BuzzerBeater Forums

Rather than bumping a thread with just bump. Please post something that helps find a solution. I fel that this is a large issue that needs some attention from the community as well as the BB's, but adding input is far better than adding "BUMP".

All I would ask of everyone is to help in suggesting a possible solution rather than just shouting "fix it".

I see a few issues that could potentially cause major issues. If suddenly the big men have a salary reduction down to a reasonable level, their transfer value could go way up. This obviously would create some unfair transfer and cause issues unless there was a notice previous to the actual salary drop. For example today you can buy a 400k/week big man for around 1 million. If his salary were to drop to say 200k in the off season this player now becomes alot more valuble and could sell for roughly 2.5-3. bviously that is an unfar advantage that should be avoided. The way to do that is by communicating with us what is going to happen in advance of it actually happening.

Last edited by Mod-beanerz at 3/16/2011 12:52:23 PM

I think the only way to implement this effectively is alter the potential system so that tri-skilled/poorly trained big men cap out earlier. However, I don't agree this would be progress, it would just be dumbing down future player development.

Fact is, some players have developed dumbly and some managers want this dumb training rewarded instead of it being (correctly) punished economically. I still maintain my position that those playes 500k+ aren't the equivalent of NBA players, they are the equivalent of ten foot tall aliens from the planet Zog (where everyone can dunk and nobody has fun).

I also find it a bit rich that players who claim hiring salary monsters is ok because it's in the rules moan that when it's not in the rules, nothing's actually been fixed. Rubbish. I would like to see the B3 rule more widely implemented in national tournaments.

I'm not so sure the current playoff deadline needs changing.

465K/week player in V division


http://www.buzzerbeater.com/player/4726855/overview.aspx


don't ask me how...

Reducing the salaries of the behemoths all at once would create a landslide in favor of those who purchased these beasts and sold them at the new prices. However what if over the next few seasons, a salary cap was slowly implemented, only limiting the top paid players at first, and then slowly lowering until it gradually reached a reasonable level and allowed the tops teams to have the top players. This way there would be a max salary just like the NBA and we would be able to have the right teams keep the players they deserve. I know it would be a process but even if it took 3-5 seasons I really think it would be worth it.

I find it hilarious that so many people say that tweaking the salaries of the few big men on 300K + wages will change the balance of the game so much when the free agent tsunami has reduced the value of almost every player in the game by 2/3 and that is fine.

it is maybe not so biiiig, but the free agent tsumani as you called it had impact on all where this would favour few teams(for me it is more because of balanced economics, in the past days you easily earned 200k with a competive roster in div 1).

And yes maybe you could say that the FA tsumani hit some more and some less, but it acted pretty fair on the same quality level and it was a process where good managers could act, where a salary cap at least gives a instant boost to some speculants.

Yes the free agent tsunami had an impact on all, but not remotely evenly. Teams that had sold off lots of their players and had money were given a massive advantage. Teams that spent on players in season 11 or 12 were at a huge advantage with those players sometimes worth 20% of what they paid for them. The teams in the same leagues that just sat still in those seasons and saved or spent on their arena had a massive advantage. Many would argue that this was the direct cause of one of our ABBL winners being able to win the championship. If that isn't significant then I don't know what it.

it was a process where good managers could act

They can act on any process, however this one turned the whole BB econony upside down. It brutally punished anyone that was training bigs. It made all training of only moderate value. It really sucked the profits out of the lower leagues. Where everyone used to compete with $20,000 players and make a healthy profit, now anyone can afford multiple $60,000 players, and they do, but they aren't making any money and their teams are heading no-where.