BuzzerBeater Forums

Help - English > Help me understand potential

Help me understand potential

Set priority
Show messages by
From: Vikman

This Post:
00
130264.9 in reply to 130264.8
Date: 2/3/2010 10:39:19 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
44
End of the season.

This Post:
00
130264.10 in reply to 130264.9
Date: 2/4/2010 7:54:19 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
I am a little concerned about some of the responses you have got from player who are not experienced and mostly have copied other responses from other people in the forums.
The soft is in some way related to salary, mainly because high salary players have alot of skills. The soft cap is not just a salary level. Multiskilled players reach their caps much faster, it is also because of this that some say that there are different salary caps for different positions. I am certain that the respectable ID does affect his cap as much as if he was a center.
I hope this helps you understand potential better. And remember people doesnt know the formula and training speed also slowes down with age regardles of the potential cap.

This Post:
00
130264.11 in reply to 130264.10
Date: 2/4/2010 10:16:54 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
Multiskilled players reach their caps much faster,


To clarify this - multiskilled players hit the cap at a lower salary. And I would not say it is a MUCH lower salary. A well-balanced SF seems to hit his cap in the $40-45K range, which is still getting close to $60K.

My observation is that there is probably just one cap formula for all players, which is why we see differences by position. Guard skills seem to count less towards the cap, in particular passing and handling.

Also, a multiskilled player does not hit his cap faster in terms of training time. My player Wendon took a lot longer, time wise, to hit his cap. Yes, his salary is lower, but training so many skills to high levels still takes time.

So conclusion: you can train a player longer, cap wise, if he is multi-skilled. Such a player is probably much more useful than the average allstar player and has a lower salary. So why does everyone want players with no secondary skills again?


Last edited by HeadPaperPusher at 2/4/2010 10:18:27 AM

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
This Post:
00
130264.12 in reply to 130264.11
Date: 2/4/2010 10:29:56 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
Multiskilled players reach their caps much faster,

This is fiction.

"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
130264.13 in reply to 130264.12
Date: 2/5/2010 5:52:46 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
As someone else pointed out "faster in terms of salary" or earlier. Is this also pure fiction?

This Post:
00
130264.14 in reply to 130264.13
Date: 2/5/2010 9:38:13 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
As someone else pointed out "faster in terms of salary" or earlier. Is this also pure fiction?


I would say this is the truth, that multi-skilled players will hit the cap slightly earlier, salary wise, than a player with a few high skills.

However, some people believe in sub-levels for potential and that's why we see differences. I think the evidence points somewhere else, but I guess we can have the debate.

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
This Post:
00
130264.15 in reply to 130264.14
Date: 2/5/2010 11:27:43 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
some people believe in sub-levels for potential

Potential clearly has sub-levels. Nearly identical players cap at different salaries all the time.

"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
130264.16 in reply to 130264.15
Date: 2/5/2010 11:58:04 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
Nearly identical players cap at different salaries all the time.


Well, I would love to see your data on this. So far I have yet to see any evidence to support this theory. Usually the identical players you are talking about have different secondary skills, or people have differing definitions on when their player was capped. Some people take it to be the first sign of slow training, others think it is when training has virtually stopped (ie: one pop every 7-8 weeks).

My experience tracking 3 uni-skilled allstar Cs is they all capped at 3x tremendous in IS, ID and RB without any variation. Also, tracking 3 different SGs, they all capped towards the upper end of the capping estimate.

Was it just luck that I observed 6 different players with really high sub-levels in potential? Maybe, I do not know.

I think for now, unless you can provide the definitive proof of your theory, we are pretty much all in the dark.

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
This Post:
00
130264.17 in reply to 130264.15
Date: 2/11/2010 8:30:30 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155

Potential clearly has sub-levels. Nearly identical players cap at different salaries all the time.


Perhaps the latest post by BB-Charles might change your idea on the sub-levels theory: (130305.38). He says that there is only a correlation between salaries and potential and not a direct link. That's why "Nearly identical players cap at different salaries all the time". The key word in that sentence being "nearly", although I suspect if we broke it down we would find that the "nearly" is not as near as you think (maybe different sub-levels on different skills or multi-skilled players).

In any case, if you still think "Potential clearly has sub-levels" I am still waiting for the "clear" evidence.

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
This Post:
00
130264.18 in reply to 130264.17
Date: 2/11/2010 12:49:11 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
I had a nice post on this with links to about half a dozen of allstar centers from my NT coaching tenure, all capped somewhere between 50 and 80. However, a Mozilla crash ate that and I haven't had the chance to reproduce it yet.

I'd just like to point out that this point from Charles came after the salary structure has been changed, i.e. we're now in a situation where salary consists of skill-based portion + adjustment for player distribution in the game (or in other words, at this point a player can change salary even without a second of training in a season). So potential is related to the skill-based component (which used to be the entire salary, before the changes), and in this sense, just because a player changed his "new" salary doesn't mean that the "old" salary (skill-based portion) will necessarily be affected.

And obviously, if players are completely identical they will have the same salary -- my test group was centers with no secondaries to speak of and no more than proficient shot blocking.

"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
130264.19 in reply to 130264.18
Date: 2/11/2010 1:42:57 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
I had a nice post on this with links to about half a dozen of allstar centers from my NT coaching tenure, all capped somewhere between 50 and 80.


Of course, without seeing the data I can't poke any holes in it, but my suspicion is that one or two of the C skills counts more towards the salary cap than it counts towards a player's actual salary. So this kind of variation is possible given either theory, although 80k seems a little out there.

I think talking about a C trained equally in IS/ID/RB with no side skills (even proficient SB is getting to be too much in my opinion, I would restrict all other skills besides those three to medicore) is more interesting, because if 30+ such players all cap at the same time, then you have a good answer. If there is any unbalance, there is no way to test either hypothesis, unless all the players were equally unbalanced.

Of course, any such study would first have to define exactly what "capping" is, since the definition varies.

Also, the fact that you saw no player capped at 40k is a big flashing light to me.

Last edited by HeadPaperPusher at 2/11/2010 1:44:03 PM

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
Advertisement