BuzzerBeater Forums

Is there a reason that the on-court best players should be on the best teams?

The more real to life a sim is the more I enjoy it.

The majority of people I try to recruit to BB choose not to play because of its separation from reality, (not real life players, real life teams, etc) and these are people that like to play fantasy leagues to real sports.

The biggest issues for people that are new to BB, from my experience, is other features of the game that are separated from reality. Some of the more fantasy based features of the game improve gameplay (fewer, shorter injuries), others don't, such as the best on-court players bouncing around the TL and bankrupting team.

Somethings most of us live with because we're already hooked. For me, this not a big issue, but it's not ideal and I live with it because of all the other great aspects of the game.



Last edited by brian at 10/21/2010 8:18:13 PM

Some of the more fantasy based features of the game improve gameplay (fewer, shorter injuries), others don't, such as the best on-court players bouncing around the TL and bankrupting team.

Capping their salary and letting top teams maintain any players they want is more brutal to new teams chances of success than anything else.

Not sure that's what I was advocating and I havent read every post in the this thread. If there's a way that salaries and income could be paired in a fair way to all teams so that the best on-court players were valued as so then I'd be all for it.

Who said any of this? Is Bronson one-dimensional? He went on sale recently at 300k salary: no one who's any good can really afford his salary. Is Bronson poorly trained? Is Wozz stupid in playing him for the NT?

I think you're fighting a straw man. No one wants the best performers all on one team on the court at one time. The hope is to make the best performers desirable, so that every top team could afford maybe one of them (notice: this is how actual professional sports work).

Are you actually saying that a 800k salary cap team can not afford 300k salary player. What you guys are rooting for is keeping them and not to have to downgrade any other spot. You can even maintain a 500k player you just need to tradeoff strenght from other positions. There is nothing wrong if people opt for having equally strong players at every spot instead of having 2-3 "the best players" and the rest of the team is full on scrubs. As BB's have showed BB players have evolved to be better than their RL counterparts. The actual reason why we can't have Miami Heat type teams here is because "the best players" do not negotiate salarys. You can only change that if you want to completely overhaul this game. Presumably making this game worse.

Are you actually saying that a 800k salary cap team can not afford 300k salary player.

I dunno, i added one 220k center last season, pushing payroll to 900k and have been drowning ever since.

A 300k gaurd makes it very difficult to field a competitive team. 500k left and still no big men? Not easy to pull off. You have to be count on the finals money but that's not certain in the most competitive leagues.

What you guys are rooting for is keeping them and not to have to downgrade any other spot.

Not really saying that at all. If all the players salaries are pushed down some (particularly big men) it would be for all players, not just the few at the top so the D1 teams can gobble them all up. You'd still have to buy these now salary affordable, yet awesome on-court, players that would be very popular on the TL.

In the NBBA teams are making less then 100k/week on average, which gets used for all but 2 finalists to cover the lack of attendance revenue in the 2 offseason weeks.

To me the player pyramid is just missing the top .01% of the best on-court players, that have priced themselves out of usefulness. "I'm sorry Dwight Howard, your high levels of inside skills have priced you out of the market, you're just too poorly trained to be afforded in BB".

"I'm sorry Dwight Howard, your high levels of inside skills have priced you out of the market, you're just too poorly trained to be afforded in BB".

That will be a thing of the past in 5 seasons when you've stockpiled enough cash to go absolutely bananas on your USA rivals :D

Why'd you pick out those 2 quotes from Coco, but ignore this and not repsond:

Now onto the reason why the best performers should be available.

1) better integration between NT and club teams.
2) as a corollary to 1), much less pressure to create farm teams.
3) higher realism (see Brian's point).
4) actual incentive to make use of the higher potentials (no affordable player with HOF potential really needs to be HOF).
5) less incentive to play the horrible divine trick (buy a high potential players for a cup final)

What are the reasons they shouldn't be available?

I'd love to be convinced here. For real, I have no agenda as the current setup really isnt hurting me.

I think we're both taking notes from jbmcrock

I think we're both taking notes from jbmcrock :)

But his is a final explosion...we are building the base to do the same but still have some crumbs left afterwards!