BuzzerBeater Forums

Yep, I absolutely agree here. Considering 9.99 as new max - getting a maxed out 19 y.o. will be better than training a maxed out 18 y.o. Not only TSP-wise but especially because of the reduced cost of training which you described. There are two major considerations though:

1) If you get a 18 y.o. you are guaranteed those extra pops from 1 season of training. If you get a 5 star A+ 19.y.o. you have no guarantees - he might (like less than 0.1% chance I guess) be a 80+ TSP guy but he might also be a 52 TSP guy. This presents us with one more decision to make, one more risk to take, which imho is a good thing.

The chance to get a 90+ TSP guy would be ~0.001%, so - astronomical. And we are talking not displayed TSP, but real TSP including sub-levels. The chance to get an 80+ TSP guy is ~0.28%, so one guy in ~350... We have ~20 000 19 y.o. draftees each season. 700-800 of those are HoFs. So there will be ~two 80+ TSP 19 y.o. HoFs brought in the game every season. I am pretty sure we have a whole lot more than two 18 year-old HoFs with 80+ TSP counting sublevels, trained for a season in the game right now...

2) Why do we approach this traditionally thinking that a 18 y.o. must necessarily be a better pick than a 19 y.o.? Like one season as a starter in G league Ignite might be a better development choice than one season on the bench in Orlando, for instance. The vast majority of 19 year-olds will still be worse picks than 18 year-olds, as it is supposed to be.

That said, I do agree with you to a certain degree, that's why at the end I added that raising the max to 9.49 might be a better choice. Also what alter_ego said is yet another approach worth considering. Making the max 9.49 AND also limiting TSP to say 70-75. It will be a little harder to implement but not impossible by all means.

If we make choosing between a 18 y.o. and a 19 y.o. pick a much closer affair than it is now, this will add yet another choice we have to make - whether to take a big risk with a 19 y.o. A+ who could be anywhere between 45 and 90 TSP (45 and 70-75 if TSP max is also added), saving one season of training costs or to go the safe path, pay more but be sure that you get a top notch guy.

Decisions, decisions...

Last edited by mink0ff at 6/23/2021 11:28:04 PM

This can open a possibility to value and use more Scouting Points and use the other Scouting options namely:
Gather&Shoot
Extra Pass
Post Up Dribble
On Ball Defense
Cut Inside

It could promote Draft and Scouting even more... Tanking may be reduced even more and can even be a disadvantage at some situations...

Last edited by Bro_Khen at 6/24/2021 12:14:49 AM

I do agree with you on this. Training is much faster nowadays (not to my liking too) and yet the coin has two sides - that does make game progress a little easier as many users want it to be and also it allows for the development of new winning strategies. The downside is that starting skills matter less and less and potential matters more and more. Thus those very high starting TSP 19 y.o. players will indeed be great at the early stages but later on their TSP will still be limited by potential. And that's something that will be perfect for U21 national teams, as they will then have to actively scout 19 year-olds as well. Right now I do not believe that a 19 y.o. draftee has a shot at U21 at the top level. Correct me if I'm wrong.

If something should be done, it would be better to simply increase the probability of drafting a high TSP(70-80 range) 19 yo

Well, that is precisely what I want too. And what I described is a way of achieving it, as ~30-35% of those 19 year-old picks will then be in the range 60-80 TSP(right now with a 8.99 max this percentage is ~12%), with only 1 in 350 being over 80 TSP. There are numerous ways to approach the change. And we can discuss and refine the ideas at a later stage. We should not forget that some ideas are much harder to implement in code than others and our new BBs do have quite a lot on their late right now. What I'm interested in currently is whether such a change does have the support of the community. I would myself consider further steps only if at least 70-80% of the votes are in favor and right now it seems we are right at this threshold.

I do not think that the proposed change will lead to an avalanche of additional great players in the game. It's main idea is to promote interest in the draft, make it a lot more balanced and a little more "fruitful". Right now probably 90+% of all users who invest in draft still completely disregard 19 year-olds (I know I do). And a large portion of the community completely disregards the draft, preferring to save some 70-140k per season which is insane... Knowing that even 4-th, 5-th or 6-th picks could give you a shot at a good prospect might even discourage hardcore tanking to an extent as Bro_Khen mentioned and probably reduce trainees' prices a little. All good side effects.

I appreciate the discussion, guys! Keep it up.

Last edited by mink0ff at 6/24/2021 9:37:19 AM

I don't understand your point here : 19 yo have the same probability to have MVP, HoF or ATG potential than 18yo.

Exactly. My point is that although 19 y.o. will have slightly higher starting TSP, that will not result in higher end builds.

It's not common, but it does happen already. A couple seasons ago, I almost put one of my french trainees in the U21 squad, despite drafting him at 19yo. And he started with a very low TSP.
Scouting all U21 squads for the past two seasons to help the french one, I also saw a few players in those squad who were drafted at 19yo.

I agree - it is possible, yet not at all likely. I guess the vast majority of those players would be very tall pure centers and the most relevant increase there would only be ID, IS, RB, SB all + 0.5 (from 8.99 to 9.49 as max) which is just 2 TSP in primary skills, which taking elastics in consideration will only result in less than 1.5 TSP gain @ 21. It is not too much imo. Certainly not enough to make them more viable than 18 year-olds starting with 7.99 on primary skills.

Last edited by mink0ff at 6/24/2021 10:34:01 AM

Totally agree with ur suggestion. The users who disagree fail to see the big picture here. 19yo draftees are at a disadvantage compared to 18 yo. Almost none of experienced NT trainers choose 19 yo draftees because 18 yo is much faster to train, especially with gym and youth trainer. It is obviously unfair advantage since youth trainer and gym give % extra on the initial amount of training

Last edited by Cobra Kai at 6/28/2021 8:45:20 AM

We are close to 100 votes here, so I want to keep this alive for just a little longer.

The draftee market is on fire right now, so it's a good time to make observations. Here are mine:

1) There were/are some pretty good 19 yo players on the market. They are not far off the ones already being trained for a season but still I haven't yet found a guy that I would preffer over a ~50 TSP 18 y.o.

2) Max TSP for an 18 y.o. draftee (9+ pot) trained for a season -> 77 (currently 16 players on TL over 69TSP).

3) Max TSP for a new 19 y.o. draftee (9+ pot) -> 69.

------------------------------------------------------

A summary of the suggestions in the discussion:

9.49 as a new limit is probably better/safer than 9.99

A max TSP for 19 y.o. (~70-75) to make sure there are no exceptional 19 y.o. draftees

As an alternative: keeping the current max (8.99) but rising the overall TSP of 19 y.o. somehow


Based on this info I maintain my disposition that we need to see the overall quality of 19 y.o. draftees increased once again (nothing drastic though). Looking forward to some more comments and votes!