BuzzerBeater Forums

Salary efficiency. Look I can tell you that my guy is better than defensive players I've seen on good NTs and more salary efficient. That is enough for me and that is exactly what people look for when building teams. Players like Hakkinen (near 160 TSP) are not Centres for a reason.

I have not seen C over 135 TSP on any team really. The German guy (who was more of a D oriented PF) was the highest I've seen on the market. Centres are a bit peculiar: the salary gets easily out of hand so you hardly ever see 140 TSP on guys with 66+ inside skills. He would probably have a salary cover 250k even now after all the reductions.

I think your whole point is about SFs type player, which is fine. It doesn't apply across the board though.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 4/7/2016 3:54:14 AM

The japanese guy's stats look a bit like my guy, he was a better scorer (not by much) and had marginally better steals, but in his best seasons he had significantly fewer boards, fewer assists and significantly fewer blocks than my kid. Note that I played my guy out of position even last season and this season is the first time he's only played either C or PF (hence the bump in some stats).

Besides he played in a micronation through most of his peak years in what looks like a farm team (1 top player and several D2-D3 level players) and he had better potential than my guy.

You don't need C position players and they don't have value that much in the top end.

Good teams will usually not use a player listed as a PF.

look, apart from the incoherence here, it's not for me to convince you. My kid has very high PA and high OD, high enough to guard most top end PFs and be effective at passing against top end PFs. He's listed at C because his inside skills are extremely high. When I gave you the totals, I used the + because I don't want to give the exact numbers, but they are higher. And beside good luck defending a guy with 15 DR, 19 IS, 17 RB with a PF with relatively low ID and RB. Yeah you might manage to get a couple of steals, but you will get butchered on the block and destroyed on the boards. A lot of PFs have stupidly high amounts of JS, which just kills your salary and your cap, punt 1 inside skill and have a low or relatively low second inside.

I went and checked the TL. The top 2 big men on the list (by TSP) have 134 and...55 and 52 inside skills respectively. Of course there are also exactly 0 C with 120+ TSP on the market.

If I use the same trainee, and the same training plan as you, but I use an L7 and you use an L4, I am going to have 15-25 more skill pops after 10 seasons and if we play eachother even with all other factors I will win.

It's like saying that my guy, could have, say, 73 inside skills, he could not. He's fully capped and the only things you could have improved are outside skills. Outside skills also count towards the cap and he has OD and PA in abundance already.

So, no, first and foremost you have to clarify that you are talking only about HoF and ATG potential players and for guard or forward positions. And second according to Coach Parrot the difference is not even close to 15-25 TSP. Even assuming it's 10%, I've added 70-75 pops, so an extra 10% (according to coach parrot is even less than that) training would have lead to 77-83, 7-8 extra pops. Your extra 25 TSP on 75 pops is +33% speed which is, obviously, completely unrealistic

Last edited by Lemonshine at 4/7/2016 11:45:11 AM

Anyway you are trying to back peddle around my point that you can never have the same quality of player with an L4 trainer as you can wiht an L7.

Its just silly.

You train the same guy, in the same pattern, the L7 gets more pops. That is the core rules and it will always work that way.

I haven't really change my position and I think I already explained why your reasoning is flawed. Once you reach the cap a lvl 7 is not going to do you any good. So for the purpose of taking 1 guy and capping him: you can do it with a lvl 4 and you can do it with a lvl 7 faster.

HoF/ATG SF prospects if you want to achieve the highest TSP possible? That's a different story. However this is not the discussion you're entertaining. You are making absolute statements.

Is trianing with L4 or 5 smarter/more cost effective/more profitable YES! Does it make better players HECK NO! Does it make EQUAL players....wait for it.... HECK NO!!!!!

If you think it does, or you want to give me some text walls to try to prove it you are just being silly. How could it ever make equal players EVER!

Look, I have explained, but I'll repeat it once more: after you cap a player you can't add more skills to him. So, if you can do it with a lvl 4, that's it, end of discussion. Of course you can do it with a lvl 7 as well and faster. The problem is the 10% extra training you get that way costs you (by your estimates) 600%-1000% more.

So if you have a cappable player, you really should go with the lowest trainer level that allows you to achieve that build. An MVP C, like my guy, can reach 125+ in the C formula with (mostly) a lvl 4 trainer. A MVP SF with 140+ probably not, but if we do some math and Hakkinen reached 158+ (this is a fact) and 7v4 is 10% extra training, then it means that he would have got to 144 with a level 4 trainer. So there you go, you can achieve 140+ even with a lvl 4 trainer based on currently available knowledge.

I don't spend as much time as you hunting down cheap staff (if you tell the truth on what you pay, I am using a 5 now and I started at the cheap one on a 500k purchase, he is at 19k a week after about 2 seasons now) so I probably pay a little more in staff

Meh considering how many there are, I think it requires a lot less effort to look for.

someone else will make proper DI studs with 140 TSP and a proper spread of skills.

