BuzzerBeater Forums

That shouldn't be too surprising. They do have the highest payroll in the league.

can i help it if i admire a team that is well put together? that team is stacked, with a couple of sleek guards out front that kept interfering with my passes and a well-rounded foundation that protected his basket very effectively -- i couldn't score last night!

i do think, however, when playing Delta, that penetration is the key, but to do that you have to have great stamina. otherwise, that team will just slap all your balls away and block your shots. a very frustrating team.

Spot on, Hassan! Jusd be glad you only have to face them once!

i was scouting Delta 9. went to my usual source, buzzermanager. went to the list of the league's best (top 20) players (by game ratings).

Delta 9 has 3 of the league's top six players, four of the top ten and six of the league's top 20 players.

one of those six is for sale, so by the end of the week Dmitri will only have one-fourth of the league's very best players.

Oh look, the team in first place and has a lot of wins has 6 players that combined make more than the league average...

*yawn*

Gosh, seems like this has happened before. You know, like every other season prior.

Did anyone else notice that the teams with the fewest wins have the lowest salaries?

Oh look, the team in first place and has a lot of wins has 6 players that combined make more than the league average...

*yawn*

Gosh, seems like this has happened before. You know, like every other season prior.

Did anyone else notice that the teams with the fewest wins have the lowest salaries?

I've been trying to figure out how to leverage this fact into a useful competitive strategy but it's simply too complex to be actionable.

Because I'm bored (and the NFL draft is making me anxious), here's how everyone's Utopian team is doing.

Arizona Desert Storm, 9-1 and 1st in his conference, 1st overall
10 Inch Vertical, 8-2 and 2nd in his conference, 3rd overall
EDH Wolves, 8-2 and 2nd in his conference, 4th overall
Beware of Dogs, 7-3 and 3rd in his conference, 3rd overall
Bullish Mentality, 7-3 and 3rd in his conference, 6th overall
Eugene Register Guard, 6-4 and 3rd in his conference, 7th overall
Dog River Riverdogs, 6-4 and 4th in his conference, 7th overall
Kentucky Wildcats, 4-6 and 4th in his conference, 7th overall
The King and I, 1-9, 8th in his conference, 15th overall (has a big game coming up for him to possible grab the #1 overall pick)

Promotion rules are from what I can tell. Both Finalists are guaranteed, and then it compares the conference rank and win/loss record of the teams who didn't make the Finals with the rest of Utopia. Highest conference rank and then the best win/loss record at that conference rank across Utopia promote.

So if none of us make the Finals, then you really need to be 1st or 2nd seed with a great win/loss.

I'm not winning my league, and the best conference rank I can reasonably attain is 2nd. I have a long road ahead of me for a shot at this hyper accelerated Utopian promotion.

the ultimate goal: to have your USA team and Utopia team play each other in the B3 finals!

the ultimate goal: to have your USA team and Utopia team play each other in the B3 finals!

Wake me up for the first inaugural BuzzerBeater's Most Meh. They'll call it the BM2, which fits because BMs are number 2.

alas, i reread the rules and only team in the B3 per owner. scrimmages are also forbidden -- how about Private Leagues?

Gosh, seems like this has happened before. You know, like every other season prior.

point taken.

part of my statement is amazement at how high the bar is set for the NBBA championship, and part of the reason for the statement is a (failed) attempt to start something on the board.

how 'bout this, sorta the dark side of Dmitri's success-to-date: when i started BB many seasons ago, it was my impression that there was a core of teams that were fixtures in the NBBA. we know the list: King Drive, Lake Merritt, Bruins, ChiTown, Burlington, Silverbacks -- the ones who populate the 100 Win club. now the turnover is making my head spin:
-- all those teams are gone.
-- teams i saw promote out of DII.3 are having troubles: Visionaries gone, Kentucky looks like they could be out after two seaons, TKI gasping for air (but very salvageable)
-- BM, 10inch and Jason are the only teams still here who were in the NBBA in season 24.

for a newbie, that is really ominous.

and now i'm catching on to why this is -- winning produces diminished rewards (no promotion bonus, but apparently solid attendance), but as Delta 9 shows, to win, one must stretch the budget. replacing players at this caliber is very expensive, and to cut corners, one has to buy older players, who of course have reduced or little market value after a certain age. training to replace players is of course an impossibility -- one simply doesn't have the luxury of time.

so as much as i admire Dmitri's squad, the ones i'm really coming to appreciate are those managers who have negotiated these treacherous waters for many seasons -- right now, AZ and Saul.

Here's my explanation of what you're seeing:

1) All those old "mainstays" started early, accumulated team value (sometimes in ways that could never be repeated again and were 'permanent advantage'), and then stayed at or near the top until they got bored and quit. KDB is gone, BMG seems pretty gone, ChiTown seemingly took like two years off, and that's not even listing some older "mainstays" that you left off like NTH_MLB_Giants and the BBs that used to play seriously.

2) Now that BB has reached an economic equilibrium (at least my impression is that money in ~= money out in larger BB nations), there's very little encouragement to play in a "steady" way, trying your hardest in every game. You'll never win anything of note because the boom&bust strategy is superior for that, and simply treading water is expensive enough that you'll likely stall out at mediocrity unless you're exploiting the TL. Tanking until you have enough money and then making a real run at whatever your goal is is still too attractive despite the series of changes made to discourage it. Silverbacks, LMA, FTF(?) and I are all doing this as far as I can tell, though with some variations to the approach.

It's a different BB world out there. You could still probably assemble a roster of solid young players, top off their training for salary efficiency, and be a new-age NBBA mainstay in the 3rd-6th place range, but why would you want to unless you're one of the rare people who takes pride in consistency and longevity?

-- Edited to add that I think the declining playerbase might have something to do with the turnover too. As you pointed out, it seems like the only way to fill out a roster is to buy aging veterans. Tons are out there (from quitting players and teams going bot?) so they're all cheap (and trying to buy youth on the TL nowadays is a seemingly hopeless endeavor). I think that only adds to the one-and-done mentality.

Last edited by Peluin at 5/8/2014 8:43:13 PM