BuzzerBeater Forums

1. If they did we'd have very little way to actually know or test this since training already has way too many variables associated with it.

2. It does not impact fan survey at all however there is a firing cost for the old trainer which is the salary he would have gotten paid on the monday of that week

That's not how it works.

Elasticity means simply what the first responder told you: there is a bonus or penalty depending on the relative level of different skills. IS training speed is impacted by JS and ID, meaning that if JS and ID are higher than IS the training will be a bit faster and if they are lower it will be a bit slower. This says nothing about the baseline speed of IS training.

There is one glaring takeaway from elasticity: 1v1 is always the best choice of training for outside skills as it primarily trains HA and DR which together have an elastic effect on JS, JR, OD and PA. 1v1 is also the fastest training regime available, and 1v1 forwards also trains IS and JS secondarily, so it really is a no brainer.

Now, for inside skills it is less clear cut and since only SB has a baseline speed which is clearly higher than the other 3 there is no significant advantage in prioritising a skill over another, you can just go with the fastest provided it fits the training regime. However since 1v1 also trains is and JS has an elastic effect on IS, if you plan to train IS and train some secondaries for a big man (OD, PA etc) then you will still start with 1v1 forwards, do the outside skills to the level you want them and then move to IS and ID, likely alternating between them when they have similar training speed.

All of the above is subject to the player's potential and especially for big men this is very relevant. So be careful, do not accidentally cap the player before you actually added the skills you wanted, plan and track the pops so that you know where you stand. After a player hits his cap you can keep training him, but it will be much slower everything else being equal.


Last edited by Lemonshine at 11/26/2019 4:27:45 PM

1v1 guards might be the better option for bigs depending on the starting skills. Higher training in JS and HA allows you to get training out of the way faster for OD and PA. Assuming inside skills are relatively the same, there is an order to train them that gets the most out of elastics. ID first, RB second, and IS third. The increase is small but it's still an increase. But I agree that it doesn't mean training 1 skill to 17 when the others are still sitting at 7-8.

Higher training in JS and HA allows you to get training out of the way faster for OD and PA

Not really. JS has no impact on OD and PA and whether it's guards or forwards 1v1 yields the same amount of HA and DR training (the only difference is that all secondary training go to JS in 1v1 guards, while it's split 50/50 between JS and IS in forwards)

There is almost never any benefit in doing 1v1 guards instead of 1v1 forwards. The only 2 cases I can think of:
- when the player is very short and IS will train so slow that you may as well give up from the start
- when the training plan is predicated on punting IS
In all other circumstances, you want to have IS instead of more JS, it's better for cap management, it's better for salary reasons and it's also usually better for the impact on the court (depends on the height of the player which affects IS and JS training speed).

ID first, RB second, and IS third. The increase is small but it's still an increase.

ID is pulled by IS and SB, trains ID+IS/SB secondary
IS is pulled by ID and JS, trains IS+ID/JS secondary
RB is pulled by IS and ID, trains RB+IS/ID secondary
ID>RB>IS is not the optimal choice, IS>ID>RB and ID>IS>RB are both better in absolute terms. If you focus only on IS+ID+RB, then RB first is the marginally better choice. Often the optimal strategy with inside skills is simply to train the skill with the higher overall yield, given the actual skills of the player (this means you reach a point where you start rotating skills). I'm pretty sure RB first always produces the worst results since it has a lower baseline yield than IS and ID.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 11/27/2019 8:34:16 AM

JS has no impact on OD and PA and whether it's guards or forwards 1v1 yields the same amount of HA and DR training (the only difference is that all secondary training go to JS in 1v1 guards, while it's split 50/50 between JS and IS in forwards)

I agree that JS has no impact on OD/PA. I meant to include that as having an impact on IS. I disagree that 1v1 trains the same amount of HA and DR. 1v1 guards trains more HA for bigs. 1v1 forwards trains more DR. 1v1 guards also trains a significant amount of JS reducing the need for JS training later on and allows you to focus on inside skills.

ID is pulled by IS and SB, trains ID+IS/SB secondary
IS is pulled by ID and JS, trains IS+ID/JS secondary
RB is pulled by IS and ID, trains RB+IS/ID secondary

Cross training and elastics are not the same thing.

ID is affected by IS and SB. Higher IS has a positive effect, while higher SB has a small negative effect.
IS is affected by JS, OD, ID, and RB. Higher JS, ID, and RB has a positive effect, while higher OD has a small negative effect.
RB is affected by ID and JR. Higher ID is positive and higher JR is negative.

That being said, all of this is theoretical based on data put together by BB users. So we could both be wrong.

