BuzzerBeater Forums

That's why I said I train them on medium height players. I simulated the PG on a 6'6" player with the following starting stats:

JS 6, JR 6, OD 1, HA 5, DR 4, PA 7, IS 1, ID 5, RB 6, SB 4, Potential 9.

And as I said, training would be done at age 26 which makes for 9 seasons of training. It's long I know, but it wouldn't be too unrealistic right?


Last edited by Jeründerbar at 2/1/2013 8:27:06 AM

You won't be able to train both guards and bigs. It would be hard to find the type your not training on the market.

I'm aware of that problem. But say if a group of managers would train these type of players, then they can sell eachother the type they're missing themselves right? Or maybe on a bigger scale, if this type of players become a new trend and more managers would train players this way, it would be possible. I'm not trying to use this as a strategy for my team, but I was just wondering if the concept would work.

Theoretically it could work , but i would question an approach which relies on spending 9-10 seasons training a few of these guys with no guarantee of this being effective , to only get maybe 4 or so years benefit out of it. Add this to the fact that you are relying on other managers to train some of the other players for you to buy , i just think its unlikely this could be effective. But then again people have been burned at the stake for saying the earth was round.

Yeah I was wondering wether the idea of having players with outside offense and inside defense and vice versa would work in games, in order to have a lot more salary efficient roster. I tried to provide some numbers to show it's at least somewhat feasible, but I was looking for feedback on the idea and not so much the numbers and how it would work. I can try to work that out later if I find out people think the concept would work. I have no experience in training players to a high level so I have no idea if training them in this way takes a lot longer than in a traditional way. I don't even know if the training simulation I used is best to achieve the outcome I want, that's all to-do. I'd just like to know if the concept works, and if you have suggestions how to work it out in a better way it's always welcome.

Yeah I understand that the position would change, but I used 2 different salary calculators to make sure the positions would still be correct. I tried to find levels of skills that are on the edge of making the position change, in order for the player to be as salary efficient as possible. For the bigs it was easier, because they only need OD that's different than normal, and because the other guard skills are low compared to the IS/RB it doesn't make the position switch to SF or a guard.

These numbers were one of the first I tried, but should work. There might be better configurations but I can find that out later. I was just toying around with the salary calculators and found out that you can get immensely high OD for free on bigs, so that's when I started thinking about this idea.

Also the elastic effect must be considered when you have od and is so low its going to KILL you when training .

I used Rhyminsimon's Training Simulator which accounts for the elastic effect. I know training is harder, you don't have to tell me that. What I'm interested in is wether it would work in games, and if so, if the decrease in salary is worth the 1 or 1,5 extra season of required training.

If you check, you'll see that the players have a very compelete training. Especially the guards, are trained in everye skill except OD and IS. This isn't necessary, and if you're more concerned about completing trainining you can of course settle for less. I took these numbers to make an example of how high you can get the secondary skills and still have low salary and a guard position. Also, if you want to compare, you need to compare it to the training required to train a traditional player with the same main skills + OD, which takes long too. You can of course aim for lower skilled/salary players and have a quicker training.

Last edited by Jeründerbar at 2/1/2013 9:46:24 AM

In theory I think this could work out very well it's true. But in practice it could be very difficult to pull off. At most you're going to be able to train 2 of these players, and you'd have to count on being able to pick up the other 3 off the market. Along with being generally uncompetitive for like 5 seasons while training your guys out of position. And don't forget you'd need to have funky backups too!

I also believe teams with more balanced players could take advantage of all of your defenders except the SF. (I'm assuming if you have the capital to make this kind of team you'd be in at least D.II, where you'll see SGs with 12+ IS, and big men with 12+ JS). So basically if this was a US team I believe it'd be the type of team that would be borderline D.II/NBBA team. Though it's possible that your team passing could offset this(I'm not sure a team with passing that high has ever been put together so I'm not sure how it'd work)

Finally, I'm not so sure your basic assumption that all perimeter defenders need is OD is true.

Thank you for your response. I'm not at all sure if it would work, that's why I'm sharing my thoughts on the forums. I just started playing last season so I have no idea how higher divisions and their players look like, so these actual numbers will probably not be ideal. I noticed that I put in too few of the other defensive skill indeed, and if I were to try it of course I would do a lot more research what skill levels to aim for. As you said, the overall passing is very high and probably unnecessary, so that's where I could shift things.

To get a team like this together is a problem in the current situation I know, I just thought maybe if this setup could become a trend, it would be easier to acquire players like this if managers find out it can work. Or maybe a group of people that want to find out can work together and train players like this (is that allowed btw, cooperating with teams to train players and exchange, without the aim being profit or cash exchange?)

And about OD being the only important thing for perimeter defenders, that's why I was asking if that was the case. I don't know, I couldn't think of other skills that were necessary for them. Does anyone know if a player is a less effective defender if he has the same OD but lower guard skills besides that?