BuzzerBeater Forums

Care to share what kind of results you've had?

I could, but since I only had a few weeks of rebounding training it won't be very helpfull since we don't know how high they where in sublevel when I started training.
So far I had 5 pops in 2 weeks... 1 was my PG.

Since last week I try loggin my training progress, once I have usefull and acurate info I will post on the forum.

If you're willing to keep at this, I'd be really interested in your results.

I plan to rotate between a few inside skills, but will keep track of training minutes.
I'm not sure about it, but I think that up to 48 minutes training is linear. So every 1 minute played = 1 training unit, and x training units are needed for a pop. The x is what I try to find out. If my theory is wrong, this will be shown in the results. I will also keep track of secondary training minutes.
So before I get something solid we might be a few seasons further. ;)

could you direct me to that post, maybe I could learn more from it than that it simply is not linear...

I can't find the link either, but I also do remember that it is NOT linear. The question was whether 45-47 minutes resulted in 94-99% training, and the answer was "No, significantly less"

so by training 2 positions and effectively having 6 x48 mins as possibility I often have something like 51,49,47,45 for my main 4 trainees after my 2 league games.. i then see if i can get 2 other players to play 48mins in a scrimmage or if in the cup i play 2 others and 1 back up for the 2 position normally resulting in each getting approx 30mins.. should I be just going for 48 with both or even ensuring my main guys cover the deficit bewteeen 45-48 and 47-48?

if its wisest to ensure they get the 1-3 mins difference this seems very harsh.

Last edited by Superfly Guy at 2/28/2008 1:15:53 AM

if its wisest to ensure they get the 1-3 mins difference this seems very harsh.

exactly.

since I have many players in my team, and I like it since every player has it's own special ways, most of them don't get 48 minutes.
I try to get many as close to 48 as possible, but as you say if one already has 45 minutes, and an other player did not play yet, it seems more logical to me to let the one that did not play yet play instead of having a player who only needs 3 minutes play.

Also I have 3 PG I use for 3 games, I rotate them so they all start in 1 game, and are all back-up in an other game, so every PG starts 1 time, and is back-up 1 time. Mostly this results in 1 of them (and it's not always the same one, varies a lot) gets 52 minutes, the others 46 or 47/45. Or 55/46/43 or so. I believe this is prety good spreading of minutes, but if that means that if you train PGs only 1 player is fully trained and the other 2 significantly less, then I might reconsidder my training and just start training stamina and free trows all the time...

One might say, okay get rid of 1 PG and have the 2 remaining play 3 games so you have 2 fully trained, and also for other positions, just keep the ones needed and sell the rest, so you don't need to puzzle out new line-ups every game in order to get most of your players enough minutes to stay in shape. True, but then, if someone gets injured, or you need a guy with very good defense and les offence, or the other way around, or you want to put someone in with good outside scoring instead of inside for a few games? After all I'm paying enough wage for each of them weekly. Putting effort into it to give them all some minutes instead of keeping just a few and having them play every game should not be punished.