BuzzerBeater Forums

2 position will make your team better quicker. However, 2 position training is a little slower than 1 position training. So 1 position training is used for creating really good players/national team and U21 players.

Unless you have 3 fantastic prospects (or even 1 very good prospect) that you want to get on to the national team, or unless you are in a high division, you should do 2 position training.

The reason I wouldn't recommend it in a higher division is that it is hard to train 6 rookies and still win games.

I thought I should react, cause I don't think your answer is completely correct.

Just talking about the short term training, you are correct that 2 position training is better, your team will improve more.

However this also means that if you're setting a long term goal for your players to reach, that training time will take a few more seasons for your players, than 1 position training does. The older the player gets, the slower the training goes. So at some point it will even out and 1 position training will be better, however the question arises, when is this turning point?

Purely seen at training speed, it depends on your training goal which is better.

But one position training has got some other pro's and con's :
- (at the start) You can invest the same money in better quality trainees, especially when you start Buzzerbeater this might be a very good idea *
- with one position training, you're players might have a chance at U21/NT (who doesn't wat that?) *
- value of these players on the market will be better, but you also have few players to sell.
- often your starting 5 will be better with one position training
- you're bench will definitely be worse
- when your one position trained guy is injured, your team will really miss something.

and finally you're argument, the further in the game you get it's easier to train 3 rookies and win games, than training 6 rookies and win games, this reason combined with the reason marked with the *, made me choose for one position training.

It depends on the situation which choice is better, but I feel one position training is better in more cases.



Last edited by Arsjitekt at 6/23/2010 5:20:45 AM

However this also means that if you're setting a long term goal for your players to reach, that training time will take a few more seasons for your players, than 1 position training does. The older the player gets, the slower the training goes. So at some point it will even out and 1 position training will be better, however the question arises, when is this turning point?

I don't think it will ever be the case that you get the same number of pops (across all players trained) out of one positions as you will out of two position, which is what it sounds like you are saying when you say it will even out. However, you can only make players so good using two position training, so if you are trying to get someone up to superstar potential, you most likely need one position training.

It depends on the situation which choice is better, but I feel one position training is better in more cases.

For your team, and teams in situations you are most familiar with, absolutely, but for most teams, I feel like two position training is better. Remember, there are 16 times as many teams in D.IV as there are in D.II. These teams don't need to be training players for the national team (unless they think they can promote to keep up with his salary), they need a balanced approach that will allow them to improve all positions (by selling off excess trainees for cash to shore up their non-trainees).

My first season I did one position training (and with 2/3 of a season, my pops were not all that far off from 2 positions for a whole season), but after that I have been doing two position training. I plan on sticking with two positions for the next three seasons at least, and by the end of it, I should have two big men at 50k and 60k (and that's with spending two season training guard skills), which should be competitive in D.II, and even in the NBBA I could still start one of them (I would need crazy guards to start both though). Of course, this is just my estimation, maybe training drops off faster with age than I predict, I have only been playing for two seasons. (FYI, what I've been using for my estimates are 100% at 18, 95% at 19, 85% at 20, 80% at 21, 70% at 22, 65% at 23, 55% at 24, just numbers pulled out of my #$%, so feel free to offer better suggestions)

I think that unless you start off with two very good players you should be drawn to two position training right away. Yes, you need more trainable players, but the kind of players that will help you then are quite cheap. 25k-50k for a ~4k salary player with starter/star/allstar potential is what you're looking for. You can't afford a player with MVP potential unless he really sucks, and if you start with one you're probably better off selling him. Once you get those players up to their caps, then look at one position training, but until then mostly you need raw material to work with, and two position develops that raw material faster than one position.

I wish I could give 6 balls for this post. Nicely said Superfly.

This is the best post in esponse to my original question so thanks ever so much, much appreciated.

Scipio

Thanks for all of your replies to my original question.

I have trained two position inside defence this week and my trainer has just reported that I have three out of the five players in training who have received a pop. I`m quite happy with that. My aim is to build a good strong,defensive first front court so happy days.

Thanks all for your invaluable input.

Scipio