I disagree that 1v1 trains the same amount of HA and DR. 1v1 guards trains more HA for bigs. 1v1 forwards trains more DR. 1v1

This is wrong, you can have a look at the results from the US offsite project for confirmation.

There is no evidence that 1v1 guards and forwards are any different in respect of primary training (so HA and DR). The only difference is that the secondary training is concentrated in JS for guards and is split for forwards.

Yes guards trains more JS, but my point was why would you want to give up IS for more JS? It's almost never a good trade-off.

Cross training and elastics are not the same thing.

Again, I'm not sure what you're talking about. I haven't mentioned crosstraining. What I provided is primary and secondary training. You always get training in the skills I mentioned, crosstraining is random.

Higher IS has a positive effect, while higher SB has a small negative effect.

This is incorrect, higher SB (than ID) will make ID train faster, higher ID (than SB) will make SB train faster. That is exactly how the elastic effect works.

IS is affected by JS, OD, ID, and RB. Higher JS, ID, and RB has a positive effect, while higher OD has a small negative effect.
RB is affected by ID and JR. Higher ID is positive and higher JR is negative.

Wrong wrong wrong. OD and RB have no elastic influence on IS. JR has no elastic effect on anything except for JS.

Also there is no 'negative effect' it's a simple relationship: the higher skill pulls the lower skill making training faster. Obviously if you flip it around, you will have the opposite effect (lower skill drags the higher skill).

this is theoretical based on data put together by BB users.

Well, it was a statistical analysis based on thousands and thousands of data points. Regressions have been run on that data set in order to estimate the training speed and the impact of other factors like height, age and trainer level. So while the model built on that analysis is not exact, it is a very good approximation. Besides in respect of identifying which skill have an elastic effect on other skills the error should be basically zero. Keep in mind that the elastic effect was something the developers talked about, so people looked for it in the data: while we can discuss how accurate the elastic effect estimate from the analysis is, we can pretty much be sure of the relationship between different skills (i.e. you can be 99.99% sure skill A has an elastic effect on skill B, however you can only say that the effect is x% with a lower level of confidence).

From my experience one on one for guards is a better option to train big guys from one on one forwards.

Apart from the rest which is also questionable, but I will address later, this is seriously bugging me. Why would you want more JS on a big man? Check what it does to salary and cap: you would be paying good money in salary for the privilege of having less cap room for more useful skills!

Also JS will have a good elastic effect later on IS skill.So definitely its a better choice for taller players.

That happens because JS has an elastic effect on IS, but not vice-versa. So if you look at the total amount of skills it will always be true that 1v1 guards will give more TSP, irrespective of height, but the difference is lower for tall players as the height effect on IS and JS secondary training offsets part of the one way elastics. Of course, you will not get more IS training through elastics than you would from direct secondary training.

From coachParrot:
6'2'' player 1v1 guards then IS...https://imgur.com/yE3ibiV
6'2'' player 1v1 forwards then IS...https://imgur.com/OqJPODt

6'10'' player 1v1 guards then IS...https://imgur.com/j5aygKT
6'10'' player 1v1 forwards then IS...https://imgur.com/ZHqHIrf

Since IS is more valuable than JS at any position and since JS costs money and eats in the cap, it's actually better to use 1v1 forwards unless the player is very short, you are trying to build a high JS/JR player or you have a HoF potential and you are looking to hit the highest possible TSP (irrespective of the value of skills).
To explain what I mean regarding the impact on cap and salary, consider the following example:
- This player with 12 JS has 167k estimated salary and can likely still be trained at full speed in primaries: https://i.imgur.com/LkiY5rS.png.
- The same player with 15 JS is pretty much capped and has 209k estimated salary: https://i.imgur.com/7DImZo2.png. At PF or C, would you take this player over https://i.imgur.com/KNlwh06.png? This is the trade-off.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 11/27/2019 8:39:11 AM

1on1 guards doesnt train IS compared to 1on1 forwards which trains both IS and JS. That might be useful in a scenario where your trainee has very low JS. I do rely on elastics in training, so I can also see where you are coming from. I think every trainee is unique. When someone prescribes a generic training plan disregarding how skills are broken down it shows that elastics are not given equal weight. Every trainee is different.

Per USA off-site data, taller bigs should be trained in 1v1G because it trains HA quicker on the bigs and IS actually trains slower the taller the player is.

1v1F trains IS quicker for shorter guys.

So as a result, it is better to train 1v1F for guards ( typically 6'4" and shorter) and 1v1G for bigs (6'11" and taller). For guys between 6'5" and 6'10" I think 1v1F would probably be fine.