BuzzerBeater Forums

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.

Do you really think is a good idea to use the term "Tsunami" in this situation? I think that with the peolple suffering in Japan, start using and repeating this word for intrascendent things it is sensacionalistic and offensive for those people affected.

Edited: Now that I know the term was used before last weeks, I just think we sould change it for another one. Sorry for criticising without pairing atention to the dates of the messages. Sorry too if my language offended someone, it is not my native language and i find dificult to express myself polite.

Last edited by Gragamel at 3/18/2011 8:56:30 AM

They can act on any process, however this one turned the whole BB econony upside down.

this one lead to a switch, the suggested thing here turned the economy upside down because the value of the players will change instantly with the change - and not through the process that teams don't earn this massiv amounts of money anymore. When free agents was introduced, the prices didn't collapsed to 20% of it, they got slowly(or not so slowly but not instantly), which wasn't only the reason of the free agent as i said the raising salaries had a bigger impact because you haven't those astronomic income anymore if i pay now 1,5 mio i need more time to get the needed money then when i spent 5 Mio in the past days.

So your ABBL winner, make a strategic long term decision, which gave him an advantage about his opponents in the future which lead to his championship. Maybe you could discuss if this give up strategy to powerful, but this will need another thread because you could still earn 500k+ each week in the premier devision and this is a high quality player every 4 weeks.

I have been using that "offensive word" to describe this situation for the last two months since I started this thread. It wasn't offensive two months ago. I was in Japan last year and have visited 5 times now. I have great sympathy for the wonderful people of Japan and hope their suffering is a brief and painless as possible. However I reject your false "PC" attempt to censor my use of metaphores and limit my free speech.

I think were better of getting rid of those monsters that no one can afford. Then we dont have to have this discussion about having to lowering the salary on players that no team can afford except the NT's that dont have to pay their salary.
Whats wrong with having NT's with the best players that teams actually can afford?

This is not a solutions
First,because top teams can afford a 300-400k player if they believe can be more competitive than the others team.The fact that often you have to go with negative balance or lower the overall level of the roster if you want to have some kind of players,is what stop top teams(except for B3/cup or champiosnhip games) to have these players
Second,because the economic questions the teams all over the world have to afford are not only about the top players,but on daily management of the teams,the lack of a graduality of the prices among the players of different level hurts much more than the top player problem

Last edited by Steve Karenn at 3/18/2011 11:37:10 AM

I don't think that fire some existent players is really a good idea
I think that really it should be given the possibility to build good teams around these kind of moster player,so we could finally discover what kind of tactic is really winning.But this thing it should not be made in a way that gives everyone money indiscriminately,or cut the salaries of some player more than the other players(I don't like for example that in the last seasons the cut were higher in percentage for higher salaries players)