BuzzerBeater Forums

First of all, great ideas about draft especially the scouting for cerrtain positions.

Pro: good idea to have better players in higher leagues, because it's a joke that 80% of the top draftees go to bot teams.
Con: you need good players in lower leagues as well as they are great way to raise your funds. Why support the top teams more? Also good draftees are good chance for lower league teams to get higher with training so they are a must.

D-League sounds interesting but as I see lots of teams have financial problems already. I have a big stadium, cheap team, U21 member player in the roster, level 5 manager and still only 50-90k plus a week. If I would have been paying 50k a week, it wouldn't be worth for me (and all this for a slower development!). And I stand pretty good in my league with financials comparing to others.
Also, paying 700k a season for slow development (even that is for 4 players)? What result can I expect? After a season I'll have 4 players who are not even close to sit on the bench. Let's say, I pay D-League for 4 season and I'll have four21 years old guy looking like well-trained 19 years old ones (maybe 12th man level). That costs 2.8M. Do you know what could I buy for that money? A whole bench.
The idea is not bad, but would cost too much.

Agreed.

Even though I am in Division I

* The higher you are in the league, the better players are available in the draft. The best young players will probably end up in the top-divisions, not the bottom onces.

This is unfair.

Yeah. If anything, more higher-skill, lower potential, older players would make sense for higher leagues, and more higher potential maybe lower-skilled younger guys in lower leagues. Though I think it's even better to just continue to have the draft be created with no intentional advantage toward any division or league, just equal parameters for all and let those who are lucky be lucky and those who aren't be unlucky.

The better guys should be drafted by lower league teams because they are in development.
Old teams who start in around season 5
who are still around have advantages in money so,
the new ones should have a advantage in draftees

the new ones should have a advantage in draftees

Agreed. But the problem is that now the best draftees go to bot teams (at least in my country).
So, more good draftees to lower teams and more good draftees to higher leagues as well. Thumbs up

Seriously, I would like to see drafts where bot teams don't get any draftees. No point because they won't train them, they won't sell them so they don't use them at all.

My country is a perfect example. We have 5 leagues and 758 active teams. It means that we have 1.301 teams, that means 3.903 draftees. With the 758 active teams , real users get 2.274 draftees, so 1.629 draftees go to bot teams. And as long as bot teams are always in lower leagues if the good draftees go to lower leagues it means bot teams will get the best young players. Our NT and U21 staff see every season the best draftees (good salary, best potentials) at bot teams and it is really annoying.


I can imagine a draft system like this:

1. Check how many active teams are in a country and generate the rookies (active teams*3)
2. Add skills like as it is happening now. No change needed.
3. Assign potentials to the draftees (randomly shared). I'm sure there is an algorithm or script or whatever it is called for doing this.
- 2% of them should be hall of famer/all time great
- 3% MVP
- 5% superstar
- 15% perennial allstar
- 20% allstar
- 20% star
- 15% starter
- 10% 6th man
- 10% role player/bench warmer
4. Randomly share the draftees between the leagues. Every league gets active teams*3 draftees. If it's a full league (higher leagues), they get 48 draftees. If there is a league with only 2 active teams and 14 bot teams they get only 6 draftees.

That's a minor change but would help a lot to not waste the best draftees by adding them to bot teams. Opinions?

Edit: other version is that bot teams put new draftees to transfer list (random time in the next 3 days to not have 10k players with their bid ending in the same hour) for the price of salary*10. The players who won't be bought can stay at bot teams.

Last edited by LA-Charlie50 at 1/22/2014 4:39:22 AM

Nice to get a little discussion going =)
I'm OK with equally good draftees no matter what division you are in. Your arguments are good enough.
Is there a maximum of 48 players presented in the draft? It could be

BOTS should draft the worst players in the draft, if any. To only have 6 draftees available in a draft in a division where there is only 2 active teams is... not good. The chance of a high-potential player ending up along these six players are microscopial.
If BOTS select the worst players, there is a better chance that new teams get potentially good players in the draft even if they don't invest too much in the draft the first year.

Yes that's a good way too, but in that case I would certainly be adding the idea that bot teams put their players to transfer list (no matter how bad they are) for the price of salary*10. The worthy players would be sold, the others can be kept by the bot teams.
Here's my point: If you randomly share draftees, there will be good draftees in leagues with only bot teams. Currently the draftees go to bot teams are lost players. They are neither trained, nor sold.

Also if there's a league with only 1-2 active teams they get as many good players as a whole 16-team league which is not fair either and that's why I proposed the other version (no draftees for bots). With that system the 2-team leagues members have exactly the same chance as any other 16-team league members. Count like this: there is a 16-team league and a 2-team leauge. So it's 48 draftees in both leagues, 50% of good draftees go to each league (let's say, there will be 4 good draftees altogether). It means that in the 2nd league, both teams will get 25% of the good draftees (2 of each teams), while in the first league it's only 3,125% chance per team (4 good draftees for 16 teams, so it's 0,25 players per team - most commonly 1 in every 4 teams).
Let's say, there will be 8 good draftees in the total 96 draftees. In this case the 2-team leage members get 3-3 good draftees and 2 good draftees go to bot teams (lost players), while in the 16-team leagues get 8 good draftees too, that's 1 good draftees in every second team.
In the other system (no bot darft) it means that there would be only 54 draftees based on active teams (18*3). 6 of them would go to the 2-team league (11,111% of all, which is 5,555% of the good draftees per team) and 48 goes to the 16-team league (88,888% of all, which is also 5,555% per team).

By the way, are the BBs and GMs reading these suggestion or should we write pm to them if we get a common point with our ideas? If they read it, it would be nice to see a feedback with their opinion about the different ideas.

Last edited by LA-Charlie50 at 1/22/2014 5:54:17 AM

I agree with many of your ideas. I think HOF/ATG should be rarer than 2%, as that means there would be almost one per draft on average in a full league, and that may be too many. Bots transferring draftees would be interesting too, but maybe for example we can specify that it's only bot teams in leagues with human owners - no need for the 16384 bot teams in USA VI to flood the market with three draftees each.

Okay, I just wrote numbers, as examples. Of course, the BBs should count what numbers will bring a good balance to the draft.
The idea about bot teams transferring players is because of the bot leagues. All players getting there are lost to the community. If bot teams take 40% of all draftees, it means that 40% of the draftees are lost. Anyway I still think that the "bots not drafting" thing would be perfect.