BuzzerBeater Forums

I've done it, and without jeopardising the private stats of my own players on a public form I will not go into it.

Sorry I added a bit more. I understand and respect your position of wanting to keep your trainees skills secret and that's why I mentioned Sharpling (he's now 34 and declining, so probably sharing his skills at 30 should be ok) and Marshall (he was put on display by JoeMaverick in the past, so I'd think he'd be ok to share his stats, which I have anyways).

An example with a training plan without starting with 1v1 and an explanation of why it is structured and developed in a certain way, surely would help those people who've asked more info about training above. Also "without jeopardising" does not mean "most efficient", reaching a good target is not reaching the best possible target either, I'm sure you'll agree.

We also can agree that finding some balance with performance may be preferable than brutally going for the most efficient route, but I turn the same question I had for Gully to you too. Going forward, is it better to try and improve our average English manager (ie all of us who care to) understanding of the game/training so he's capable or choosing for himself if he wants to follow one route or another or leave that decision to someone else and follow what he suggests?

Last edited by Lemonshine at 12/10/2014 6:54:49 PM

Park didn't train Sharpling much, he bought him (from a guy who'd outbid me a couple of seasons earlier) when he was largely done. Sharpling isn't anything special from a training perspective, he's just a short arse with a lot of skill.
Sharpling had 106 outside skills at his peak, 9 more than he has now.

Last edited by Elmacca at 12/10/2014 7:12:14 PM

For those of you not wanting to see me clarify something for Lemon please skip to the bold title half way down "In terms of..."

I do apologise, allow me to clarify.

Yes i realise jeapordising and efficient are different words, thank you for checking. Let me make it slightly clearer; I do not want to share the stats of my players on public forums hence not wanting to jeapordise the private stats of my own players, because they are private. I am also reluctant to declare how many tsp they have, I would say however that given how poor Mac was when I started, he has trained exceptionally well considering he started with 33 tsp and played his first game for the NT at age 22. Perhaps you may rate my efficiency based on that if you are willing to forgo the need to know the intimate details of his training and stats.

This may have a bearing on how efficient you feel I am, however that is ultimately not my concern, the players are doing well and as you are probably aware, there is a difference between impossible and inefficient. I never questioned what was the 'most efficient', you see me advocating one on one early, so I am not arguing against you. However you said it was impossible to go the defense route for 'a world class player' at this stage you had not specified they had to be a guard, I simply stated that it was possible because when I trained my players, Morwood wanted players with heavy inside stats so I delayed the one on one and worked hard to produce heavy primaries for him. Mac was at 100k salary at 21, trust me training his secondaries after that was painful but possible. Please don't make me explain it again, that took a lot and please just read this, no need to reply or pick holes or make a discussion out of it. I'm not arguing and the more you seem to want to argue, the less likely I am to even bother.

I see you are keen on the meaning of words, with the deepest respect, I recommend that you read the words written and interpret them according to the meaning the author intended. I am happy to address any further confusion you have with my english but I would rather you didn't feel the need to remind me that there is a difference between words such as 'jeapordise and efficient'. I used jeapordise for a reason, that reason is found in why I used not, not what you think I should be saying. Please don't hear this as criticism, I am patiently trying to explain how you have come across in your post as I am sure you did not mean to sound condescending but were just working hard to clarify for your audience.

Now to the point of this thread and the point of training for the NT

Training is always a tradeoff between the needs of a team and the desire of a coach to make compromises. 200k salary players are capable of playing in D2 teams but you make compromises. I will have 2 x 200k players in my team next season and that is a big compromise for me as it creates a big imbalance in my team and makes it harder for me to challenge for the top. For example, notice I sold Canning and Barker in order to keep Mac and Innes and bought a 30k backup to replace Canning and a 50k starter to replace Barker.

In terms of what I see as the system we ideally would set up...

Going forward the recommendation I have made in the past and am happy to make again is that we need 20 managers dedicated to training 10 for the NT (selling to EBBL if they don't plan to promote) and 10 split into 2 5's for the U21 in cycles of 2 years. That way we have enough throughput of players and balance of MVP up players coming through the system. Just 20 dedicated managers can produce a world challenging NT (Finland have 15-20 for example)

Our problem is not that we do not get enough HoF's etc. I used to agonise over not being able to save what seemed to be 12 HoF's per year who went to computer managers in a draft or the majority were drafted but not trained or just bot'd. Seriously it was the most soul dest

.... geez this ran over!!! Didnt even know that was possible...


continued..

soul destroying part of being U21 manager, watching players who were awesome go BoT.

