BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Committee for the Rights of Small Forwards

Committee for the Rights of Small Forwards

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
67212.20 in reply to 67212.19
Date: 1/4/2009 9:33:51 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
Strange reasoning. So according to you since you've sacrificed to create small forward from (congratulations for the great work done) now you should be able to sell goods to the detriment of those who start now? perhaps you've forgotten the training speed double? I sold everything I had at the roster, the one that I gave it my small forward and are not here to say that because I was having difficulty must all, quite the contrary I realized the absurdity of the thing and promote the idea in the forum suggestions, not in the bug's forum. I do not see how you who've committed so much as losing can "facilitate" your work already "well" started.

And do not talk to multiskill or monoskill, it's another thing as the small forward should be much more complete than any center or guard as it binds the two departments. it is clear that serve training in passing to c / pf and rebound for guards but
1) are not as indispensable as the defenses for sf
2) perhaps it is better to proceed by degrees can not find?

Then if you feel that it is better to get more out dollars at the expense of others ... bravo!

p.s. translation by translator of google, if you do not understand I am sorry

Last edited by Cholanka Avikola at 1/4/2009 9:36:09 PM

From: chihorn
This Post:
00
67212.21 in reply to 67212.20
Date: 1/4/2009 10:29:08 PM
New York Chunks
II.2
Overall Posts Rated:
943943
I think what's getting lost in this conversation, and which I think was a key point in the opening post in this thread, is that training SFs as SFs is more realistic than the current system. I.e., how do you train Scottie Pippen to be be Scottie Pippen? Do you make him play center a few games to get his post game better? Do you run him at the point to get him to pass better? The current system is pretty good for PGs and Cs. (Even though I centers need to learn to pass, too, or they couldn't play in, say, a Triangle Offense, passing skills for players on teams that rely on passing can be done as part of team training.) But SFs can only be trained either in a watered-down training mode (training 3 positions at once) or playing out of position, and that detracts from the realism of the training system, that some players get short changed only because they are versatile and play one particular position.

Changes can happen, good managers can adjust, especially if we're given, say, a full season or two heads-up on something like this so we can prepare.

Don't ask what sort of Chunks they are, you probably don't want to know. Blowing Chunks since Season 4!
This Post:
00
67212.22 in reply to 67212.20
Date: 1/4/2009 10:49:04 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
303303
Then if you feel that it is better to get more out dollars at the expense of others ... bravo!


Absolutely within the framework of the game.

This isn't Lake Woebegone.

NO ONE at this table ordered a rum & Coke
Charles: Penn has some good people
A CT? Really?
Any two will do
Any three for me
Any four will score
Any five are live
This Post:
00
67212.23 in reply to 67212.22
Date: 1/4/2009 10:54:28 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1919
Then if you feel that it is better to get more out dollars at the expense of others ... bravo!


Absolutely within the framework of the game.

This isn't Lake Woebegone.


Are you saying the children aren't all above average?!

This Post:
00
67212.24 in reply to 67212.21
Date: 1/5/2009 5:25:17 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
and guards needs inside shoot etc. they learn such things but normally they don't need to play ;) In reality you see improvement of bench players who just got few minutes each game, often they are the one who learn the must, but here that it impossible.

The training here is far away from realistic, and to make a change who you like to see, and saying thats realisitc won't change anything and is a real bad argument. And it hits those players who use the system to train difficult to train players, which gave you probadly a bit lesss succes but you get paid off hen you selling then, thats what chuckd like to explain.

This Post:
00
67212.25 in reply to 67212.24
Date: 1/5/2009 5:48:44 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
I think you have not brought a valid justification to say that it is not necessary. You say it is a bad argument to your personal interests, not because the game would work better or worse. You say that it is impossible to make it realistic, in my opinion is far from impossible

This Post:
00
67212.26 in reply to 67212.25
Date: 1/5/2009 5:53:59 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
my personal interest, why?

I just could imagine, how others players thought who adept the system.

And when you say thats not a valid justification that it is necessary, i want to see one that it is necessary to beat the Sf trainers?

This Post:
00
67212.27 in reply to 67212.26
Date: 1/5/2009 8:19:33 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
88
I think that:
if a training for the SF will be updated it might be a training that improve only SF and not a combination of other roles (like sf+pf or sf+pg+sg, etc...), so if a manager wish try this he know that can train only 2 or 3 guys, isn't?
at the end of the season the hypothetical manager have 2 good or excellent sf and a half wank!
And the other players?
wasting 1 or 2 season for the training of a single role isn't the better way for the PO's victory!
But we must try before say: Its a good change or isn't a good change.

(i'm a sf trainers!)

This Post:
00
67212.28 in reply to 67212.27
Date: 1/5/2009 9:00:49 AM
New York Chunks
II.2
Overall Posts Rated:
943943
I think this could mean that instead of having options to train Inside Defense for either C, C/PF, or C/PF/SF, that there could also be an option to train only SF or perhaps SF/PF. This would help a team focus training for a SF any week, and it would also mean that if someone wants to train, say, a SF for Inside Defense, he could play the SG at SF, which would hurt his team less than playing the SG at C or PF.

I think that if this were the only sort of change that was incorporated, giving us the option of focusing training of SF rather than creating new types of SF-oriented training, that would be all that would be necessary to get the SFs trainin on par with other positions.

Don't ask what sort of Chunks they are, you probably don't want to know. Blowing Chunks since Season 4!
This Post:
00
67212.29 in reply to 67212.23
Date: 1/5/2009 10:29:59 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
303303
Then if you feel that it is better to get more out dollars at the expense of others ... bravo!


Absolutely within the framework of the game.

This isn't Lake Woebegone.


Are you saying the children aren't all above average?!


If you've seen my draftees, you wouldn't need to ask.

NO ONE at this table ordered a rum & Coke
Charles: Penn has some good people
A CT? Really?
Any two will do
Any three for me
Any four will score
Any five are live
This Post:
00
67212.30 in reply to 67212.20
Date: 1/5/2009 9:24:33 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
155155
Strange reasoning. So according to you since you've sacrificed to create small forward from (congratulations for the great work done) now you should be able to sell goods to the detriment of those who start now?


What can I say - I played by the rules to create a situation where my team would be successful in the long run. I had to make sacrifices in the short run in order to do that. I expect that the game will be stable enough to allow me to do that.

We started BB at almost the exact same time. You could have done exactly the same thing. Instead you chose a path that allowed your team to be more successful in the short term. That was your choice.

Now you want to complain that you can't afford a balanced SF? In fact - you want to change the rules to make it better for your team, at my expense (and the expense of all other SF trainers who followed the rules). Sorry, but I'm going to take exception to that.

The good news is - all other teams are in the same boat as you. So there really is nothing to complain about.

Run of the Mill Canadian Manager
Advertisement