BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > TEAM development and franchise players

TEAM development and franchise players (thread closed)

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
271102.7 in reply to 271102.5
Date: 6/21/2015 1:08:08 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
370370
Playing in actual games is an element/aspect of player development.
... rewarded in this game by increases in Experience, as it should be.

example- Guys like MCW who play big minutes as rookies tend to develop quickly and establish a career.
They develop quickly because they have so much talent, not because they played more minutes.

Have you ever even been part of a coaching staff???
Actually, I have been on a coaching staff and head coach as well. That this is true of you or me is irrelevant to this discussion.

In short, minute requirement is realistic.
Nope, sorry.

If all you do is press your argument over and over and over again, the conversation is not elevated.

This Post:
00
271102.9 in reply to 271102.8
Date: 6/21/2015 11:10:39 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
370370
You're entirely missing the point, probably deliberately but maybe not.

Rookies develop because of their skills. They gain experience because of their minutes played. That isn't rocket surgery.

And your usual ad hominem attacks are hypocritical and entirely out of place.

Message deleted
This Post:
00
271102.13 in reply to 271102.1
Date: 6/22/2015 4:46:55 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
People will never intentionally devote time to trianing lower potentials enmass. I just don't think it will happen. NOR will they train 3 or more positions consistently. People will always tend towards training 1 position/as fast as possible. Profitable or not. Good for the global health of game/market or not. People will also cheat to do this if it is the best option, as currently is the game design.
Completely agree. I think the appeal has to come in a different flavour.

TOO hard for most people not to just end up really ruining prospects and wasting hundreds of thousands at a time
People are even admitting as much

The players in existence do not have the skills to earn what we are capable of paying them, thus we have surplus and inflation. This creates messed up cycles of inflation and deflation where peoples training patterns can radically alter the market.
This is true as well. We've always focused on the movement in user numbers, taxes, reduction of FA to explain inflation, but the salary reduction that started a long time ago and is still going on is another obvious reason.


This whole opening post should be quoted in full, all the time, everywhere.

This Post:
00
271102.14 in reply to 271102.11
Date: 6/22/2015 4:55:37 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
I think you can't just get a free for all system (or some variant of it). So complexity must be retained.

I agree that players develop through playing time in the NBA and even in Europe. They set the threshold at 48/week but whatever the number I agree with Trainerman that there is correlation between burn and development. I'm fine to retain that aspect of the system to some extent as long as we get more flexibility.

To be fair I'm on board with any proposal to add flexibility to the current system and hopefully that's still considered. I still train my guys out of position (and my main trainee is 24 and the best player on the team), but if I could somehow, even under equally strict conditions train a guy in pressure and another in outside shooting I would be already a lot happier and I think it would be easier to understand and accept as a system by many new managers.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 6/22/2015 4:56:25 AM

Advertisement