A few examples just off the top of my lists...
(30976714) - 53 tsp MVP bot
(32029051) - 53 tsp HoF never trained
(26865171) - 76 tsp HoF at age 20 went bot after not being trained beyond 21

20 committed managers working closely with the U21 and NT would be enough to produce an incredible set of players which as I have said many times while I was coaching the U21, would benefit everyone in England because the merchandising alone would go up, and our player prices would go down... The only reason our draftees are so pricey and our players are so pricey is because there are so few being produced and made available from managers who do not wish to train. It is pure supply and demand.

Lastly... forgive me for the long post, I am going to go crawl into the corner and whimper a little now - this post almost killed me

You deserve a stiff drink and a lie down after that post..

You know.. I am going to do that, got some 18 year old single malt for just such an occaision lol!

The elastic effect is massive

I 1 on 1 trained one of my 21yo 6'11 big men until handling was 12 (sensational). I have trained passing for 7 (possibly 8 , im sure it was 7 though) weeks and had 5 pops in passing (from mediocre to Prominent) . OD is 10 HA DR 12

He looks looks awesome right now. I can see him making the NT for sure

FWIW , i have trained a u21 PG who made the world champions serbias team. I trained him in OD first and didnt really do all that much 1 vs 1 forwards. I really really regret that though.

Last edited by DanielPaton at 12/10/2014 10:22:21 PM

Park didn't train Sharpling much, he bought him (from a guy who'd outbid me a couple of seasons earlier) when he was largely done. Sharpling isn't anything special from a training perspective, he's just a short arse with a lot of skill.
Sharpling had 106 outside skills at his peak, 9 more than he has now.

Fine, this is due to my poor research. I do remember him being in the region of 106-107 when you bought him. Yes he's short, I would like to know if the trainer added OD or something else first which is counterintuitive. Spaggiari has more than 110 if I remember correctly and he's 6'0''.

It all comes down to how you create a player like that. This should be discussed and shown to people who actually intend to train an equally strong player. So they would a) understand what it takes to do it (in terms of out of position training if any) and b) why the trainer went a certain way

Last edited by Lemonshine at 12/11/2014 3:47:49 AM

For those of you not wanting to see me clarify something for Vecx please skip to the bold title half way down "In terms of..."

different words, thank you for checking. Let me make it slightly clearer....with the deepest respect, I recommend that you read the words written and interpret them according to the meaning the author intended

Ok...

However you said it was impossible to go the defense route for 'a world class player' at this stage you had not specified they had to be a guard

Fair point. I should have clarified big men are obviously out of the equation since they don't need top notch JS/OD/PA. I think everyone was talking about guards and maybe SF who can play guard, but I agree with you here.

Training is always a tradeoff between the needs of a team and the desire of a coach to make compromises.

Except you will agree that this is 6-8 seasons down the line, not at the beginning. We all know OD is the most important stat for an outside player to perform well, but if you're training OD first on a guard or on anyone with top class outside skills (SF?) and you're trying to make him into the best possible (or the best he can be as fast as possible) it's just not going to cut it. Performance-wise t's also debatable that adding 1 OD every 2 weeks is as good as 1 pop in HA/DR per week and 1 in JS/IS every 2/3 weeks, this coming from someone who plays in a league where everyone stacks OD and ID.

So there are 2 types of compromises: a salary compromise or a competitiveness compromise. The first is a real concern: you need to get it right with how much secondaries vs primaries you need to add as you don't know beforehand if you will be playing in D1 or D2 when he caps. The second not so much. I'm not sure a trainee would perform so much worse (I think it'd be be slightly worse) by doing 1v1 first and even then you're probably going be able to nearly catch up during the third season with whatever regime you picked at the beginning.

In terms of what I see as the system we ideally would set up...

Going forward the recommendation I have made in the past and am happy to make again is that we need 20 managers dedicated to training 10 for the NT (selling to EBBL if they don't plan to promote) and 10 split into 2 5's for the U21 in cycles of 2 years.

Ok sounds reasonable. We will need to do something about the lone wolves out there, to make sure they do not botch the training of those prospects who fall into their lap. Because there will people who will not be willing to subscribe to this, but we'll need all we can get. And if a manager knows what theoretically he should do with a player, the discussion/disagreements would only be on the target builds or minimum requirements (which apparently is a big no-no in England, but there are teams which have it on their front page of all places: http://www.buzzerbeater.com/country/24/nt/overview.aspx)

The bottom line is, all managers (or as many managers as possible) should know how to train efficiently. Those who accept to work for a common goal should try to build skillsets which go well with each other.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 12/11/2014 5:56:18 AM

I'm currently training a PG in my Utopia team and I wa wondering if someone is willing to give me some advice? I don't think he'll make the NT team due to his potential (however I do have a HOF trainee but he isn't as good). If anyone can hep can you bb-mail me so I can message you the skills?