BuzzerBeater Forums

The best guy I've interviewed in this season is this one:

1) Rating: 5 / Potential: 5 / SG / A- / 18 yrs / 6'8"

Not a bad prospect at all but, keeping in mind that the idea would be to sell him right away, how much do you think his height might hurt his value on the market?

Also, my other best options should be these ones:

2) Rating: 5 / Potential: 4 / PG / A- / 19 yrs / 6'1"
3) Rating: 5 / Potential: 3 / PG / A / 18 yrs / 6'0"

...and a bunch of other 5/3, 18 year old players that, based on grade rating, height and role, are slightly worse than 3).
Do you agree with this overall ranking? Would it be reasonable to prefer 3) over 2), maybe as a safer bet market wise?

Oh btw, I'm also assuming that all factors being equal, guards are worth more than PF's or C's on the current market: does that make sense?

Thank you.

For selling, I'd take 3) over 2) because of the age.

1) could be a nice SF trainee, so his size shouldn't be an issue and could in fact be a bonus, depending on his big man skills.

In general guards would be worth more then C but if u have a PF with some nice guard skills they can be very valuable.

Looks like you will land some good draft picks. Guards are worth more than Cs but guys with potential to be a great SF/PF can be worth even more. They are very rare players and need a great skill balance but for a guy like that 6'8" is a fairly ideal height. This is just my opinion but I would always put just about every single not pathetic 18 year old ahead of the 19 year olds if you are wanting to sell. If you want to keep it is different but the value of 19 year olds on the trade market is really really low.

Very good, thank you all. Based on your feedback, I think I'll place player 3) in second place.

One more question: as I said, I have a bunch of other players very similar to 3), i.e., 5/3 stars and 18 yrs old. Overall, 3 of them are PGs, 1 is a C and 1 is a PF. I'm now tempted to place the other two PGs in front of player 2, so that the new order would be:

1) Rating: 5 / Potential: 5 / SG / A- / 18 yrs / 6'8"
2) Rating: 5 / Potential: 3 / PG / A / 18 yrs / 6'0"
3) Rating: 5 / Potential: 3 / PG / A- / 18 yrs / 6'2"
4) Rating: 5 / Potential: 3 / PG / A- / 18 yrs / 6'9"
5) Rating: 5 / Potential: 4 / PG / A- / 19 yrs / 6'1"
6) Rating: 5 / Potential: 3 / C / A / 18 yrs / 6'8"
7) Rating: 5 / Potential: 3 / PF / A- / 18 yrs / 6'7"

After all, I need money but I also need a decent PG to train for next season. I haven't been training big men for two seasons now, so I'm placing all PFs and Cs on the bottom.
That said, I wonder if players 4) and 5) should be swapped. I don't think I would ever train player 4), and he would probably not be worth much on the market. What do you think?

Additionally, should I rate player 6) higher due to his A grade rating?

Thank you.

I would say that player 4 would be worth a lot more than player 5 on the TL. Some people would like that he has good secondaries as his best position is PG, so he probably has good passing.

Player 4 has a chance to be an amazing PF trainee. Now he may have atrocious ID and JR in which case he is probably worthless for anything but he could actually be really interesting.

Player 5 looks great to train for your team, high potential, ok starting skills and great height. He wont be making any U21 teams but if you want a solid player for your team he could be the one. He will never have high trade value. 19 year old $3,700 superstar will sell for $100,000 or less unless he has a superb set of secondary skills.