BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Individual Training.

Individual Training.

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
15639.12 in reply to 15639.11
Date: 2/12/2008 4:41:47 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
2222
I think that IT would give us more tactiks on team management... Also no one knows If this would pay-off or not...

ZyZla - ZyZlūnas ZyZlavotas ~c(=
This Post:
00
15639.13 in reply to 15639.6
Date: 2/12/2008 7:32:45 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
44

(1) It would be limited to just a few players; but the rate would be the same as if the whole team were being trained.

.. that mean if I train 1, 2 players or whole team, the training will have the same effect? So why don't train whole team anyway?:)

If you select team training, each player gets one glop (standardized unit of training) on his plate.

If you selected individual training for 2 players, those two players would get one glop of training. But the other players on the team could get position-based training (though not as much as they would get if there were no individual training that week).

If you did team training instead, you might be training a lot of players who didn't really benefit from that training - and they would be missing out from position-based training.

For something to be a real choice, there must be benefits and risks associated with all choices.

This Post:
00
15639.14 in reply to 15639.13
Date: 2/13/2008 4:27:14 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
196196
id just like to see more training options for SF/PF... everything is too concentrated around Centres and Guards....

inside shot for PF/SF without having to include C... or maybe even some individual training for SG / SF / PF like there is for PG & C....

This Post:
00
15639.15 in reply to 15639.14
Date: 2/13/2008 5:18:34 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
22
if we will have more individual trainings (like stamina or whatever) it will not be for all of us so comlicated to train the players

everyone have the same conditions and I'm not sure that is good move to make training easier for all of us. People which doesn't understand how to do it - have to figure out and we should not make that easier for them

Last edited by Iordanou at 2/13/2008 5:20:12 AM

This Post:
00
15639.16 in reply to 15639.15
Date: 2/13/2008 9:30:11 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
196196
as a non basketball follower and reading into the rules it would suggest that SF is one of the key positions on the court. It seems as if it is the position you need the most rounded player... this being the case you either have to buy a trainee and play him consistently out of position to train up all the relevant stats or train him slower in regimes better suited to guards or big men.

wouldnt it be more appropriate to at least give the same training options to those similar to PG or C??

This Post:
00
15639.17 in reply to 15639.16
Date: 2/13/2008 10:43:07 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
22
is true that SF's are most complicated for the training with a current condition

maybe this position deserve a change

This Post:
00
15639.18 in reply to 15639.17
Date: 2/14/2008 12:28:30 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
In real life I'd say that the SF is the least valuable position. Not saying that it is invaluable but in terms of the other 4 positions, it's probably the least important.

This Post:
00
15639.19 in reply to 15639.16
Date: 2/14/2008 3:56:14 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
66
i use the sf position to adjust my tactic, if i need more inside value i bring in a big guy c/pf, if i focus on outside i use a pg/sg. i cannot afford a real allrounder atm, to expensive and there isnt that many of them out there atm. what i mean is maybe an sf isnt that important he just adds some of his skills to the tactics.

This Post:
00
15639.20 in reply to 15639.18
Date: 11/15/2008 1:03:20 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
458458
Larry Bird. Julius Erving. John Havlicek. Scottie Pippen. Rick Barry. James Worthy. Lerbon James.

Pretty valuable players making pretty valuable contributions to the game and their teams.
Small forwards are the quintessential basketball players. They must be able to play both ends of the floor and both in the paint and on the perimeter.

Once I scored a basket that still makes me laugh.
This Post:
00
15639.21 in reply to 15639.20
Date: 11/16/2008 9:09:15 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
404404
Larry Bird. Julius Erving. John Havlicek. Scottie Pippen. Rick Barry. James Worthy. Lerbon James.

Pretty valuable players making pretty valuable contributions to the game and their teams.
Small forwards are the quintessential basketball players. They must be able to play both ends of the floor and both in the paint and on the perimeter.

I agree with you.But LeBron James(just a name) could have the possibility to train himself in inside and outside game playing in his natural role
In BB a LEbron cannot trian it in both the defence without playing in both G positions or PF-C(outside-inside)
Individual training will favourish teams which have a not good bench too much,and making a good bench instead could be the ability of a GM-coach
I continue to suggest as cahnges for training only a specific training in defence,rebounding and also passing for SF(but also only rebounding SF-PF as for PF-C and a defence for SG-SF and SF-PF structured as jump shot for SF-PF will be a great result)

This Post:
00
15639.22 in reply to 15639.21
Date: 11/16/2008 10:03:11 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
458458
I was only repyling to post 15639.18.

I routinely interchange my SG, SF, and PF so it's not a big deal for me, but I agree that SF is given short shrift in training. As such I have no superstars but I have 6 players with decent levels in at least 9 skills. Against weaker teams, like the majority of my country, my PG can play C in a pinch.

I'm trying to have the first player with 10 strongs. (Although he is probably already out there.)

Last edited by somdetsfinest at 11/16/2008 10:08:38 AM

Once I scored a basket that still makes me laugh.
Advertisement