BuzzerBeater Forums

I know nothing of relegation, but my fans survey can drop after a win, so go figure..

Because they have 500k salary doesn't necessarily mean they're "stupidly overtrained".


Last edited by JON at 3/11/2012 4:51:45 PM

Because they have 500k salary doesn't necessarily mean they're "stupidly overtrained".

Right. If the team that trained the player can afford a player like that in a roster of players of similar skill levels (and, therefore, salaries) and not bleed off money like a geyser, then sure, it can be a well-trained player. (Though, of course, I'd still be willing to bet that at least 80% of those guys are ones with either passing or handling no higher than inept). If the team that trained that player can't afford him, and no other team can afford them within the context of a non-farm team for any significant length of time, then they are absolutely stupidly overtrained.

Postman, the other thing I wonder is what your philosophy of the game and squad management is.

When I look at your roster, it seems you have a lot of players that are somewhat similar in level. Let's look at the guard position, which is the position I'm assuming you are training:
- you have your highest salary there, at 15k and 25 yo. Then you have a 26 yo backup with a salary of 11k and a 21 yo at 5.6k. There's not much decrease between your starter and the backup, and the 21 yo is not good for a 21 yo. So you can have a fundamentally OK starter + backup, which is great on paper, but they are both on the end of their training regimen given their age, and then a player who will never be a starter in D3 or higher as the prospect you are nurturing. What happens next year ? Your "star" will slow even more in terms of training, your backup is pretty much done at 27 for training, and you have that 21 yo fairly bad player that you will still be training and will still be incapable of playing at a higher level.

Look at my team (D3 in 3 years in France): I bought a 20 yo guard originally, which I think was better than your 21 yo is now to hold the starting spot in D5, then I trained 2 18 year old, one of which I sold, while the other one is starting to come into his own at 21 (14k salary). They're still weak for D3, but they are now 23 and 21. When I wanted to win my D4, I bought a 25 yo guard to be competitive while training at that position, who's now 27 and about to be shipped. By the end of next season, my three trainees will be OK for D3, I'm hoping I can sell one and replace him with a young prospect with high potential. By this time I'll still have a couple of years of training on the older 2, and start getting my draftee or investment into shape. I might sell one of the 23 yo, who will be 24 then, or maybe focus on JS and 1vs1 to be able to keep training all 3 with the draftee. It will naturally roll, with minimal investment, into what I hope can be a D2 backcourt towards the end of the training life.

But that's not the only problem:
- your trainees are some of the best players in your roster. Mine are the worst. They'll hopefully catch up, and then I will contend, but I based my entire squad on getting older players at inside position that would pull the team while the backcourt is just there to feed them the ball.
- you place too high an emphasis on playoffs. Who cares if you make the first round of the playoffs ? You should be in them to win it, meaning the first 2 rounds should be won by playing with low enthousiasm, and then you can compete in the finals. If you did not compete in the playoffs, you wouldn't pay a salary for that week and would probably end up making more money. Coming in 3rd or 4th seed is the worst position to be in, unless you know you can win the playoffs. You're much better off playing for the 5th position.

I don't really know what to tell you, there is a lot, but I think apart from the venue size, which has already been covered, you need to have a strategy for training: get one game ready guy, a 24-25 yo that you can still train, get a backup with half the wage and at least a couple of years younger, and your third trainee should be a very young player that you will get to the level you need eventually. The rest should fall in place when that happens. The smart money is on your trainees being the worst players of your starters, at least until you reach the next level.

There are many options you can go with. Study the other teams rosters' dynamics, try to commit to one strategy of roster building, and don't hesitate to dismantle your team if somehting is not clicking. Your first post does not show the right attitude, as you're basically blaming the game (a great game, if I may add) rather than examining what you're doing wrong. Surely in all those play off seasons you've come across a team that had the formula. Try to emulate it at first, and then make it your own.

Agree. My trainees are far from perfect but I also have a 21 year old ($19k salary and superstar potential) and a 23 year old ($37k salary and also superstar potential) who I am working on and who in a season or two should be solid starters. My old guys like Lawrance (26 135k), Sherwin (31 62k) and Sperbert (27 56k SF) have much higher salaries and have to do the heavy lifting while I nurture the younglings. I trained Kumar from a raw $3.5k 18 year old (he played his first ever game for me) and Barton from 20 (and now he Ranks #1 in AST / game in my league) so I feel very attached to them.

I'm not going to read every post but the team stats (and opponent stats) the OP is asking for exist in programs developed by BB players. For instance, buzzer-manager.com will give you that info. And stats for just your team are available in BB. Do a little research in the forums and you'll find this stuff.

Believing there's no gain from expanding your stadium is wrong thinking. I agree the attendance algorithms need some work as there is far too much variability, but if you want to get better over the long term, you have to have a stadium that gets you the revenue needed.

Not sure if anyone has said this already, I did not read it all. Just some bits I (think I) know:

Training:

Height matters, age matters, potential matters, current skills matter (soft cap against the potential right?), whether you are training 1, 2 or whole team in positions (doubt team, but hey) and probably more stuff I cannot think of.

Stadium and money:

I have never had any problem with money, always getting money each week. I joined mid season and didn't know what was going on, but the next season I destroyed my league not losing a single game, always filling out on my stadium, then when I progressed to the league above I upgraded my stadium and barely filled what my previous size was. I think this is down to fans general happiness? When I have won my last game, last tv game, and last rival game, I had 5 star (well, ball) total happiness. And I almost filled out on my stadium (apart from like 10 of the 2nd from top tier and 2 of the top tier seats). But when I lost a game, I was like 700 below my total. So I suppose how you are performing counts, so if you are just losing all the time, no such luck that you are going to get money.


One thing I think that should be put into the game. Although I am not sure if it is in already (haven't noticed it)

So far I believe that it is more beneficial with money if you are in the relegation zone to just get relegated, destroy the league below (and in doing so get mostly full stadiums) and then come back up with some bonus money from wining your league on top of stadium money, whereas if you stay up you wouldn't get any league winning money (unless somehow you won obviously) and if you were a mid table team, you would be losing a fair few game, and so not getting constant full stadiums.

So I think they should ad prize money if you come 2/3/4 and maybe even slight amounts of money for staying up in the relegation zone. But not entirely sure if they have this already? Or if they think stadium money is enough.


That is just my hypothesis, may be completely wrong, but I think it is not too bad