BuzzerBeater Forums

I would prefer if 19 year olds could have skills that are up to strong
That way it would actually be worth getting a 19 year old, and it adds some more strategy to the game as you have to choose between 18 year olds and 19 year olds. At the moment no one would pick a 19 year old over an 18 year old with the same rating.

Yeah,in the actual situation there are very few players that can be really good in the draft,because also the better 19 years old suck
We need to increase the overall level of the draft,without create young super monster

Last edited by Steve Karenn at 9/4/2010 1:37:06 PM

There is a logic that if you see a five ball, five ball potential 19 year old, you'd draft him over a five ball, three ball 18 year old - because he will be the better player once potential is reached.

This doesn't bear in mind that players like to training draftees to a certain age then sell them on while they are still trainable. But training for market value is only one strategy. Training to keep is also a viable strategy and the best potential 19 year olds are worth drafting. Players are still trainable aged 26, if you are keeping them.

i would love to see something implemented to make 19 year olds more appealing or simply stronger players but i still think that 18 year olds should have a higher value when it comes to training.

That's a huge change and that would be a long discussion (I think this may have been discussed already?). Such change has some merit and some problems. Anyway, I have understood the BB's don't want to create useless players so this probably won't happen. Even now many drafted players are almost instantly fired.

BB wouldn't have to create useless players, it could be made so that the players that aren't drafted simply don't get created.
So the draft is a list of info, and then at the draft this info gets translated in to a player(not sure if this is how they do it now).
Basically what I am saying is that the players that are not drafted can simply be deleted from the system as if they never existed.
Having extra players would allow the skill level of 19 year olds to be higher, but also doesn't gaurantee that you get a great draft pick, and hence doesn't just give everyone better draftees. But it still means that if a great 19 year old is scouted then even a team with the first pick would consider choosing the player.

Having extra players would allow the skill level of 19 year olds to be higher, but also doesn't gaurantee that you get a great draft pick, and hence doesn't just give everyone better draftees. But it still means that if a great 19 year old is scouted then even a team with the first pick would consider choosing the player.

This again increases the randomness of the draft (if we assume everything stays the same). Or we would need to have much more draft information available for each team, most of which would be about useless players no one will want to draft. That would either force everyone to spend more on the draft (more money going out of the game) or we would need to give all teams a lot of free scouting points. So, the draft basically becomes more random or we give everyone better draftees.

I think we don't need extra players in the draft,we need more useful players that caome from the draft
At the time,the only 19yo that you could think to draft are the five balls in skills and five balls in potential....maybe one player per draft,but the 19yo are the half of the players,so in the 48 players we ave in the draft,only for the age,the half are yet useless.

If it is not the best, it is automaticly useless?

i think there are already enough usefull players in the draft, and i believe if you make the draft class better there won't be more player in your eyes who are considered good enough to train, i believe you will look at even higher ambitions who you train.

Each team needs about 12 players, while the average drafted and trained player will have a career of, say, about 12 seasons. These are not exact numbers, but sufficient approximations to understand the supply and demand. So, you need one fresh face each season to maintain your team where it is now (in terms of age). Therefore about two thirds of an average draft class will be useless whichever way you look at it, regardless of their skill level (assuming some sort of maturity in the system, which we are probably only now beginning to reach).

Of course, there is a second source of player supply in the system: new teams. Making the draft stronger only takes money/resources from the new teams and puts it in the pockets of existing teams. I'm not saying we are at the optimal balance right now, but I don't think it's necessarily a bad balance either. I would be interested in seeing how large a portion of the draft class ends up fired at each division level.

I understand everybody wants something useful from the draft. I thing the last truly great guys (two of them) I drafted are from season 3 and the last really useful player is from season 4. There have been 2-3 players I have been able to sell after that. That's a long drought and I feel the pain of anyone who has had a few weak seasons -- or is still waiting for their first good draft. But simply improving the quality of the draftees is a short-term solution, which should be avoided.

Last edited by GM-WallyOop at 9/5/2010 6:56:10 AM

If it is not the best, it is automaticly useless?

19 years players with the same skills of a decent(not the best) 18 years old and with medium/low potential are not useful for me,because they have less value on the market of a 18 years old,have a slower growth(1 year more),and I can find player with the same skills and with 18 years old with cheap price on the market

Age: 19
Height: 6'1" / 185 cm
Potential: star

Jump Shot: mediocre Jump Range: average
Outside Def.: average Handling: awful
Driving: respectable Passing: average
Inside Shot: awful Inside Def.: average
Rebounding: inept Shot Blocking: inept
Stamina: awful Free Throw: strong

Experience: atrocious

This player would be a decent trainee,but if I can find a player younger,with the same skills and with an all star potential for 100-200k,considering that I have to spend 10k/week for 14 weeks in the draft to see him(140k in a season),I will not have any value from the draft if this player is my first pick.And I have to consider if this player worth to lose so much time on training to have a player who can be useful maybe only for a medium III division,or if buying a player for low price I can have a better player to have in my team or to sell with an higher value




Last edited by Steve Karenn at 9/5/2010 7:06:37 AM

Well if you consider to train the players for selling them right away, it is like that. In advance are players with great potential (above superstar) even more expensive on the market if you are training them well.

However consider this. Once you choose to train your draft for yourself, because you like to get more merchandising revenue, you dont need even superstar (well it depends on what you want to do), because better potential he has, more salary he demands.

I think it is only matter of priorities you have.