BuzzerBeater Forums

I think it will go through a cycle. Managers will start to train less and, as a result, training will eventually be a worthy strategy again.

It's quite possible, at least per position or profile of players.

At one point , everybody was training bigs since it's the easiest. The market for bigs started to get crowded and teams switched to training guards for the bigger benefits.
Same for skills, passing was overlooked, harder to train since it can only be trained as a primary. Then passing was recognized as valuable and trained more.

There are probably training trends.

The Shotblocking Index is very low :D

Another funny transfer: (http://www.buzzerbeater.com/player/6450878/history.aspx) 200k Center for 3k!

it was my player... interesting price? I think BB gods have to do something to stop this shit in market...
it is nonsense, that players price is lower than salary...

Do someone think that Kobe or Lebron could be sold for lowwer price than their salaries? or changing teams more than 5-10 times in a season...

I agree, something should be done - players should not be allowed to be sold for four weeks after purchased, and owners should be allowed to fire NT players (though players actively on the NT can go back on the market at $0). The market has already spoken, and it's clear that people do not want these players and their sole existence is bouncing around from team to team who rent them for a short while. Let's let them die out instead, and hopefully people will be encouraged to train useful players rather than these worthless donkeys.

Of course, ideally we could just dispense with the NTs altogether, but of course I can't imagine that suggestion would ever gain much traction.

The NBA-stars of today are not comparable to the players discussed in this thread. I doubt Lebron would have under 12 in any skill, if suddenly summoned to the-BB game.

The players (centers) discussed here are more similar to classic old-school-centres like Kareem, Mark Eaton or the occasional Dwayne Schintzius. Only Kareem and Eaton could block 4 shots a game, so perhaps they are all mostly like Dwayne Schintzius...

So my own conlusion is that the destiny of 400k-salary-centers beeing journeymen is quite realistic, because they are too common, and they all look the same (orange eyebrows and growing bald since they were 18).

The NBA-stars of today are not comparable to the players discussed in this thread. I doubt Lebron would have under 12 in any skill, if suddenly summoned to the-BB game.

The players (centers) discussed here are more similar to classic old-school-centres like Kareem, Mark Eaton or the occasional Dwayne Schintzius. Only Kareem and Eaton could block 4 shots a game, so perhaps they are all mostly like Dwayne Schintzius...

So my own conlusion is that the destiny of 400k-salary-centers beeing journeymen is quite realistic, because they are too common, and they all look the same (orange eyebrows and growing bald since they were 18).

I think what's more relevant than how common they are or how they'd compare to RL basketball players is that in this case, realism has to take a back seat to game balancing. To satisfy the complaint that these "best guys" are worthless on the TL, BB would likely have to reduce their salaries to an amount that is reasonable for most teams to carry. Once that happens, salary no longer becomes a reasonable constraint on teams and instead those who have amassed much money will be able to buy up these donkeys and never have to worry about balancing the budget. The market for players who have reasonable salaries now will of course drop - why buy a guy with 50k salary skills when there are 200k guys all over the place? In the end it will just become an arms race to see who can train and otherwise acquire the biggest monsters, with everyone else left to watch the gap between them and the top teams grow further.

I'm not really sure but what he might be saying is that the increases in salary compared to increase in skill are too high.

Well, that's one way to see it and you probably are right.

But I'm a fan of realistic =)

I don´t have sufficient data to back this up statisically, but my feeling is that really low "secondary" attributes don´t affect performence enough.

I have seen some IRL-centers that could not get hold of a rebound or recive a pass, mostley dribbled on their feet, and could throw a 15 ft. pass into the bleachers on a daily basis. Sure they were strong, heavy and could make their way to the basket during warm-ups, but in game-situations their lack of skills were absolutley devastating, even in the backyard-series i Sweden.

On the TL there are some recent examples of +200k-centers with 4 attributes below "average", and 1,5 - 2,1 TO's per game playing 30-45 minutes in a competitative league. If realistic, these players would either not get the ball from their teammates, or hoist up 5 To's a game.

If really bad secondaries had more effect on performance, BB-managers would be more stimulated to develop players with wider skillsets, and the pack of 300k journeyman-centers bought for 50k could perhaps be a lesser problem?

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

You have, however, explained what is going on very well.