BuzzerBeater Forums

ok so 300 equalling 300 is extreme but that is how a lot of people are feeling now with a ton of 4k plus per week players coming up for general consumption.

does the doubling apply to stamina and free throw as well??

so in a 14 week cycle how many pops would you hope for on an 18yo?

ok so does that therefore not go against other posts written saying you need to have more balanced players??

or am i answering my own question when i say the next year you train him up in 3 other skills??!!

Its good that BB saw the potential problem of Div 1 teams just holding on to their money and its implications down the line. In hindsight, I think it would have been better to just release older players from the botified teams. As it stands now, top teams just gobbled up the 18 year old studs that should set them up for future success and the continued benefit of Div 1 revenue. If we only released players above say 25 years old. They'd still be very good players but not with very great potential for improvement. It would create the talent gap but not make it grow exponentially as each season goes.

Like in any league, there are two approaches, win now (Boston) or go young and play for the future (Seattle). The release of the 18 year old superstars at a time when the top teams had tons of money stashed away is like doing the draft lottery for the teams that made the playoffs and leave the weaker teams fighting for scraps.

Again the intention might have been correct but the side effect has turned off a lot of users. But the cat is out of the bag, what else can we do..

they are talking about inflation over in HT like no tomorrow...here is the complete opposite..

A curiousity is that if you read the first post in this thread, it was complaining about all the FA that only the top division teams could afford - because the thread started before the 2nd week of releases.

just to repeat myself:

BB makes a change for good in long term: GOOD!!!

My team profited form this ( my team is better than our NT team now), even though I must trow the players I had for sale with the trash, I still can sell the players I had on my active roster. Still I feel it is not such a good thing a team can fire all his benched players, sell the actives, and ransom a whole new superteam. So even though my team improved 250%, I'm not to happy.

What my point was: keep the change, but make it less drastic. Lower the amount of released players. This way average players still are worth something, and teams with few or no money can still get some from their players... (and I'm NOT talking for my own team here)

Maybe now that so many players get released because so many teams quit, and maybe later on this effect will slow down. Why can't BB then not just for the first few months make the release wage 6000 or so. If later on fewer teams quit, and therefor fewer good free agents come on the market, they can still lower the cap again.
I read the players with wages over 4500 got released to the market, but in fact I saw many that where just over 4000.
An other means of lowering the amount of released players, and still with good prospective to speeding up having good players in the game is that only players aging 18 or 19 and maybe 20 get released. This is also a way of preventing marketflooding of free agents...

I just try to come up with something that doesn't kill the idea of BB (which obviously was good), and that doesn't hurt the game too much.

I also think it is interesting for the BBs to see how the mangers feel about their moves. Only that way they can make changes for the good. As one BB said, when an equal amount of managers pull in both directions at the same time, the change was very good.

Let me also add that this thread certaintly had impact in our discussions surrounding the wave of bots that were about to hit the market and convinced us that we should raise the threshold of released players given the level of saturation at the middle tier of players.

I just wanted to let everybody know we definitely read what's written and consider it carefully. We appreciate the input, and I have not been responding simply because I think it would interfere with the debate.

So did I...
*lol*

No, seriosuly, sounds good what you two are saying.

The threshold appears to correspond to about the top 5% of players. This is a quite reasonable level of talent to consider elite and not simply discard. But at present the top levels of talent are quite compressed, and a player with a salary only a few $100 less might only be in the top 20%.

What is unusual is that at present that a bot team that never trained can have such an elite player. The other unusual aspect is that such a large number of teams are being eliminated causing all the players to be released. Eventually, it will be that new teams won't have an elite player unless they buy him, and the number of release players will drop.

Since you are now moving players off the teams that are being botified, it would seem possible to change the release pattern. While there will be a short term glut of teams becoming bots, this will subside.

In the USA, the number of players that would have been released over the next few weeks was decreasing. Most of the teams that started last season and began training players and then quit are gone. It was these teams that had gone through a salary update after some training that were producing most of the interesting USA FA. The teams that had signed up, set the lineup for one game, and left for the most part weren't given elite players.

You might also consider the current talent level of players in deciding which players to release. Some of the FA had been getting training and had even popped
the week they were being sold, while others had never played a game. You could simply calculate a putative salary before deciding whether a player became a FA. With an increased threshold, this would tend to make FA of players that had received training, and not players who had simply been given to a team.

So something like this:

1a) Team becomes bot. Players are sent to the recycling center and new players are given to the team now in receivership.

1b) Bot team assigned new owner. Players are sent to the recycling center and new players are given to the new club.

1c) Players are fired and sent to the recycling center.

2a) Elite players in the recycling center can be made FA. This need not be immediate nor coincident with (1) and could take into account market saturation. Release could also occur through the week(s), and with deadlines that better match online presence.

2b) Most other players in the recycling center could be assigned to new clubs. They could either be given new identities (names and nationality) or could keep their individual identity, including playing history.

2c) Dregs could be removed from the game. Age could be a factor in selections, since this would be the main mechanism by which draftees replace veterans in the talent pool.

This would maintain the current talent level of players, which would gradually rise through training. It would also mean that new owners would gradually get better players, reducing somewhat the headstart of current owners.