BuzzerBeater Forums

I think one of the problems here is that many managers have been developing players who are more specialized than really makes sense for basketball

Some managers have. Many managers have been developing players based on the confines of training system. Not sure if i'd blame the users for playing the cards they've been dealt.

if you match him up against a center who has only been trained in inside defense, he's going to go off from outside.

Training centers at PG/SG is very difficult (or, guards at pf/c). You have two choices:

1 - Train PG/SG with actual guards, attempt to win games and enjoy the match playing experience, get financial rewards from succeeding on the court, etc.

2 - Train a pf/c at guard, concede games and miss the match playing experience, lose money and fall behind off the court, watch as your big players train much slower then the rest. Even then, sometimes your coach will simply take your pf/c you are attempting to train and take them off the court, no matter how explicitly you work to remove that as an occurrence.

This is supposed to be a game, supposed to be fun. It's no wonder so few choose the 2nd option, esp as the GE has until now failed to provide any reward.

you can train your pf/c with the option of forwards right? JS at least.

I'd say Outside shooting isn't necessary since they don;t have to shoot from THAT far and the JS trains it as well.

I see you are trying to say it's not easy. But it's not as extremely impossible as you put it and I for one see it as a challenge that it isn't as easy as just choosing a position and the skill they will train in.

But are not requested great levels at secondary skills,maybe this is not clear
for example,a center with inept/mediocre in Od,handling, passing,JS yet have decent skill for a center,and is not very difficult to find a player with two or three at least of these skills at that level(JS was trained as secondary of IS also)

you can train your pf/c with the option of forwards right? JS at least.

Driving and jump shot, IIRC. Charles mentioned defense, which you can't train without playing you're players out of position.

But it's not as extremely impossible as you put it

I didn't say its extremely impossible. It's difficult enough that it's extremely difficult to do successfully while attempting win (unless, of course, your much stronger then everyone else in your division).

But are not requested great levels at secondary skills,maybe this is not clear

If you get a player that has crappy secondary (or, off-position skill), which now matter much more in the new GE, then it does matter.

I'm all for players being cross-trained and built up to a balanced level of skills. I think it's funny that training system is the biggest hurdle to that goal.

Last edited by brian at 8/6/2009 3:07:57 PM

you can train your pf/c with the option of forwards right? JS at least.

Driving and jump shot, IIRC. Charles mentioned defense, which you can't train without playing you're players out of position.

But it's not as extremely impossible as you put it

I didn't say its extremely impossible. It's difficult enough that it's extremely difficult to do successfully while attempting win (unless, of course, your much stronger then everyone else in your division).

About the defense part. I see you are correct there. The option to train forwards in OD as well would be an improvement.

I stand corrected.

How many times do you think your centerr will defend against an adversary guard?Surely you canno think that an equilibrate player could beat an old-thinking player in his home filed,but "all black" players will be penalized,as is in reality

I didn't say its extremely impossible. It's difficult enough that it's extremely difficult to do successfully while attempting win (unless, of course, your much stronger then everyone else in your division).
​

​
​About the defense part. I see you are correct there. The option to train forwards in OD as well would be an improvement.
​
​I stand corrected.

And that's why I always train my future inside folks in outside skills first (along with some guards, then I switch and train them inside, while giving my guards some inside focus. But I train 3 main SF's (1 for selling short term, 1 for selling long term and one for myself), 1 PF/C, 1 PG/SG and some spare minutes for the ones I want to keep for a while. I foresee that eventually there will be a lot of SG's, SF's and PF's per definition and scarcely any C's and PG's in the game if we need very balanced players.

I build my team with an army of SF's with the most versatile SF's as SF's, the SF's with stronger inside at PF/C and the ones leaning more on the outside at PG/SG. Of course this make me weaker before I reach the desired level as it takes longer to train versatile players, and then it would last some 4-5 seasons before I am weak again while building younger players again. Unfortunately there are not many versatile players on the market, and I don't think most people want to pay the price, therefore fielding players with ONLY the skills that have the highest priority in each position, forgetting that you need some of the others as well. I am excited to see how things evolve from here.

I think there are a lot of owners who view this game differently than I do. Even with all the revealing information I've gathered from forums and friends, I've always treated my players and the games as "real basketball". Hence, I have always stayed far away from players with a1-4 rating in secondary skills. Now, I realize that cannot always be the case, but...

ex: If I find a SG with proficient core skills and respectable IS and ID and inept or mediocre REB and SB, I will take him over a player who has better core skills, but pitiful or atrocious secondary skills across the "bottom 4" board.

The same goes for bigs. I plan on keeping my C even as my team keeps on improving because he can handle, pass, play OD and has range. I've played him at SF and PF just to see how he would fair. The results were just fine, and on that note, I've seen C's with level 12-15 across the bottom 4, but 1-3 at the top. Like Shaq if he couldn't pass (he can) and lets the ball get slapped out of his hands down low (he doesn't). Common sense dictates they will have issues on the court.

Just like in the NBA, you need guys who can play two positions. Two fundamental rules I have followed are:

1. Comprise a team of players who can play multiple positions for the sake of injuries and more importantly, strategic advantages.

2. Offense wins you games. Defense wins you championships. (hence my 67 ppg allowed this season)

It's worked so far.

One dimensional players are fine if they're coupled with well rounded players or if they're coming off the bench. But as explained, you will get burned if your PF or C can't guard outside, especially in a zone.

ex: Cavs vs Magic in this year's conference finals. Varejao and Z and Ben Wallace could not guard on the perimeter, nor could the step out and defend jumpers. Next thing you know, LeBron is storming off the court and I'm left broken hearted yet again.




Last edited by Plotts at 8/6/2009 11:24:19 PM

Your center don't need any outside sksill,your Pf or your SF yes...and if you don't have 15 players,often you have to switch your players in various positions,changing for the various situations of the different games.So,if your center doesn't have decent outside skills,thaere aren't any kind of troubles,but if he had to play as PF you have to think if it's advantageous for you.If you think your adversary will play low post or look inside,ok,no problem,if your adversary play R&G...you have to think if an atrociuos OD power forward is a bearable risk