BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > 3.1 million - BB Record Transfer???

3.1 million - BB Record Transfer???

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
18508.19 in reply to 18508.18
Date: 3/6/2008 6:19:26 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
And why is it such a shocking trade? if 2.5mil goes between each teams they were a like for like and therefore essentially 0$ was spent. Which is also why the prices weren't adjusted.

This Post:
00
18508.20 in reply to 18508.19
Date: 3/6/2008 7:03:51 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
196196
ok, well this debate is about the new record transfer and so we will just have to agree to disagree.

at the time the top players were changing hands for 1-1.2mil and so those transfers DID look out of place. The trade price was set that high to scare off other bidders from scuppering the trade.

a lot more water has passed under the bridge since then but its amazing how you can still defend the price vs what was out there at the time in the market.

it is irrelevant what stats the players have now.. if they are the same as the guy just gone then now they could be worth the 2.5mil they sold for back then... which if so just proves they weren't worth it previously.

This Post:
00
18508.22 in reply to 18508.20
Date: 3/6/2008 9:02:47 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
6666
it is irrelevant what stats the players have now.. if they are the same as the guy just gone then now they could be worth the 2.5mil they sold for back then... which if so just proves they weren't worth it previously.


I don't really understand this, but oh well. Strauss and Anderson were both starters on the US National Team, and were amongst the best in the entire game at the time.



Anyway, on Pera, it should be noted that Zerebus probably would have only paid 2.35mil - but I bid the price up to 3.1 to make him pay more.

Friends Do not Let Friends Play 2-3 Zone
This Post:
00
18508.23 in reply to 18508.20
Date: 3/6/2008 9:23:50 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1919
What exactly are you against regarding their trade? That the players both went for 2.5M instead of a lower amount? Would there be any difference if they switched teams for 1.5M each?

From: LA-André

This Post:
00
18508.24 in reply to 18508.23
Date: 3/6/2008 10:00:59 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
22
other people could bid on them in that case

which still wouldnt be much of a difference, considering they would both bid until nobody else could or wouldnt anyway...

Last edited by LA-André at 3/6/2008 10:01:20 PM

From: dhoff

This Post:
00
18508.25 in reply to 18508.24
Date: 3/6/2008 10:16:10 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1919
No fair, you made my argument for me. :P

I figure that if the players are of equivalent skill, then there's nothing wrong with them being "traded" for any value. The higher the price, the more each team loses to agent fees, anyway.

This Post:
00
18508.26 in reply to 18508.25
Date: 3/6/2008 11:05:05 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
196196
No fair, you made my argument for me. :P

I figure that if the players are of equivalent skill, then there's nothing wrong with them being "traded" for any value. The higher the price, the more each team loses to agent fees, anyway.



the point is that the transfers were at inflated prices.... at least now you are coming round to the fact this was the case....

then the next point is - is it within the paramaters of the game/transfer rules to trade?

if it is then anyone trading is likely to only be able to do this at inflated prices to ensure that only the 2 teams involved actually do end up with the desired swap.

if they are doing this surely this constitutes as cheating.

WARNING: It is against BuzzerBeater rules to bid above market rates on a player.


of course they are defending their position a being fair as they obviously dont want to incriminate themselves!!!

what about the neutrals...

if everyone paired off and only traded their stars at $4-5mil plus then how would the teams with cash (but no friend to trade) get away with bidding the amounts without someone accusing them of cheating....

there would just be a void in the market unless you had a friend to deal with / i guess we are now going down the same route as mutual TIE and is this fair/reasonable.

Last edited by Superfly Guy at 3/6/2008 11:08:08 PM

This Post:
00
18508.27 in reply to 18508.26
Date: 3/6/2008 11:33:14 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
303303
One last clarification on the "trade" before we steer this conversation back to the original topic (or to one of those little padlocks):

We look at each sale as it's own transaction.

If either one was considered overpriced enough to warrant an adjustment, and adjustment would be made, regardless of the circumstances.

We felt that there was no adjustment necessary.

Now, let's get back to the original topic.

NO ONE at this table ordered a rum & Coke
Charles: Penn has some good people
A CT? Really?
Any two will do
Any three for me
Any four will score
Any five are live
This Post:
00
18508.28 in reply to 18508.27
Date: 3/6/2008 11:46:58 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
196196
then the only conclusion that i can reach is that the algorythms are set way beyond and that now DT's have nothing to worry about buying FA on weds and then doubling their value to sell at the weekends for those that cant log on as frequently during the week.

I also conclude that you are advocating the notion of 'trading' and that this is likely to become a more common method of acquiring players in the future.

dont worry - thats the last from me on this subject. it is the 2nd thread i've aired this point only to be either ignored or now told to keep quiet.

i get the message....

This Post:
00
18508.29 in reply to 18508.26
Date: 3/7/2008 12:07:17 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
1919
he point is that the transfers were at inflated prices.... at least now you are coming round to the fact this was the case....
Would you complain about this if both players went for $1.5M? If so, why? If not, please explain to me how any single player in this game would be affected in any way by the players moving for a different price.
if it is then anyone trading is likely to only be able to do this at inflated prices to ensure that only the 2 teams involved actually do end up with the desired swap.
Again, how does this adversely affect anyone? If there was a single player who was sold for an inflated price, then the seller gets an unfair advantage. But here, that simply isn't the case.
if everyone paired off and only traded their stars at $4-5mil plus then how would the teams with cash (but no friend to trade) get away with bidding the amounts without someone accusing them of cheating....
Can you come up with a realistic scenario?

Advertisement