Well, you make good points.
I think that "best" and "highest skills" are not the same thing. Nor are "best" and "highest salary". It's similar to a discussion I was having about the best managers in BB. I would guess that I know as much about real basketball as anyone on this site. That, and the fact that I live in Thailand, are the reasons that my team has done so well (despite the drubbing at the hands of the Arrows last night). But, just knowing a lot about basketball isn't enough to make you the best manager in BB. You also have to be a good planner, and TL-savvy. So I'm good at one, okay at another, and dreadful at the third.
The best players should have great skills, great potential, good hidden attributes, and have payable salaries. This game is not real life, and choices are the way to separate one manager from another.
Having said all that, I do agree that the salary structure could be better. But it is what it is and we have to learn to deal with that. At this point a radical redistribution of the salary system would have every manager on these forums whining and crying about their long-term goals being compromised by the BBs, including the ones who are clamoring for a salary restructuring. I suppose they could say in three seasons time we will be changing the salary calculations or something.
Lastly, and in this I agree with you completely, is that something needs to be done to minimize the ability for any team to purchase, for one game or one week, a $400k behemoth. I think this severely affects the integrity of the various competitions- highlighted by last year's B3 fiasco. My suggestion is to make a minimum bid for any player be set at two or three times their salary, and for the player to be paid a signing bonus of one week's salary. This would, of course, necessitate an increase in revenue but it would have a major effect on daytrading and behemoth swapping. TV revenue could be increased to offset the costs.
Once I scored a basket that still makes me laugh.