BuzzerBeater Forums

i have a player that matches those stats that I bought on the market in last season.

level 16 in jumpshooting and 7 in od?

who is?valdes?

Last edited by Steve Karenn at 1/10/2009 11:44:47 AM

No wonder you added him awhile back and your OD ratings were so low, they were using his JS instead of OD all this time.

lets imagine if we had a training system where any position could be trained in any skill..

if that were the case wouldnt we want a PG training rebounding not to be as effective as a PF training rebounding?

so even if we gave SF more training options wouldnt the logical setup be that the SF was able to train a lot of things at just an average level and nothing at a excellent level. It would be silly if the SF could train everything as well as other positions, and if everything was equivalent then there would be no meaning to positions really.

So if thats the case, how much different is the current system than that? I would agree its a little different... but in the end how much faster would you want the SF to train say Jump Shot than they currently are able to by doing PG/SG/SF at jump shot? I think it would not be hugely large.

did anyone even thought of how effectove the training would be for 3 guys?

honestly i want a training for sf but if it would make 3 players train a single skill how much time would it be needed to get results aside from actually dragging your players from getting any result.

surely level 6 and 7 doctors are again going to be so high everything goes slow for bb universe!

there has to be a different set of training for sf, because he needs to versatile in everything

if anyone already post this just ignore mine.

lets imagine if we had a training system where any position could be trained in any skill..

if that were the case wouldnt we want a PG training rebounding not to be as effective as a PF training rebounding?

so even if we gave SF more training options wouldnt the logical setup be that the SF was able to train a lot of things at just an average level and nothing at a excellent level. It would be silly if the SF could train everything as well as other positions, and if everything was equivalent then there would be no meaning to positions really.

So if thats the case, how much different is the current system than that? I would agree its a little different... but in the end how much faster would you want the SF to train say Jump Shot than they currently are able to by doing PG/SG/SF at jump shot? I think it would not be hugely large.

You don't consider a thing,at this moment
THERE IS ONLY A TRAINING FOR SF PLAYING IN HIS ROLE,JUMP SHOT FOR SF-PF;WHILE FOR THE OTHER POSITION(PG-SG;PF-C) THERE ARE ALL THE ADEQUATE TRAINING
I aplogize with MODs,GMs,and BBs to write with capital characters,but some users really doesn't understand that,if a SG or a PF can train himself playing as PG or C without lose efficency during the games,a SF can not make this
So we request only ONE training which is not faster than the combination of the training in ID and OD in the separate roles in which they had to play to train himself now,and specific skills of the frontcourt and of the backcourt as Passing,Rebounding,Jump Range,Handling,Driving and Shot Blocking must have trained however in other roles

Last edited by Steve Karenn at 1/12/2009 10:20:05 AM

calm down.. i do understand perfectly.

i do think the training should probably be tweaked, but I think it shouldnt be to allow for single training on skills for SFs, for a number of reasons.

1. Unfairness to current SF trainers
2. Realism in that SFs should be able to be trained at a lower rate than all other positions but be able to be trained in a wider variety of skills. If SFs were able to be trained at the same rate in the wider variety of skills then everyone would train SFs and then play gaurds and forwards out of position at SF. Imagine you could train both your center and your point gaurd at jump shot by playing them at SF and neither were particularly poorly out of position. As of now you need to play your SF at SG if you want a little bit better passing and PG if you want a lot better training at passing. This seems to be to be at least the SORT of tradeoff one wants the system to have. If you want optimal training you have to sacrifice, not having any tradeoffs is stupid.

That being said, I think there is a real question as to whether the current system has the right QUANTITATIVE tradeoff. Training SFs at their position should result in a reasonably skilled SF, not as good as a SF who was yanked around out of position to get personal attention on all his skills to the detriment of his team, but good enough that he is a reasonable choice to have on a team consisting of his peers (same starting age/potential/training time).