BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Midseason News: Exciting things to come

Midseason News: Exciting things to come

Set priority
Show messages by
From: Foto

This Post:
22
282669.73 in reply to 282669.70
Date: 12/7/2016 12:49:28 PM
Totwart
ACBB
Overall Posts Rated:
31503150
Second Team:
Furabolos
Guards with 20 IS and 38yo who have dropped several skills during the season.
I would have expected a salary far below 50k with the old formula.
If you find a guard with 33 or less years and 20 IS who has less salary than last season, then I will agree with you that something went wrong.

From: Lemonshine

To: Foto
This Post:
11
282669.74 in reply to 282669.73
Date: 12/7/2016 5:29:34 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
Guards with 20 IS and 38yo who have dropped several skills during the season.
I would have expected a salary far below 50k with the old formula.
If you find a guard with 33 or less years and 20 IS who has less salary than last season, then I will agree with you that something went wrong.
The problem could be that Chaperon is in the SF formula and not in the guard formula right now (which means the changes to the guard formulas are not big enough to return him to a guard formula), but if someone thinks that a 126 TSP player should have a sub 50k salary then we have bigger issues.

I hope you or Marin can clarify what is the extent of the changes and what's the final goal in the new season News.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 12/7/2016 5:45:47 PM

From: Foto

This Post:
00
282669.75 in reply to 282669.74
Date: 12/7/2016 6:02:57 PM
Totwart
ACBB
Overall Posts Rated:
31503150
Second Team:
Furabolos
I really think I'm missing something here. Chaperon's salary is higher than it should have been with the old formula, and that's what was intended. He has not enough passing and not enough jump range to change his position from SF (from my point of view)
On the other hand, when the changes were announced, it was clearly said that it was not going to be dramatic and that most teams won't even noticed it so I'm not sure what you have expected.
In fact there were several complaints talking about how this measure would kill some teams and destroy their long plan terms...

if someone thinks that a 126 TSP player should have a sub 50k salary then we have bigger issues.


Well, you have some examples in the transfer market where you can see that last season there were players like that and that now they have a not dramatic salary increase (I'm assuming that they were not trained with 32 years, though)

From: Lemonshine

To: Foto
This Post:
00
282669.76 in reply to 282669.75
Date: 12/7/2016 6:11:02 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
it was clearly said that it was not going to be dramatic
That's true, but if it's small for most players, one would expect it to be noticeable on a 'guard' with 20 IS.

Buzzer-manager has the estimate for that skillset at $ 60 298, so I'd think nothing's changed for this player.



Last edited by Lemonshine at 12/7/2016 6:12:00 PM

From: Foto

This Post:
00
282669.77 in reply to 282669.76
Date: 12/7/2016 6:38:43 PM
Totwart
ACBB
Overall Posts Rated:
31503150
Second Team:
Furabolos
Buzzer-manager is just a tool that not always is right (although it's accurate most of the times)
I've assure you that the salary of Chaperon would have been below 50k. And anyway as I've said, you have examples in the transfer list including players which have not dropped or trained, so they are easier to compare.

From: Robard

To: Foto
This Post:
00
282669.79 in reply to 282669.77
Date: 12/8/2016 3:17:05 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
301301
The intend of the change was (if i got that right) to reduce the competitive advantage of LI teams in terms of salary (LI guards had low salary compared to outside guards).
What i see now is that LI guards might have indeed become slightly more expensive, however, LI big men (high IS, low guard skills) have dropped in salary while teams with balanced players have seen a rise across the board.

Summary: The salary advantage for specialist LI teams was increased instead of decreased compared to more flexible, high TSP teams.

From: Foto

This Post:
22
282669.80 in reply to 282669.79
Date: 12/8/2016 5:02:22 AM
Totwart
ACBB
Overall Posts Rated:
31503150
Second Team:
Furabolos
Well, my conclussions are not really the same as yours.
What I see is that guards who were inside trained have a higher salary now, and that PFs an Cs with skills trained to defend outside tactics have a higher salary now.
I don't think this is helping LI dominance.

From: Robard

To: Foto
This Post:
00
282669.81 in reply to 282669.80
Date: 12/8/2016 5:55:22 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
301301
The change was not supposed to help LI dominance.
My point was that non-Li teams were hit just as hard, maybe even harder by the change than LI teams.
In my team for example, all players had a rise in salary unless they had skill drops while i see some comparable LI teams that had no such rise.

This Post:
00
282669.82 in reply to 282669.81
Date: 12/8/2016 10:52:25 AM
Superhelden
III.3
Overall Posts Rated:
191191
Second Team:
TV Harheim
well... looking at my team I don't see major changes.
Davidson (133 TSP, IS 12, PG) - salary is 125k instead of 120k*
Tallec (129 TSP, IS 14, SF) - salary is 80k instead od 74k*

So I guess the change was only minor - which I approve a lot. Training High TSP players is challenging, so it should not be punished by drastic rising salaries for these players.

* buzzer-manager prediction

Last edited by Superheld at 12/8/2016 10:53:00 AM

This Post:
11
282669.83 in reply to 282669.82
Date: 12/8/2016 11:52:45 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
301301
Indeed the change was minor, biggest rise i had was 7k (without training).
The point here is that the primary reason for the raise was to balance the salary for LI guards which it did to some effect.
To prevent a big fuss they kept it small (could be more from my point of view) and somewhat lowered the salary for pure A-skill builds. They also increased the cost of things like PA for C which in turn leads to the result that a team with 2 LI guards and 2 Li bigs (high IS, low secondaries) saw a total drop in salary because the raise for guards was outweighted by the decrease for the bigs, while teams build for e.g. motion saw a raise for all players.

Punishing high TSP player training by lowering the value of such players (higher salary) while decreasing LI team salary was not exactly what the announced no matter how minor the change was.

Advertisement