BuzzerBeater Forums

[quoteThe problem is that you´re only talkig about economy and not about its impact on the game. I repeat (again):

-Have you killed PF and C training? I think so, do you?

i don't actually know what you mean exactly by "killed" so i'm not sure how to answer the question

-Have you killed most of managers of III, IV,.... divisions? I think so, do you?

I don't know what you mean by killed again.... managers in those division have a certain level of income, they will have salaries comenserate with the level of income, and when they advance their incomes will go up and their salaries will go up... i fail to see how any salary structure, unless the mininum salaries are too expensive would "kill" any division.

The argument for killing would be that those teams are forever stuck in that division and cannot compete when they advance. What we have done over the last two seasons is make tv money a larger fraction of the revenue source, and reduced that amount that having preinvested in a large arena affects your revenue stream.. thereby making it easier for newly promoted teams to compete.. thereby not killing anybody.

-Have you shown the way to success is training PG-SG? I think so, do you?

i disagree with you, so do some other managers... though really i don't know the answer, i can design the game, but I don't konw the absolute best strategy, we have tried to design the game such that there is no one single dominate strategy. I can say that i see a lot of different training strategies out there... so you might be right that this is the best, but there are still plenty of people who disagree with you.

-Is now possible compete in a long-therm against people who train PG-SG and they have centers monoskill who only defend and get rebounds? No, it´s not. They save loads of money with those kind of monoskill centers and they can train full time PG-SG cause they can earn 200K and that fact won´t be a problem cause those players will have a top level.

this seems to be about the same question as above, so i won't repeat my answer. (that is not meant to be snarky.. i'm just trying to go through your points.

-Do you really think that salaries of both kind of players are really fair/equal? No, I don´t. Top PG-SG earn 200-250K, Top PF-C earn 500-600K.

Basically you are saying that the top big men are more skilled than the top PG and SG... so yes.. they are more expensive.. maybe you are right and because the top PG /SG are not as skilled right now, it makes more sense to train them. But as they get better maybe that will change... i dunno.. i kinda see the answers to these sorts of questions as one of the points of the game.

-Do you think most of managers will train the same things and use a kind of pattern? Yes, I do. Do you?

right now most do not train the same... if that changes i'm sure we will notice. (by most i mean more than 50%.. the are of course some strategies that are more popular than others)

It seems like you tried something but you got another huge thing you did not expect: the end of tactical and versatility spirit.

I don't agree with your assessment... if its true it will be born out and we will react and we will have been wrong.

They´re only questions, you could (and I´d be so pleased) answer.

Bye

Last edited by BB-Forrest at 3/23/2010 9:19:24 PM

First off, the answer to this question is very different in Spain and a smaller country in terms of how long it takes to reach division III and how strong the teams are that have made it there. We've stated many times that division III teams should be weaker than division II teams, etc. However, that's only half the battle - the second goal is that when a team promotes from III to II, they need to be given enough resources that they can stay in II and be competitive. What this means effectively is that teams at the top end cannot be allowed to save massive amounts of money - for a Division II team to stay in II, they need to be forced to spend almost all of their income (on some combination of players, staff, transfers, arenas, etc.) in order to be competitive. As long as this is true, then if a division II manager demotes to III they will have to sell off part of the team and will not simply dominate III. On the other hand, division III managers are competing in a zero-sum game; your comment reminds me of a bit of chess annotation I once saw where the commentator claimed "both sides stand worse". No, it's a zero-sum game! But if you're asking whether you can maintain a division II caliber team in division III? I hope not, because otherwise it's impossible to compete with a team that demotes.

This thing you comment it was happening since season 8. Teams arriving from II to my III was able to keep the same roster and maybe the first season they dindt promote, but the next yes(and i was asking myself how the hell is posible they keep the same roster?(Contract TV).
While the teams arriving from IV just the bests were able to compete(the level was close) and most of the teams they were demoting to IV again. And i was on the middle of the table that seasons(ive been) no promoting, but no demoting. I had to train young players and lot of primary skills to stay competitive, but now what?

TV contract was a big fail which helped in that direction you said, but now teams that always did the right things we are going to get frustrated. Yes, for the first time after 8 seasons on the game im going to go frustrated with the game, managers who keep taking right decisions are penalised again, and specially on Spain where on medium divisions theres a close level.

We will have to sell to be competitive(if not bankrupt coming soon) and we cant keep training because if not salarys are going over us and if you dont train really hard on a close div. III you are demoting to div IV.


