BuzzerBeater Forums

Correct.

The cumulative minutes count, not where he played last.

Nonetheless, if a player plays between 24 and 96 minutes his shape will remain above respectable.

This is not true, and has been proved untrue very recently (including in my own team when 35min saw a drop to average). Check out this study: (15597.1)

EDIT=average, not mediocre

Last edited by darykjozef at 2/14/2008 5:30:47 PM

you are right, my statement was a bit too strong.

What I meant is that below 24 and above 96 minutes the game shape decreases constantly every week. If the number of minutes played each week is between these two values, the game shape will stabilize at a high value... but that does not mean that there may not be temporary fluctuations to lower values.

A far as your original post, I agree that the ideal is somewhere between 40-80 minutes, but I would even suggest a narrower field of 50-70 minutes.

Cheers
DJ

A far as your original post, I agree that the ideal is somewhere between 40-80 minutes, but I would even suggest a narrower field of 50-70 minutes.

Cheers
DJ

personally I would sugest to get as close to 48 minutes as possible.
In my opinion you loose training for every minute you play over 48 minutes. Minutes that other trainees could use to improve.

One should seek a good balance between trainees (which should never get over 50 minutes of time) and the star players that help you win your games, which you might use for more than 50 minutes per week.

But that is just me. ;)

A far as your original post, I agree that the ideal is somewhere between 40-80 minutes, but I would even suggest a narrower field of 50-70 minutes.

Cheers
DJ

personally I would sugest to get as close to 48 minutes as possible.
In my opinion you loose training for every minute you play over 48 minutes. Minutes that other trainees could use to improve.

One should seek a good balance between trainees (which should never get over 50 minutes of time) and the star players that help you win your games, which you might use for more than 50 minutes per week.

But that is just me. ;)

For training purposes, yes, 48 minutes is perfect. But good luck getting anyone in proficient GS playing only 48 minutes per week.

Trainees can only play training positions to make their training optimal, leaving 2-3 other positions open for players that you need to make your team balanced. I prefer to have both starters and backups in these positions at strong+ GS, as I don't want my PG getting into foul trouble and having a guy with mediocre GS subbing in for him.

But that's just me =)

[good luck getting anyone in proficient GS playing only 48 minutes per week.

I don't want my PG getting into foul trouble and having a guy with mediocre GS subbing in for him.

And that is where the diffrence lies... I don't have 1 proficient and 1 mediocre, I have 2 respectables, or strongs, or 1 of each... also my players are prety balanced, so my subs are as good as my starters (some games starter a little better, other games subs a little better, depending on the minutes I like them to get...)

lso I had proficient game shaped players, a few times, ofcourse mostly they are strong, or respectable, some who get the fewest minutes are average, but that's just normal. what I try to say is that I had some proficients as well, and they didn't play for 60 minutes that week, probably between 50 and 55... So if that is the goal, I'd say take 55 minutes as a max.
Ofcourse if you need him to win, and he already has 40 minutes, you might still want to put him as starter and have him play another 35 minutes or so... But since I don't have anyone jumping out of the group, I don't need to do this, I can try to get them all to 48 minutes as close as I can.

It all depends on your team, and your players and your goals.

edit: I noticed 48 minutes is more than enough to get them to strong GS, possible 44 minutes would do the trick, if you only have them play a little longer than that every so often.

Last edited by Lord of Doom at 2/14/2008 12:18:24 PM

I'm going to very slightly disagree with your last statement, as there appears to be a slight element of random in GS. Here are my results from last week:

0 minutes=mediocre
0 minutes=mediocre
16 minutes=mediocre
27 minutes=respectable
31 minutes=strong
35 minutes=average
46 minutes=strong
50 minutes=strong
53 minutes=respectable
59 minutes=respectable
59 minutes=respectable
60 minutes=strong
61 minutes=respectable
63 minutes=strong
64 minutes=respectable
68 minutes=respectable
75 minutes=strong

Going by this singular example, it can be assumed that playing at least 46 minutes is just fine for GS. I have found this topic rather intriguing, so I will continue to track my weekly results.

If it's okay with the OP, I wouldn't mind positing my changes in GS every week in this thread to try and track which amount of playing time is optimal (and see if what the community at large thinks is actually correct).

not for me to say but would you not agree your strategy worked for you when in Div2 but so far this season it is not as finely tuned in Div1?

My strategy from about half way into the season last year was win then see where the best training minutes/players happened to be. Sometimes it was PF/C then PF/SF sometimes guards..because of this my trainees are now all interchangeable so i can now let them play 48mins in the weeks training position and 20-25 mins somewhere else.... I have normalled certain games thereby resisted TIE so that I can select players out of position to balance minutes as i agree it is imposssible to get decent GS by only playing 45-55mins.

*By the way I think we have v.similar views on squad rotation and not having too much emphasis on 1/2 players and judging by some of your recent results I think it is safe to say you will be back on winning ways v.soon!

first to react on Darkyjozef.
I believe my statement in my post was that I wanted to tell that it is not important to get as many minutes as possible without exceeding 80 mins to get them in prolific GS. I told 44 mins was probably enough to get decent GS... since 48 is the max mins they can get for training, and GS has to do with training, I asume that 48 minutes would just be as good as 65 when it comes to GS...

Suprfly Guy: Yes I only have 1 out of 4 so far, and I must say this has different reasons. The first match I expected to loose, but I won it. The second I wanted to win, but lost. The third I knew I would loose and the forth I lost, but I still don't know why, except that I played TIE on the road...
I will try to get as far as possible in the cup this season, and try to stay in Div I in the process. This has led to my decision to play all competition games TIE so far, except my second game. I'm also desperatly trying to train some guys asap to sell them.
I hope to get my team of about 20 players tuned by the midseason All-Star game.
I'm not putting up excuses for my bad results here, but I want to point out that the bad results are not entirely unexpected.
As you say, I expect to get back on track, maybe just not for the first few weeks though.

first to react on Darykjozef.
I believe my statement in my post was that I wanted to tell that it is not important to get as many minutes as possible without exceeding 80 mins to get them in prolific GS. I told 44 mins was probably enough to get decent GS... since 48 is the max mins they can get for training, and GS has to do with training, I asume that 48 minutes would just be as good as 65 when it comes to GS...

And I wasn't really disagreeing with you on that, except that I don't believe a player's GS has anything to do with him getting training (however it has an effect on how often the coach will play him, so that can effect playing time, and therefore training).