BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Expanding LI, not beating it

Expanding LI, not beating it

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
278218.52 in reply to 278218.49
Date: 4/9/2016 12:11:31 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
And JS is the death of many builds as it eats a lot of cap with dubious benefits, although I can see the case for pushing JS a bit for SFs.

The reason why high DR is a horrible thing to have is that either you have other players with equally high DR or the player with very high DR will attempt more shots. And normally you would like your frontcourt players to take more shots as they are usually more efficient in BB. SFs are not as inefficient as guards, but big men are usually more efficient than them, too.

This is why you should take things with a pinch of salt and not going with blank statements about 140 builds. Those builds are typically built on 20 DR/HA to speed up all other outside skills, but unless you end up with legit 150 TSP player with good primary and key secondary skills like Conor Marshall or 160 TSP players like Hakkinen, in most cases you end up with a build which is inferior to a 125-130 build which has lower HA/DR (so fewer bad shots taken), but more OD or PA or other more important skills.

So let me make a suggestion: instead of talking totals, let's talk about hypothetical (or actual) builds. So we all know what we are discussing and we avoid personal interpretations. The (partial) builds you proposed earlier in the thread are unlikely for guards. Haek is the closest thing to what you would like, but he has underwhelming shooting skills and JR. So that's the trade-off: a guy with low shooting and uber defense and flow. I think you can add another 10 pops to his build, if you're lucky, with a better trainer, but it will still be low.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 4/9/2016 12:20:32 PM

This Post:
00
278218.56 in reply to 278218.55
Date: 4/9/2016 3:18:19 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
262262
I was reading some old forum posts on trainer effectiveness and in most of them, it was said that an L7 trainer is about 2% more effective than an L6, 4-5% better than an L5 and 8-12% better than an L4. Do you think these numbers are accurate? Just going off these numbers, and assuming that the extra effectiveness is uniform for primary and secondary training, that means for every 100 pops(which is quite a bit), an L7 gives you 2 more pops than an L6 and about 10 more pops than an L4. This seems quite low.

Last edited by Mountaineer at 4/9/2016 3:18:49 PM