BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Civil conversation about FA changes

Civil conversation about FA changes

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
270968.10 in reply to 270968.7
Date: 6/14/2015 4:50:10 AM
Manila Bombers
PPL
Overall Posts Rated:
216216
Oops, you're right. The amount of trainable players actually increased. It should be the number of trainable players did not increase as much as Lemonshine hoped it would.

This Post:
00
270968.11 in reply to 270968.7
Date: 6/14/2015 10:40:44 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
370370
1. Marin reduced the amount of trainable players

There has been no such reduction.


QUOTE from Marin: "1. The FA reduction is intentional." So not only DID he reduce the FA's, it was intentional.

The good thing with FA is that it can be altered every season. If Marin see or is convinced by logical arguments that there should be more FA, he can expand the net and saves more players. FA net has been changed in the past, to be bigger or smaller.

The change has barely happened and already we are talking about reversing it.

This Post:
22
270968.13 in reply to 270968.12
Date: 6/14/2015 12:35:59 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
55315531
Some seasons ago the scouting options for the draft was improved. Now the importance of the draft is improved. Seems to be a good idea.

This Post:
66
270968.17 in reply to 270968.15
Date: 6/14/2015 3:05:01 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
55315531
50% of the players managers like you regard as trash aren't trash. They may not be the next LeBron James for 1st league teams. But you can make valuable players for 3rd and 4th league out of players with star potential, e.g. this player has 94 TSP and those aren't just JS/DR/HN: (33315212) Imagine what you can do with Allstars and even higher potential players.

This Post:
00
270968.18 in reply to 270968.5
Date: 6/14/2015 5:18:22 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
3. That is a reasonable strategy. However, I've seen teams win it through other means. Another strategy is spending cash immediately on older players and hope they can carry the team to a championship. I've seen teams do both strategies and be successful.
I think they want to prevent exactly that. They want to make it unlikely that someone may have enough money from saving to buy the finished product directly without training.

4. Try to post in the suggestion forums on how to improve training. Maybe you can help.
There have been endless discussions about how to make training more appealing, including from the person who opened this thread and from several GMs. I liked very much the ideas of those who wanted to focus the efforts and changes on lower potential trainees. The threads are still there. Maybe we can all go and revisit those threads. :)



This Post:
11
270968.19 in reply to 270968.10
Date: 6/14/2015 6:00:22 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
Not really. Unless you haven't followed the conversation, 54 TSP HoF 18yo are not going to free agency. Therefore I ask you and Perpete, exactly what we're talking about? Yes 10 is more than 0, but unfortunately 10 is fewer than 200 or 500. I can show you precisely how many hundreds of players who were trainable actually retired (and they would not have retired last season), can you show me how many 18-20yo have been saved from retirement so far?

I'm getting tired of people coming out with this nonsense. I was challenged to check and I did. I can do the math, can you guys? Do we want to finally put all the chips on the table and argue with numbers instead of claiming silly vague statements? The only person who has seen a 18yo free agent is hrudey.

Start counting and contact me when you reach 200.

This Post:
00
270968.20 in reply to 270968.12
Date: 6/14/2015 6:33:00 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
Here is the full paragraph, two lines:
"There has been no such reduction. The FA changes does allow more 18/20 y old to become FA than before which was 0. I don't know how much, maybe not enough, but more."
So if the requirement for FA is 55+TSP for HoF exactly how many do you think are going to make it? Now compare this number to those who made it before and don't make it anymore now. I think we should do a nice little count, so we can determine who is right and who isn't. Do you agree?

The change has barely happened and already we are talking about reversing it.
We are talking about having a coherent and logical idea for the future of this game, which possibly does not involve just destroying and limiting features, but improving them instead.

Besides the general consensus seemed to be that prices were high enough, maybe too high given. Maybe we should make a poll and see if that's still the case.

Advertisement