So now we are going back, its good the BB's admitt the mistakes, but the new measures arrive late and they arrive on the wrong direction




PD: I was close to become supporter and i was thinking to be it, but im sorry im getting frustrated with the game and disappointed with the economy, i see i wont have a chance never, because on 2-3 seasons a new rule will come and i will get penalised again and again. And its the feeling we all have on Spain(specially medium divisions managers) we are really frustrated, even if we did de right things with a long strategy term.

I have a player(Center) that increase 3 principal skills and 1 second skills, and increase 130K of salary.
S11 salary 153K ... S12 salary 286K....i need a answer

i really don't follow your arguement.

You seem to say that the reason why teams that demoted were able to keep their rosters as they entered your division was because of TV contracts. That's can't be true because everyone in the league has the same TV contract. The real reason they were able to keep their contracts was maybe because they had saved large amounts of cash, and could afford to burn through cash assets for a season.. or maybe because they had better arenas. Two things we tried to advance. Also, maybe they got demoted because they had a roster which was not up to DII standards.. so their roster wasn't much better than the average DIII roster.

I have barely time to read and answer but a GM edited my original post where I compared to players who were on sale to understand better what I meant and the reason why at this point of the game PG-SG´s salaries are not equal to PF-C´s salaries.

Killed means "no more it gonna happens", English is no my mother tongue so maybe I´m aware it could sound weird or bad for you, sorry if it was in this way.

I´ll explain more things in a couple of hours,

regards

Last edited by Mr.Mac at 3/24/2010 3:10:48 AM

i understood exactly what you meant by saying "killed"
im new to this game this being my second season, i decided early to train bigs and already i can see that there is much more advantage of training gaurds.

personally i think the salary of bigs needs to drop a bit rather then go up even more.
either that or it needs to be made easier for training of balanced bigs.

It actually surprises me as a basketball fan to see this coming from a European fanbase, because most of the European forwards that come over to the NBA are effective because they're multidimensional. But yeah, you can take any player with enough potential, train them in too small of a set of skills, and bump their salary to 500k+. Just that most people seem to realize it's a bad idea with a guard but not with a forward.

.......
So you are bringing up the multiskill thing..but why "monoskilled" guards trainers don't have to pay that huge salary like center trainers do?not to mention that very few people train shotblocking which would raise the salary even more.
Also it is obvious that triple prodigious would perform better than "multiskilled" triple tremendous,so why there is so much talk going about those "mulltiskills"?Lets look at real life examples:Nowitzki(multiskill) would get destroyed by howard(monoskill) at inside,yeah howard would get burned from outside but in the end howard would win that matchup etc.there are more examples like that....Of course there are very few players who can be great inside and outside:Kevin Garnett,Rashard Lewis.....
P.S.I'm not against those multiskilled players,but they are overrated and you would still have to pay big salary if you want to have a really good one..

Last edited by Ref at 3/24/2010 4:24:04 AM

I have a player(Center) that increase 3 principal skills and 1 second skills, and increase 130K of salary.
S11 salary 153K ... S12 salary 286K....i need a answer

in this area one main skillup is close to 20k increase, this was too low because to few people use them thats why they raise it ;)

1) Which skills did you consider important, and what were you trying to create?

most important rebpounding, inside shot and depending on tactics insideshot.

Second category Passing and a "bit" handling.

Third category Jumpshot(especially as a PF, on C i think it is an advantage if he had it, but he use it pretty rare)

Fourth blocking, because to get it to the heigth where it might be usefull(1,5 of opponent insideshot, the salary is to big or should we forget about id then that those players actually shot the ball that he could use this skill)

2) Have you tried playing your big man at SF or a guard position on offense but C/PF on defense? Did it work?

It works, the main problem is that Sf is a tough defensiv position, where you need lot of OD - so you need a PF /C who could defend outside else you get punded from outside. So for the player himself it works good, he could create in offense and defend like before but you need a very strong SF to compensate his missing inside and still to able to defend on the other end. With guard it is easier to move to the three in my eyes, because creating an outside SF is a bit easier or at least more common(so it is more easy to buy him)

On Guard position i didn't try, because i tried to train my sf in inside skills - for training bigs the solution to play him on sf is pretty pintless because JS and driving is trainable on PF too. Handling three position is in my eyes weaker for handling training then one on one for two so maybe you get the possibility to train OD which isn't totally pointless but takes pretty long which didn't get better if you train three position(and good OD on guards helps a lot too, if you have weak centers there at least i am not scared with my OD 1 center on court)

3) If you started to train a more balanced big man, how did you use him tactically? Did it work?

my performs well as a PF, but he still needed high inside skills and ain't cheap, maybe with 10 skill less in blocking he would be better on orice/effort.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 3/24/2010 6:06:43 AM