I greatly appreciate your input and thank you for that. So I apologize if I wasn't upfront enough with you which caused you to spend time that you could have used otherwise.