BuzzerBeater Forums

If 3/5 does not have like ridiculous height 7,2" or above, i would pick 19 year old one. Age and potential does not matter if the player is trash. The only occasion 3/5 is good is probably when he is future tree center, atleast he can play for U-21 and be most unvaluable player salary wise in higher leagues.

Have had drafter 3/4 18 yo before but he was 7,2"" tall (47368063), U-21 main center this year. But tree, so not even mother team wanted him back lol.

Last edited by Vilkai [LTU NT] at 8/23/2020 8:54:56 AM

I'd take the 19yo if I'm training for my team and if I go for a SF, BUT PF formula tends to have high skills that are easily trainable and in fact could have low OD.

C+ should have over or around 2k salary I think so he'll likely be in the 45-50 TSP bracket. The guy may have very low PA and mostly decent skills. OD won't be too low, otherwise he'd be in another formula: I think he has all round decent skills but not many 7s, if any at all (because of its C+ rating). The 19yo probably has good inside skills and high salary (like 5.5k+) but if he has holes it may be OD and likely has mid 60s TSP.

So if you train as a SF it will likely boil down to what the actual potential is, but since you can't know that beforehand, I probably would take the 19yo. If they have the same potebtial they are likely to achieve similar builds but you need to train 1 less season. If you were going for big men or guards, I'd probably take the 18yo and pray he's HoF, but for SFs, MVP will most likely do.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 8/24/2020 7:03:46 AM

Atrocious in a drafted player is often associated with a tall player and with a center position.

Using buzzermanager for salary computation, for a SF position C+ it might be an all around player with 5 everywhere but a 6 in JS.And i would take it everytime (51 TSP).

Draft is also a matter of beleif. And like in the real world you may be wrong.

Last edited by boule at 8/23/2020 4:06:09 PM

Well once again i base it on my own experience as i do play mainly with team build around drafted players. And i've been doing so for 29 drafts. I did a full study (all skills all potential) of two drafts a long time ago just after the change with more valuable draftees. One was exceptional, the other on Utopia was completly crap. And i had a typical example of 5/3 A+ tall guy with 34 TSP.

Why do i associate atrocious with tall guys because very tall guys (>7'2") are often with atrocious outside skills even on the market.
This is why you should always be cautious with drafting a tall center. An estimated position will always go for at least a PF position if it had a decent outside set of skills. On the other hand a very tall guy with good outside skills out of the draft is very valuable.

Of course if you draft a center, and you only train him in inside skills, if there is an atrocious it will be there forever. But an guard or forward usually gets training in most skills and the atrocious will disappear soon. Maybe that is the reason of your apparent association.

Well i was just talking about players out of the draft not about trained players.

> I did a full study (all skills all potential) of two drafts a long time ago just after the change with more valuable draftees.

So that is a nice set of data. We can talk about it if you make it public.

I made it available on the day of the draft on a french external forum.

> An estimated position will always go for at least a PF position if it had a decent outside set of skills.

This is not true. A PF is a C with Jump Shooting. That is the only skill that makes the difference.

Well lost in translation apparently, when i say" at least a PF position" it might be guard as well as SF or PF. But you can focus on an exception, you're very good at that. And stop fousing on 4x7 inside skills when you evaluate a position. You'll find more outside evaluation then.

> On the other hand a very tall guy with good outside skills out of the draft is very valuable.

A short player with good inside skills should be equally valuable.

"Equally" ? As a principle yes, as a probablity no. If a very tall guy is rarely with outside skills then its rarity make it worth more. Plus the fact that some coaches prefer to pawn the rebounding skills on oustide players.