BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Forum Day Topic: Training Options

Forum Day Topic: Training Options

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
29688.28 in reply to 29688.22
Date: 5/9/2008 2:25:01 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
196196
I have to agree with WFU on this one, and have thought this since back to the beta days.

It's seems more unrealistic to have a PG play at C to get training then to be able to just train that skill at the preferred position.

Plus, more flexibility in training should only improve the ability to create balanced players, which is key to BB.



Now some of us have 4 game weeks (or even when we return to 3 game weeks) we have to wait til scimmages to play guys completely out of position to get training.

If we (as we do) understand the height penalties for training Inside skills to short guards and vice versa why can we not be given the option?

This week I would choose to train passing but not for PG/SG as i will max out my mins on guards and so I would choose PG/C (suitable for my outside game) or SG/C. If the Centres took longer so be it.

Anyway the point is pretty clear and in the open... either you guys plan to or dont mind opening it up to give more flexibility to managers that want it OR for the sake of simplicity keep it the same (or for another reason you may not be wishing to disclose!)

This Post:
00
29688.29 in reply to 29688.21
Date: 5/9/2008 3:51:09 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
170170
It really takes good managing to train effectively and it is probably the only way for a weaker team to fill the gap with reacher and stronger ones.
True, true.

This Post:
00
29688.30 in reply to 29688.10
Date: 5/9/2008 4:03:53 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00


It isn't much different than telling LeBron that he can't start half of the time because you want someone else to also train ("I know you are by far our best player, but you've already played 48 minutes this week - go sit down").


Except a team might sit their best player in an unofficial game, which is what I'm guessing most of us do. Other than that I have to agree this is a good idea. Who says a team WOULDN'T want to focus on wingmen rebounding or big man passing? That's pretty much what makes European players so sought after IRL now, and forget LeBron, you could NEVER make a Dirk Nowitzki in BB.

This Post:
00
29688.32 in reply to 29688.31
Date: 5/9/2008 4:24:12 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
Great day for poker too.


Bring it. (Seriously, how many people around here play?)

Well, I've been meaning to give it a try, I guess Though I am not much into the gambling side of it, I guess.

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
This Post:
00
29688.33 in reply to 29688.31
Date: 5/9/2008 4:24:52 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
170170
I'm every day all-inn.

This Post:
00
29688.35 in reply to 29688.34
Date: 5/9/2008 4:35:47 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
Does that sound like a reasonable compromise?


Does to me.

Was the idea of having 'Forwards' and 'Wingmen' added to some training regimes discussed at all? Off the top of my head, I can think of Rebounding for Forwards and Passing for Wingmen.

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
From: ned

This Post:
00
29688.36 in reply to 29688.34
Date: 5/9/2008 4:37:01 PM
Freccia Azzurra
IV.18
Overall Posts Rated:
823823
Second Team:
Slaytanic
Please Charles, any decision you can take is ok but please, don't get this game too easy (I speak about training and money) all of us would like to have best drafted player, tons of $ and the perfect player; I remember the beginning when everything it was "hard and difficul" but when also the fun was really high

1990-2022 Stalinorgel - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pV-Xppl6h8Et
This Post:
00
29688.37 in reply to 29688.34
Date: 5/9/2008 4:39:32 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
While we're at it -- I notice a naming inconsistency in training labels. Some regimes (One on One and Jump Shot) have an option to train 'Guards', and all the rest of them -- PG/SG. My understanding is that PG/SG trains both positions equally.

Was this a slip in wording, or is it intentional?

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
Advertisement