BuzzerBeater Forums

Help - English > Potential and Pops

Potential and Pops

Set priority
Show messages by
From: Bird

This Post:
00
83282.32 in reply to 83282.19
Date: 3/31/2009 12:33:25 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
It's a bit confusing. But yeah it helped.

Does that mean that a 200 cm can theoretically become a C , PF, SF, SG, or G dependent on how we train him?

From: Thijs

To: Bird
This Post:
00
83282.33 in reply to 83282.32
Date: 3/31/2009 1:20:12 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
9292
Indeed! I have a guy who is 193 cm who came out of the draft as a PF, but because I have only given him outside training he is turned into a SG by now.

From: docend24

This Post:
00
83282.34 in reply to 83282.10
Date: 3/31/2009 9:44:57 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
154154
It does not take positions into account, it takes the more or less unique skillset of a player. Positions are based on how those skillsets are balanced and can change after each training update to reflect actual skillset. Best positions are only as initial guide for beginners to make them set their lineup easier and for calculations of salaries during the season update.

Since positions reflect skillset some say they have influence in how the cap works but it is really the skillset what matters - sometimes you can develop strange skillset of players not fitting any position really so it's logical their cap is based on their skillset not the estimated position.

No monoskill cap - you can have a player with one lvl20 skill and (much) low(er) other skills but that's not effective at all. How exactly one überdominant skill works towards the potential cap is hard to tell.


This Post:
00
83282.35 in reply to 83282.11
Date: 3/31/2009 9:51:58 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
154154
... and the best position into account.
Are you sure about this?

The position affects the way salary is calculated, I am pretty sure about this.

But that's a completely different thing than a potential cap. That only helps you to find out where (salary-wise) potential for for example all stars centers tends to be. Position is a presentation thing, can be changed weekly by training update, this fact only disqualifies it to be taken into account for caps purposes. It only indicates things ex post.

This Post:
00
83282.36 in reply to 83282.22
Date: 3/31/2009 9:57:38 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
154154

The soft cap is just a number. To determine whether a player has reached his potential, this number is compared to a variable, which is calculated in a manner similar to salary.


So if I have a player who has reached his potential softcap who then changes position due to a pop, is it possible he is now back under the potential softcap because of the position change?

No, this is the clear evidence why kozlodoev is wrong about it, it simply can't work this way.

Or there is second possibility that he is right which means BB made a big design mistake.

This Post:
00
83282.37 in reply to 83282.36
Date: 4/1/2009 8:52:37 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225

The soft cap is just a number. To determine whether a player has reached his potential, this number is compared to a variable, which is calculated in a manner similar to salary.


So if I have a player who has reached his potential softcap who then changes position due to a pop, is it possible he is now back under the potential softcap because of the position change?

No, this is the clear evidence why kozlodoev is wrong about it, it simply can't work this way.

Or there is second possibility that he is right which means BB made a big design mistake.

See (46657.42) for details on salary estimation.

"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
83282.38 in reply to 83282.37
Date: 4/1/2009 1:52:04 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
154154
At first nobody from BB confirmed anything in that thread. It is only an educated guess. Principles may be right but the formula is surely wrong because it doesn't count with sublevels of skills.

Most importantly it has nothing to do with how cap works.

This Post:
00
83282.39 in reply to 83282.38
Date: 4/1/2009 3:31:47 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
Principles may be right but the formula is surely wrong because it doesn't count with sublevels of skills.
This doesn't make it wrong. It just makes the margin of error a little higher. The main point there was that position does affect how salary is calculated, and the work done offers a pretty conclusive proof.

Most importantly it has nothing to do with how cap works.
Of course it doesn't. This was an answer to the question someone asked about whether the best position affects the way salaries are calculated.

"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
83282.40 in reply to 83282.39
Date: 4/1/2009 3:47:59 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
154154
Then answer to the asker.

No, that makes it wrong as a formula (look how it looks like). It is good for estimation and maybe simulates salaries pretty well but it is surely completely different from the real formula which is used.

This Post:
00
83282.41 in reply to 83282.40
Date: 4/1/2009 3:55:15 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
Then answer to the asker.
I did. You then showed up to question the answer, so I addressed your retort. That's how public discussion typically operates.

No, that makes it wrong as a formula (look how it looks like).
No, it actually doesn't. It makes the calculated coefficients less precise, but has no bearing on the actual model used.

It is good for estimation and maybe simulates salaries pretty well but it is surely completely different from the real formula which is used.
Maybe it is or maybe it isn't -- we'll never know. But since we're only looking to predict the influence of skills on salary, we're only interested in how the input (skills) influences the output (salary), and not really in what happens in between. It's called the "Black Box" method (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_box_testing).

Last edited by GM-kozlodoev at 4/1/2009 3:56:22 PM

"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
83282.42 in reply to 83282.40
Date: 4/5/2009 10:57:55 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
Then answer to the asker.

No, that makes it wrong as a formula (look how it looks like). It is good for estimation and maybe simulates salaries pretty well but it is surely completely different from the real formula which is used.


but the final results are pretty good, and this seems to make it reasonable that ID is predited another way for a center then for a PG elsse you would notice the difference in their salary.

I have this salary formula in a excel sheet, and i noticed many NT candidates in it the last season and even the position switched only appearing when the salary is pretty close to another - so you use mostly the highest salary to determine the position.

And the same goes for the cap, which seems to depending on Position too - because Centers with low secondary(or tertiary Skills), reach their cap on a similiar level then guys with good secondary and tertiary skills. I don't expect that the potential formula is similiar to the cap formular, but they ain't totally different.

Advertisement