BuzzerBeater Forums

Who said they won't be fully developed 22 year olds? What I'm illustrating here is a cycle of trainees that go round and round each season. The older one gets replaced by an 18 year old. They may not be necessarily those ages.

For a 22 year old to be a good player in div 1 he must have been 1 position trained. If he was 2 position trained then his skills won't be high enough. So by training 5 or 6 young players, you are creating decent players, but not good enough for div 1, and also it will take a lot longer to get to a level where you can use them properly. 2 position training in div 1 means that 2 positions will be occupied each game by a young rookie that will be slaughtered.

Ok then, give me a player that you think will be a decent player in Div 1. Note, I said decent. I'm not talking about your main player.

Also give me what you consider as skills that are "high enough."

Depends on the country.
Lets consider the US.
I would say that all starters should have a minimum of 40k salary.

If 40k is your goal I think it's doable in 2-position training. As a disclaimer, I've only played 4 full seasons so I haven't actually done it. Based on the 'training speed analysis thread' though, it's very possible to have a 22 y/o with 40k salary focusing mainly on OD, PA, and JS.

Depends on the country.
Lets consider the US.
I would say that all starters should have a minimum of 40k salary.

I am glad you're sharing all of your vast experience as a division 1 manager, but I don't think reality lines up with your claims. So let's consider the US:

I randomly selected a team: Bobo's playhouse are a playoff team (4th place) in the NBBA and this is what the salaries of their wing players currently on their roster:
$62k
$29k
$16k
$14k
$11k
$8k
Plus some sub-$5k players that I assume just balance out minutes.
Now one has to assume that at least two of their starters are below your imaginary threshold unless they've got centres playing point guard.

The starting small forward for Heathens (6th best team in the world, top ranked in the US) is below $40k as well.

I think that in general there is something to be said about top teams not generally training a ton of young players and instead buying already partially trained players in their 20s to continue their training without giving up too much, but I also think you're way overstating the case.

Well thanks for calling into question a claim I never made. I never claimed I could train a 180k salary player with 2-position training. I claimed I could get a 40k salary player with 2 position training which you yourself said was decent enough for Div. I. Of course I can't prove that now seeing as I haven't gone down that path yet. Maybe someone else has. But I fully intend on buying a 18 y/o all-star or higher from next season's draft class and train him to 40k or more. According to the data from various legitimate threads here, it's possible.

My view on 1 pos vs 2 pos training is this.

IF: you are new to Buzzerbeater, the two best ways to improve you team is by either using the transfer market, or by training. One position training is obviously the most effective, but does not improve the team a great deal, as the main focus is on the one best individual trainee. Two position training raises multiple players skills, giving a more obvious skill increase to a team through multiple players. This helps maintain balance and, critically, provides a solid core foundation of players to work with.

IF: You are looking to seriously train a new superstar for your team to complete the jigsaw, or a NT/U21 prospect, then you can only single position train to ensure maximum efficiency. A SP trained player by the age of 21 I reckon would have the skills of a two position trained player would have at 22.

To each and their own, just do what's best for you team. Training national team prospects can be incredibly taxing and can cause many loses... Even relegation.. Like what happened to me last season..

One point not discussed... if you train 1 position for the benefit of the National team, there will likely be a point where if you stop training he'll lose his spot or he'll become to expensive for you to maintain on your roster.

If you are not drafting great 18yo then you should try to buy 19-21yo partially trained players and then polish them to suit your tactics. These players carry less premium than the overpriced 18yo and will still train to improve your team. As your team improves simply buy as much training as possible for the money you have. With transfer prices as they are, it makes more sense to let others train your players...

My personal though, about 1 and two position training:

One Position is good:
- When you have good trainees, who could stay in the top 2% of his age group because in young years you would get a lot money for those extra pops, who make the difference betwen average and awesome. Also this could help you to lineup a stronger formation in more important games, in the phase of the game, where your rookies are still your main weapon.

- When your team is so strong that rookies would be your weak spot(and buying great players who are still young is more expensiv then a more experienced player at those level who is 3 years older - so that he could participate in the 2 position training you make from time to time)

- When you start playing during the season to play BB, i recommend 1 position training, because it is even hard to get only 3 solid trainees with the money - after the next draft you could decide if you want to have more trainees^^

Two Position training:

- if you have 5/6 young(but don't start wasting training spot with fillers like in the one position training) and "average" trainees, 2 position training makes it easier to compete.

- If you don't like the "let them play" option, for 48 minutes game from your traineess. It isn't that bad if you sacrifice a training spot, for managing minutes.

I don't think that one of them is superior to the other, and done both during my career, even actually i make bg guy training for 2 position and small guy training for one position(i had to "very small" SF as main trainees).