BuzzerBeater Forums

Newton, I have a guard like this.. and it says - "Transfer Price Estimate: Very few players like José Refugio Carreón have been transferred recently."

He's not even that good. (yet)
Jump Shot: strong Jump Range: respectable
Outside Def.: strong Handling: mediocre
Driving: average Passing: mediocre
(he's also 18 so I guess that makes him more valuable)

So yea, they are really rare. It is one of the reasons why I chose to train guards, much easier to buy your inside players.

I would have a really hard time paying a million for this player.

If your player had a high potential level, I might not think twice in paying 1 million (depending on his other skills).

the problem right now is, though we have this market value estimate from previous sales, there has top be a way to help new guys understand a game, there was this one time i was looking for a 3 rd stringer backup and i found a 31 year old. i wasnt expecting him to even reach 150k that time im thinking 100k would be too much for this guy. then suddenly from out of nowhere there is this one guy who paid 250k for that guy!

shock as i was, i bbmail him and try to explain his actions could hurt him in the long run for his team and he answered that his sorry he doesnt know his just new and he needed help in his lineup!

well...

there are 2 types of players here in BB. 1 type realy dislikes 30yr old players and older, the other type pays more intrest in performance on the court.
It is obvious the first group wouldn't want to spen 100k on an old chap, while they other group look more at the value of a player based on it's performance.

When I started out I had a 32 yr old in my team, and he was my best player. Actually I can say he won me my championship my first full season when he was 33. Now this season I sold the guy at 35 for 99k, and at the moment he was worth more, based on his statistics. I used him as starter in all cup games this season until I sold him, and he never let me down. Based on that he made me more then 100k in those games he played.

Ofcourse nobody should buy a 30 yr old for a trainingposition, but then, you shouldn't buy any player older then 23 either...
So any player who is 25 up to 28 is sold for more money then a 30 yr old, why? I don't rely know, because they won't train too well, and if their skills are equal they're not likely to play better either...

If you buy a 31 yr old for 250k he will have decent skills. If you use him for 5 years, which is very possible, it's just 50k a year, while he can win you games where a younger (read 26 yr old or so) for the same money can not!! Winning games means extra money, and far more then 50k each season.

I might be one of the rare managers here in BB, but to me a 26 yr old isn't any better then a 31 yr old, so if I need a player for a position I do not want to train, I will more likely buy a 30 yr old, because you get a player who is a LOT better for the same money as when I'd buy a 24 or 26 yr old!
For a position which is to be trained I prefer to buy no older then 21...

You are so right... I train guards and I have 19, 19, 20, 20 years old trainees... but for the other positions, like C or PF, I prefer more experienced guys, so on my rooster you'll find guys in their 30ies... and they are good on the court, and also they have high exp. level

I think it's weird that over the course of last season prices have gone sky-high. This shouldn't be a game of who is best at training and selling, its name suggests a match orriented game, where battles are fought on-court, not in auctions.

Really hope BB can manage to contain the market, the game is starting to lose its interest...

true true!

actually his skill level probably good for him since he was of the lower leagues!

i was thinking a thrid stringer who dont needs training!

make sense actually!

I completely agree with you, Shaq. We are starting to see the same type of thing that happens in HT. People only care about hyper training a small set of skills and then overcharging. From what I can see, this is the best way to get ahead because I have a very balanced team with no monster salaries but all my starters with 8-12 skills of respectable or better. When I play a team with even one guy with a huge salary I get pummeled. I still enjoy playing but not being able to compete because I don't train a single position and work the TL is disappointing.

Erm, you seriously think you can compete with guys with respectable skills? Players get "born" with respectable skills, so if you mean to say that your squad of virtually untrained players is getting creamed by teams that have actually trained their players, yes, that sounds logical. But by virtue of the fact that players here need more than 1 skill (but not every single skill, and not even 8 skills) to be effective at their position, what you're suggesting is slightly ridiculous. What I can guarantee you though is that a team of players with several balanced prolific skills will beat almost any team of players that have 1 marvelous skill.

Last edited by GM-kozlodoev at 7/13/2008 1:01:40 AM

First of all, my name is not erm. Secondly, what I wrote was that all of my starters have at least 8 skills that are at least respectable. My pg has 2 prominent, 3 strong, 1 wondrous,4 respectable, 1 average and 1 atrocious (shotblocking). My SG and SF are similar- my SF has 3 prominent and 3 strong. My C has 1 prolific, 3 strong, and 5 respectable. That is what I mean. I assumed, falsely, that having a team of guys who do everything well but nothing spectacularly would be able to compete. I was wrong. What I don't need is you assuming some condescending attitude in response to my post, thanks.

First of all, my name is not erm. Secondly, what I wrote was that all of my starters have at least 8 skills that are at least respectable. My pg has 2 prominent, 3 strong, 1 wondrous,4 respectable, 1 average and 1 atrocious (shotblocking). My SG and SF are similar- my SF has 3 prominent and 3 strong. My C has 1 prolific, 3 strong, and 5 respectable. That is what I mean. I assumed, falsely, that having a team of guys who do everything well but nothing spectacularly would be able to compete. I was wrong. What I don't need is you assuming some condescending attitude in response to my post, thanks.

Your PG and C are not balanced. They are distinctly one-skill monsters with a single one of their attributes far ahead of the others.

A basketball team has 5 positions, which obviously need different skills sets to be efficient. So obviously fielding 5 players that are very similar in that they are jack of all trades but master of none is suboptimal.

On the other hand, the other extreme where you have 1 major skill and everything else lagging behind significantly is likewise suboptimal, so I wouldn't be surprised if you get routinely whacked by better constructed teams that seem to be of your caliber.

edit: Oh yes, and the other reason why your players might not work as you expect is that skills often work in conjunction with each other -- e.g. IS and DR or JS and JR. So if one skill is lacking, another might not function as well as you might expect.

Last edited by GM-kozlodoev at 7/13/2008 2:35:05 AM