BuzzerBeater Forums

All salaries rise by 10 or 15% or whatever it was that they decided.

Pretty crazy with players like this: (4752399)

Logically speaking this isn't the time or even the right season to buy players, anyone who does will have to be willing to overpay. I think it might take a couple of seasons till prices adjust to more equilibrium levels. But then again, if you want short term success then here's your chance with less competition in the market.

I think it might take a couple of seasons till prices adjust to more equilibrium levels.

I do not believe this. Given that there will be salary updates every season from now into infinity, I would say that the market is now harder to predict than ever. Plus this season there will be more supply on the transfer market, as teams figure out how much salary they can afford under the new regime.

I would say 80-125K will be the optimum range for training vs the return on your investment, provided the player is multi-skilled. If the player is young and still has potential to improve, even better.

But how many of those players can you fit on a roster without losing money?

Is your goal to stay in division II or to get to division I? If it is to stay in division II, I agree with your rationale. However, to get to division I and stay there, you need to have AT LEAST 3 players in the 80K-125K range.

Also, people always seem to talk about the weekly profit here but forget that you can train to make profits. So if your goal is to make it to division I and stick, you should stash about 5-10 million this season, while picking up enough player salaries for next season to win your series (even if that means losing money on a weekly basis). Then you should have a plan to train a couple of players to 80-125K in salary, then pick up another 1-2 when you promote.

Finally, when I talk about players with 80-125K in salary making the most profit, I am not talking about players with no side skills. I mean, for example, a SG who can handle and pass the ball with a good amount of stamina and free throws.

If you really want to make money in this game, staying in division II should not be an option.

Last edited by HeadPaperPusher at 3/23/2010 1:51:21 PM

I know they have almost the same salary - my point was if the wage calculation differed this 'may' encourage more thoughtful training.

If you knew you could build up a triple stupendous big man and it would cost you $325k a week without secondaries but you knew he would cost you $225k with reasonable secondaries 1) You could tailor your training / economy to budget for this + you could look at any investment as viable for the long term rather than looking upon someone as a 'quick fix' to win you a couple of games knowing that you would likely have to sell the player in question on shortly after.

The level of salaries you're talking about,will affect few team that could afford these kind of players
And at the level of medium wages,it would be however more convenient to train primary skills to improve a player
I don't see this as a proposal which can help to have a fairly based game,not only who is lucky at the draft will have players with better secondaries skills,but he will have also a lower salary to pay for him.
The new economic course is a disaster,I have an economical roster - 215k of player salaries in italian III division is enough only to fight for avoid the relegation,the top teams have to spend also 100k more to fight for the II division - and I will be tie in the incomes/expenses budget.What kind of system is that?A team who is build in a right economical way cannot made profit,only because the level of incomes is to low for the competition that it has to afford?
I think someone should think about it,if we think that this is the alternative solution to the question,mentioned many times,of the economy in competitive/non competitive countries(which often,but not always means big/small countries)

how can you NEED to have a salary of 215K to fight for relegation.. what do these other teams in your division have for revenue? is it dramatically above yours? it really shouldn't be if you are managing your team correctly... and so these other teams that are spending 100K more than you are I would argue doing something to better manage their teams... they trained better, they invested wisely in their arena, they managed ticket prices better... they kept their fans happy... did all the management right.. which allows them to spend 100K more and compete to move up.

They can't be operating in the red, they will go bankrupt.

OR maybe they aren't really spending that much more than you are, and they are just getting a better team for the same money?