BuzzerBeater Forums

So if, instead, anyone would be trainable at any position each week, that just means that training will no longer be a choice or a cost-benefit decision, just a default "everyone does it" option. It will significantly slow down the erosion that causes higher level teams to eventually have to come back to the pack, and basically the richest teams will buy the best trainees and be able to custom-build the best new players while still competing full-bore with the best current players.

The main reasons teams sell the best trainees is because 1) they bring in lots of cash which is necessary to compete in the overheated transfer market and 2) because it takes years to fully train a player and they may not be competitive while doing so.

More likely what would happen if all teams from D.I down to D.IV would prioritize training under this suggestion is:

1) Most teams would spend the full $40k per week on scouting because now it's easier to train.
2) With more players being trained, more teams would spend on Level 5+ trainers to maximize training speed.
3) Teams would spend on acquiring better or retaining existing higher salary players since they could now train players without sacrificing competitiveness.
4) Team salaries would eventually be higher as teams carry a starting lineup and a trainee lineup.

All of those would take more money out of the game and, eventually, might even eliminate the need for the luxury tax. Tanking might even decrease since teams could now train players without sacrificing competitiveness.

I can safely predict that the odds of teams investing 40k/week in scouting the draft as a result of this proposal is approximately zero. The draft is a whole different beast and certainly something that could also use some sprucing up, but as it stands there's no reason to invest much money into it.

I also don't think that tanking is generally done specifically because people want to be able to train. At some point in the erosion process, a team reaches a point where continued progress isn't sustainable and then it makes sense to do a refresh of the team's roster. I hit that a few seasons back, and so I guess for a couple of seasons I was technically a dirty tanker myself. Most of the time, the tanking option is taken for people who don't feel like they can compete at a higher level without a financial advantage, which is an opinion that often is self fulfilling.

Hi

What is happened? Why loss this match?

(89470088)

He played with more effort at home. Beyond that there are probably more reasons but those two are big ones that can cause big changes in the score.

a: wrong topic ;) you want this one: http://www.buzzerbeater.com/community/forum/read.aspx?thread=251520&m=278

b: it seems he can defend on the inside and you cant score on the outside...playing patient = you didnt really have a place to get good shots (and he's a better rebounding team than you) so fewer possessions + more misses + less off rebs gained plus the reasons given above = loss.

I agree with many of you guys but the main reason that led to prices going out of control is that there are too many teams which are "tanking" for years (not seasons) and have 10-15-20M. They are not very active but when they log in and see a good player, they can bid 5-10M for him and in many cases become bots shortly after. Yes, lack of players on market is one problem but thousands of teams with such budgets is the main reason.

When I read the announcement of the Hoarding Tax I was pretty excited about it but I expected it to be on lesser amount of money (i. e. 10M) which would lead to very high prices in the next couple of season until everyone spends his/her money in order not to lose it and that would be the decision.

BBs might not want to mess up with the economy but nowadays prices are the reason hundreds of manager stop playing the game. If the BBs want that to continue then their current position is OK. You can't enforce someone to play the game the way you want (train players). It takes years to train a good player/s and many people just don't want to do that but 3 years ago yu were able to buy an average player for 500K and now you can't find such player for less than 1-1.5M...

One very simple question, how many managers there were in BB 3 years ago and how many are they now?

It is a fact, not the reason.

It is a fact that the number of people playing BB is decreasing but what are the reasons?

Of course main reason is that most people don't like this kind of games where things are happening slowly.

But as you said, for some time the number of managers is stable but still it decreases and the main reason is the way you have to play the game since few years.

Strong teams are strong and it is very difficult to compete with them and in order to build a strong team now you need at least 15M for players. To save this money you should tank a couple of years. And a couple of years doing nothing leads to that trend.

It is really difficult for new teams to develop in this environment and after a couple of months playing and realizing that they just stop playing.

My point is, if you want to make people train players - make training easier, don't make such market. I say again, this is the case where BBs don't want to lose more and more people.