BuzzerBeater Forums

OK, that would be more logical, but the challenge ?

The challenge remains.
1. Your trainer can still only do so much.
2. Your players can only learn at a certain rate (currently verrry slow).
3. Taller players are handicapped at learning certain skills; shorter players are handicapped at learning other skills.
4. Players have invisible caps to their abilities.

The differences?
1. First and foremost, logic -- there is simply no need to retain the illogical aspects of training.
2. Simpler to understand, simpler to plan.
3. Newbies won't have to be rocket surgeons to understand it, thereby helping retention of new BB customers.

If we were to be realistic with training, only the top teams would be able to train the best players. Let's do that.

No, please quit just being argumentative and listen with an oipen mind, please. We're talking about the single worst area of BB, and it is entirely fixable. That is well worth open minded discussion, wouldn't you agree?

Logically, the best trainers would be best able to train the best players. Poorer trainers would do a poorer job, but would do something constructive. Meatheads wouldn't accomplish much at all.

Last edited by Mike Franks at 1/27/2015 10:40:49 AM

Another "challenge" would be that most of the times teams can really compete with a mix of their better players. That would reduce largely the games where one or both teams are giving up because they have to sacrifice for training reasons.

So if I'm understanding correctly there are 3 options being proposed mostly:

a) Keep the single weekly regime...

b) ... however they will have to play at a specific position to receive 100% training ...

c) Training will be applied with no penalty irrespective of the position of each trainee. ... they still need to receive 48 minutes.

All of these options make it substantially easier to train out of position.

Closer, but still illogical in each of your scenarios.

a. Coach: "Carmelo and J.R., get over here. I'm going to train you both on defense."
J.R.: "Okay, Coach, let's go."
Carmelo: "Coach, you know I hate to play defense. Waaaahh."
Coach: "Too bad. I can only train one thing at a time."

b. Coach: "Cleanthony, Quincy, Pablo, no training for you this week because you didn't play in a game."
Quincy: "But coach, the guys who played don't need training as much as we do. We're the ones who need it."
Coach: "Too bad. If you don't play I ignore you entirely. Now go over there and sit on your thumbs."

c. Same problem. Coach: "Too bad. If you don't play I ignore you entirely. Now go over there and sit on your thumbs."

Forget percentages. As long as the phrase "train out of position" remains, the illogic remains. It is NOT necessary.

I expect hrudey to come in guns blazing saying that with this sytem you can train all your players in a single (thrown) game.

You have to throw a game for optimal training? Completely illogical and unnecessary. No wonder newbies so often do not stick around.

Last edited by Mike Franks at 1/27/2015 11:00:57 AM