BuzzerBeater Forums

So, the same discussion like some seasons ago, huh? I started with SB around 14 seasons ago. That was before the changes to it. During this time span I trained some players to a ridiculous defense level (example Haek). During this time my players finished the season three times as the world leading blocker. And my trainee Nestor is going for his third consecutive title this season (currently nr. 4 worldwide, won the last two seasons).
After I finished with all my analysis I had a short talk with Marin and he confirmed some of my results. And one of them is: ID=SB. So I don't get it, why some of you guys are going for SB>ID. As long as SB and ID are not equal, you lose potential defense power. Both skills are linked with each other.
Another point (and I think I'm the only manager in this game who can currently test this) is the impact of a SB 10-19 team. Not one or two guys but a complete line up. The game enigne was designed to "react" and "think" in a certain way. It's not stupid and as soon as you use one great defender, the GE will try to avoid him and go for the other player(s). I have Haek (the best defender this game ever saw, OD+ID+SB=55) and Nestor (my trainee) in the paint. Haek intimidates a lot of opponents and Nestor has to defend more because he is the "weaker" link in this connection. Haek defends 7.5 shots/game this season and Nestor around 16 shots/game. And that already for the third season in a row.
So what will happen if you play with one blocker? He will force the opponent to search for another way to score. And if the engine finds another way there is no shotblocker. As a result managers say: "I have a blocker and he doesn't block. The opponents just keep scoring." We had this problem in the NT for several seasons. Haeks strength is also his biggest weakness. He can give a team a massive defense boost but also harm it if he has weak defenders around him. And this goes for all the other defenders/blockers. One of them is good, but two of them are devastating.

It's a pity that these discussions start every couple of season anew. From my point of view we could have already a finished GE and skill wiki or tutorial. But now that I finished it four seasons ago I'm losing interest in these threads and speculations.

Last edited by Nachtmahr at 4/7/2016 3:03:46 PM

I dont take part in the forum discussion much, so forgive me if i have missed your previous analysis. For me i have gone SB > ID mostly to see what it can do as it is a vastly unused skill, and I have enjoyed my results so far. If Marin has confirmed that SB = ID is best practice why is this not public knowledge and why are peoples views on SB so jaded?? I would bet 95% of managers dont ever train SB.

The only part i have a hard time believing is that the Game Engine is that in depth. Personally, I think it is much simpler then they want us to believe, Theres only a few Skill's, Its basketball and has 1 clear way to win. Being someone who dabbles in creating simulations for fun I just dont see any real depth to the engine outside of, pick who shoots, > is he better then defender > x chance to make it > result > next play.

Haek is a very interesting player, Id like to create a guy with 20s in OD/ID/SB just to see how he plays.
What are his defensive splits?

Well, there is the fact that SB trains much faster so it makes sense to do that before ID, but yeah I agree that ID=SB works best on big men, I did follow the discussions and went that way too.

I'm not convinced about SB on guards though, but I suppose the whole premise here was that it might help on the driving opponents in LI. If that's the case though, it would be cheaper and easier to run zone defenses (with high SB on the bigs) like some managers have tried in the past. It surely is a lot easier than having both guards and SF with high SB. And let's be honest: Mordor's Chaperon had 20 IS and no matter how much you train SB, you will never have anywhere near 20 SB on a guard.

I've been training almost all my seasons in the game(plus all the seasons in Utopia).
This season is the first ever i gave JR training.
I was SHOCKED to see my 24y old, 6'7" trainee, getting THREE pop ups in FOUR JR sessions, with two OD sessions in between.
That is a confirmed >0,50 in JR, per session, at 24y and at SF height!!!!!

If it's way behind the other skills, it can be quick. The elastic effect appears very heavy on JR - I have a level 6 trainer and my 20 year old 6'1" guy took 5 weeks of full training to go from 16 to 17 JR.

I forgot to mention, i have level 4 trainer in that guy's team.
His JR was one below JS before the first pop up, two up now.
It was 8 below OD though.
I am certain it's got something to do with the elastic effect too, but that much?

p.s 20year old, 17JR...and his daughter's name is Riley by any chance?

Everyone, IMO, errors in the way of punting JR and SB for sooo long.... and they are lower salary cost, free in some formulas.

Cap formulas are actually very clear. JR takes (used to take) more cap than any other outside skill for Cs, about 5 times more than PA and JS is the second highest (and usually the main culprit about gimped Cs salary-wise or skill-wise) about 3 times more than PA.

JR had a higher Cap weight than OD for SG. JR had nearly the same Cap weight than OD and higher than IS and ID for SFs.


Last edited by Lemonshine at 4/8/2016 5:19:14 AM

I forgot to mention, i have level 4 trainer in that guy's team.
His JR was one below JS before the first pop up, two up now.
It was 8 below OD though.
I am certain it's got something to do with the elastic effect too, but that much?

p.s 20year old, 17JR...and his daughter's name is Riley by any chance?

It's got to be that much. All three of my 20 year olds have had the same pretty consistent slowdown in JR as the weeks go on, beyond what I had anticipated. Originally I had hoped to have all three at or very close to 20 by the end of this season, but now I'm not sure I can even hit 19 and one of the three may not make 18. We live and learn, or we refuse to learn and refuse to grow, I guess.

We live and learn, or we refuse to learn and refuse to grow, I guess.

True

I think we all agree we'd rather have the extra 40 skill points build!!!!

No I don't agree with this statement.
100 TSP might be extremely salary efficient, while the 140 will definitely cost you a lot more (in salary, without getting in the training discussion).

Also skills are not equal and their cap weight is not representative of their usefulness. In short this PG has 100 TSP:
http://i.imgur.com/xxrIJT4.png
and this PG has 140TSP:
http://i.imgur.com/IZTJURD.png
You can see the rating assigned by buzzer-manager yourself.

This is the cap table. As you can see your 5 to 45 numbers are not necessarily correct.
.........JS.........JR......OD .....HA......DR......PA......IS.........ID.......RB..........SB
PG....18%....28%....30%....23%....11%...50%....5%......5%....20%......3%
SG....45%....41%....40%......6%.....6%.....7%.....6%....10%....25%......3%
SF....60%....23%....30%......5%.....5%.....3%....10%....20%....35%.....3%
PF....34%......6%....5%........5%.....5%.....3%....40%....40%....40%....16%
C........8%....15%....0%........3%.....3%....3%....46%.....42%....45%....23%

Last edited by Lemonshine at 4/8/2016 10:21:43 AM