BuzzerBeater Forums

Lots of managers do this in the B3 or PL games but it is a lot less popular in league games as it makes training very difficult and game shape management a little tricky.

However it does seem rubbish looking at this scenario.

Coach A: Studies his opponent in great detail. Sets out his players very carefully even cross matching them on defence. He has to consider who hs plays where very caefully as he is training big men and needs his older player at PF and his young stud at C although they can cross over on defence. He monitors his minutes carefully. Spends a fortune on a level six trainer (maybe $500,000 to buy him and $40,000 a week adding up to a million a season to his costs) so he can help his trainee progress. Then has to consider carefuly what to train considering the new implications of the changes to the SB formula.

Coach B: He doesn't give a toss and just logs in 1 minute a week to set his standard LI/M2M/Blank/LCD lineup while his level 1 coach trains game shape keeping his players in top form every week. If he needs a new player he buys the first $200k player he sees in the TL for less than his weekly salary.

Coach B has a massive advantage over Coach A in the current game engine.

I want to hear the comments of developers.

I hope this will be the exception and everything goes quickly :)

What if empty chart was implemented as 1- bot lineup (highest salary on PG, then SG and so on) + 2 -coach picks from depth chart ?
The 1st would give a disadvantageous 5 starters, the 2nd would make the substitutions play their 10 minutes anyway. This could solve the problem ... better ideas ?

IMO, there even shouldn't be any "let the coach decide" strategy because it has the same impact on the subs, defensive rotations, played minutes etc.
Or if it does, there should be a coach as additionnal staff member (with levels and quite huge salary ... everybody cannot afford Doc Rivers nor the Zen Master)... but this is another issue i presume ^^.

which still isn't full proof

Just to correct you here, the saying is 'Fool-proof'

:)