I swear that it's been ages since I've seen a C with proper inside skills (like 65+) and 125+ TSP. When you see one, let me know. Or when you see a player above 140 for that matter.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 4/7/2016 11:27:02 AM

But actually I think you are suggesting beyond that that capping an MVP with an L4 is possible so we shouldn't bother capping him with an L7...that is bogus.

I'll gave the EXACT same primaries and 10-20 more pops in the secondaries. That is not an SF, that is a PG or C with secondaries.

no you don't, there are no free secondaries except IS for guards and OD (unconfirmed) for C. So it's really a trade off between having 10 extra pops in secondary skills and a couple of pops in primary skills. Yours is just blatant ignorance about how the cap works and you keep doing a disservice to everyone who bother to reading your opinion on this.

(really need MVP for a legitimate NT C on teh worst day, and top WC NTs/B3 etc. will only use HoF)

Here is another piece of brilliance! Mordor's arguably best player when he sold his entire team: (23921389)
Second highest value player on his roster: (23562128)

If you trained him with your inferior trainer he will probably end the same primaries/has some potential to meed the same primary numbers- those for a superstar...but since I use an L7 I can spend more time out of position with the height penalty I can still get a good nubmer OD,PA,JR...

Then it would mean that A) the target build is not achievable with a lvl 4 trainer; B ) you're making a sub-optimal choice wasting cap on skills that are not needed (like, notably JS and DR). You don't need to create a ball-hog who at the top level can't score reliably because OD is overpowered. Do you want to see the best guard in B3 last season? I bid on him in the past and he had 144 TSP, look at those stats and look at the salary: (24714151). He shot 49-25-53 for 12.3 PPG. If you want to add 10 secondaries instead of 2 primaries then by all means do. You will end up with a PF like the ones I mentioned before with 134 TSP who OBVIOUSLY don't play in any NT, because they have the secondaries but not good enough primaries. Now, there is currently a 145 TSP PF who is on China's NT (but doesn't play). He's good, but 1 extra OD and perhaps 1 extra PA instead of 2 extra DR/HA would have made him a much better player and viable for SF. With lower TSP.

If you're talking about SFs then it's a different story, but here you're effectively arguing that it makes sense to have 5 extra pops in ID instead of 1 in OD for a point guard. That is the amount of cap the skills take. You can't have both.

If you are arguing we should train lower potentials then that's just silly.

I'm arguing that 140 is achievable with a Superstar SF and a lvl 4 trainer. I'm also arguing that a 130 build might be much better than idiotic 140 builds with 20 DR and relatively low defense.

If you have a HoF then lvl 6 trainer is your best bet to cap him. So it is for forward MVPs, but for guards and specifically Cs you really don't as most of the cap will go in the most important skills and sacrificing any one primary for 5 secondaries is not a good trade-off except for salary reduction.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 4/8/2016 4:51:32 AM

Superstar with close to 9 potential yes. If you get reasonably close to 120 at 23 it's definitely possible to add another 20-25 pops in the following 6 seasons (24-29), then the ONLY thing that will prevent you from reaching 140 is hitting the cap. At 27yo my training speed for my C was .2 (with limited elastic effect).

http://i.imgur.com/D2j2fUV.png
You're welcome.

All of your trainees are remarkably meh and nowhere near anything NT or b3 calibur.

I have no interest in farming like you do. And I don't go around crying because others farm better than me like you do. I train salary efficient players and looking at the transfer market they are close to "as good as it gets"

Make an NT/B3 stud and then come at me with this nonsense about 140 TSP SF trained with L4 that makes any sense to a real team.

So now you're not talking in a vacuum anymore? Good to know. I don't have to prove anything to you, than you have to prove to me. Buy supporter for someone who owned the SF and get him to put the guy in his hall of fame, so when he retires we can see his skills. I'm just going to point out that your allegedly superduper SF was not ranked in MVP voting in most of his career DESPITE playing for top teams in nations such as Japan and India, where he was the third/fourth best player on his own team in India. Go figure

There is the age old problem of you fiddling with the numbers and increasing them to your convenience, but I'm not going into that now.

All you do is talk about other teams players that you bid on once...that makes you some expert!?!?!?! LOL

No, but a normal person would have understood that I know exactly the skills of players I'm talking about, because I bid on them and I saved their skillset on my spreadsheet. Unfortunately I saw Hakkinen but never saved him, that's life. I have seen plenty of 140 players who are nowhere as good as Mordor's players with lower TSP.

Let's just agree that A.) the 15 million you keep throwing around is just bollocks, if you were smart you would have written a conservative number to at least look credible to anyone knowing a little about this game B.) let's just disagree on everything else.


Edit: Just so that we're clear once and for all. You ramblings about 140 TSP are meaningless when you compare the PF player above which is over 140 TSP and this one who is MUCH better suited for his position despite being 13 TSP short:
http://i.imgur.com/0Bp8Kz8.png


Last edited by Lemonshine at 4/8/2016 10:01:52 AM