BuzzerBeater Forums

I typically don't even consider anyone less than star potential, and anything under perennial Allstar isn't going to be worthwhile in higher divisions. Aim for 5/5 balls in skills/potential, next preferential being 4/5 and then either 3/5 or 5/4, depending. 3/5 can be decent, and either way can be sold for a lot of money because people go crazy for MVP, HOF and ATG potential.

I typically don't even consider anyone less than star potential, and anything under perennial Allstar isn't going to be worthwhile in higher divisions.

Well-trained star potential players can absolutely play solid minutes in the league and starting roles in the Cup at higher levels.

NO.. they mean nothing I use to think the same thing as well . but they mean nothing. because from what I was told these players play versus a lot of stronger or weaker teams to get such stats.

One thing, I have learned is big with rebounds are worth keeping. The rest of every thing else is just random scenario's.

Just go by the potential 5/5 . 4/5 etc .. Sometime even star potent can be great for you to build. My starting center was bench warmer when I got him. He is very solid for me spent so many years on the bench and produced great point and performance out puts.. His starting playing is very good. His shot blocking and rebounding is something that I look forward too because I'm running 3-4 man offense. He can score as well, I find that to be a very funny thing.

In my opinion its ok to take bad potent players in the low league, but in the top league or long term, they will not help.. If your thinking long term and building very strong. Then go for the best you can get which hard to do in draft btw.. But if your like me and just having fun and etc. Then nothing wrong with it, to take a bad potent player and try to shape him up for league level..

But long story short take the best you can get.

Last edited by Mr. Glass at 5/29/2014 2:22:37 PM

ooo I heard my name.

So i did a study in last seasons draft and found that there are some decent correlation's between Box score values and final player stats.

You can read about my quest for enlightenment here
(256102.1)

or just skip to the results here
(257837.3) and onwards

Note - you will need to understand correlation co-efficient s.

Feel free to add to the discussion. I should really pick up the work again and maybe make some more usable pictures.

I agree. I have a guy right now with lower potent playing well. I have gotten better result with shaping these bad players than I have with shaping the good. I think its a smart way to create a solid bench with lower potents.. Atleast they play well given the talent.. The good ones are just a dam liability for long time for me anyway. It just upsets me so much when they not scoring nothing and your pouring cash in to these players. only draft player I have ever kept was steve warden.

The lower potent is just getting the job done in some cases. I think if a manager is near my level of play or class division of 4-5 then they should try to get the best they can. But I don't thinking taking bad potent player Is a sin. You can always shape him to solid or good bench player for cheap like you said, in which I agree 100%

I could agree with getting them on the transfer market due to the obvious cost differences, but if you are choosing between a 5/4 and a 5/3 player that both fit what you're looking for there's still no reason not to go with the higher potential. If you don't want to train him past an all-star or so level that is still an option. Unfortunately, if you get the 5/3 player and decide in a couple seasons to change your mind it's too late at that point. Unrealized potential won't make him less valuable as a bench player once he is done training.