BuzzerBeater Forums

Under the current training system, teams may become obsessive about dialing in on exactly 48 minutes. This is because there is no advantage to going beyond 48 minutes, and perhaps severe penalties for falling short. This is simply unrealistic.

Instead, training should continue for minutes beyond 48. This need not be a huge amount, perhaps a cumulative 120% at 96 minutes, 112% at 72 minutes, and the training just below 48 minutes should be about the same above.

This would mean that the first 24 or so minutes would have relatively little effect (cumulative 25%?) and then accelerate from 20 to around 36 minutes (these would be the most efficient minutes, but would only make up for the early minutes. The rate of training would then begin to decline (2nd derivative is negative) so that at 48 minutes the cumulative training would be 100% and the rate of training would also be 100%. The rate of training would continue to decline beyond that.

If the BB model is that PT reinforces the skills trained in practice, then it is reasonable that the first few minutes aren't as effective, as the player is just getting used to his position, and may have little opportunity to actually use his new skills, and then as he becomes more comfortable, he is able to incorporate his training. But this doesn't hit a hard cap at 48 minutes as if a buzzer went off in his brain. But on the other hand, a player can only improve so much in a week.

Instead, training should continue for minutes beyond 48. This need not be a huge amount, perhaps a cumulative 120% at 96 minutes, 112% at 72 minutes, and the training just below 48 minutes should be about the same above.

I like this part (=

Is this really a big problem? 20% more training from 18 to 21, compared to a player who gets exactly 48 minutes a week, but only 8% more than someone who gets 72 consistently for a few NT players vs. trying to maximize players getting exactly 48 minutes?

Is it really game shape that should be tanking when a player gets lots of minutes? Or maybe GS should have an impact on training? Maybe the fatigue factor should be multi-game and have an effect on training and injuries.

Currently, performance declines within a game, with stamina providing resistance. But why should a player get 100% recovery after back to back games, and then suddenly at the end of the week have his GS drop?

They just wanna easier game, but if this would be implemented into the BB, so there would be started thread why this one is done, we wanna like it was before... It is just like it is, I almost get used to it.

Last edited by ZyZla at 4/15/2008 5:50:07 PM

They just wanna ...

If you would like an explanation, ask for it. If you want to discuss the idea. please do so. But don't presume to speak for me. Thank you.

jimrtex, I really don't see what this change would improve

This indicates that I haven't done a very good job of explaining it; or because you were were fixated on the NT aspect (well under 1% of players) you refused to even attempt to understand the concept.