BuzzerBeater Forums

Last one thread opened for this evening from my side otherwise I've to pay the part time salary to all the BBs

Draft must be strongly revised; there are 2 different scenarios:

Team X that has a great draft, he got 3 players with potential 18 yo and already good skilled
Team Y that has bad draft, my team, no one drafted should see a parquet cause they never have seen a basketball before.

The team X can earn 6 millions or/and can increase a lot the merchandising revenue thanks to them, team Y will receive zero $ from them. Due to the fact that the economy in BB is important and above all due to the fact that the draft has inside a good percentage of random, do you think to change it?

I should agree the weaker can pick the best player but in reality you can see very good players drafted by strong teams and human waste drafted by weaker teams (as happened in the last draft in my division). This is because few teams are investing money on it cause even paying 20k/week you can't be sure to pick the 2m dollar man ;)
The fact that you are pretty happy is not good at all

1) this is really a question of game play versus realism, if we didn't rescout the crappy players, I dont think those scouting attempts could go to better players.. i mean they could, but it would change the dynamic of the gameplay and the tradeoff about investing in scouting etc... essentially makes scouting cheaper and more valuable... and those choices are important for a gameplay perspective so we can't just go after the realistic thing straight away.

2) I think we could consider adding in things like this if we looked at everything and thought the most valuable players were not realy getting to the worst teams, or the teams that invested more in scouting reliably. I'm not SURE this is happening at the moment... certainly it CAN happen, but it does happen in real life too in some respects.... but its a question of how often it should happen.

3) Again I think we should take a look at what happens to these 3rd rounders over the long term, if 95% of them end up fired in the first season of being drafted, I would agree... but if some teams are making smart uses of training these people a little bit and selling them for a profit, that's a strategy i'd rather let continue to flurish rather than removing the round.. and certaintly making the initial players better would be a major game play choice, and I think we are happy with the current spectrum of player abilities in the game.

About 1)

What about an extention like this:

The current scouting system remains the default option. This means that the scout focuses on an economic scouting, ie that he tries to visit the drafts so that he does not create huge travelling costs.
The new, alternative option is to allow the scout to scout players without the need to minimize travel expenses. Therefore the scout may take the private plane to scout a draftee even if he needs to travel across the entire country. Of course this will cause massively higher costs.

Or, keep the draft as it is, but generate players pre season and give us weekly reports. The process would remain the same, but we get a feeling throughout the season on whats going on. I think this would probably lead to more team putting money in the draft. Kinda like putting money in the lottery, you never win, but it's exciting nevertheless. One more reason to log into BB, one more feature to get us hooked ;)

like the idea, still think height range needs to be introduced though. even if its very vague.

iii) there are exceptions. My $42k sal, 22yr old HoF pot guard was pick 47 in his draft and my utility back up forward has a TPE of 330k to 500k, having picked up bits and pieces of training over the seasons - he was my pick, number 44 in the draft that season.

Last edited by Elmacca at 9/20/2009 1:25:45 PM

I like the draft as it is now. But i would make one small move, like in the NBA every team in the league they are already well informed has great information about most of the "lottery" players to be picked and they are usually locked, the rest of the teams they do the most of the scouting.

So i would suggest that in every team draft report (even without scouting) the 5 or 6 best players would come full mentioned, they would probably fall to the teams with worst record of course. this would lead in my opinion to the need of teams with good records to invest in scounting to find some good pearl.

Ask yourself: Is the number one of the draft the best scouted player?
If the answer is NO, something is wrong and it has to be fixed. I think the answer is no, you can see a player choosen number 45 of the draft and he´s better than number 1 or 2. That isn´t a perfect draft system.