BuzzerBeater Forums

Nope.

I realize it's tempting to have a team of 5-6-7 mega top level players at affordable salaries.

However in reality, at the top level - NBA, how have the most successful teams been put together? At most they have had 3 top level players (GSW with Curry, Clay and Durant, Miami with LeBron, Bosh & D Wade etc). This is easily transferable to BB. You can have a team made up of three 250k+ salary players together with some good support (150-200k salary) but you cannot/should not be able to have a team made up of five/six 250-300k salary players + role players.

BB economy is fine as it is.

On the other note - I do agree that the SF formula is by far the cheapest and some adjustments there might be considered but this has to be thread very lightly as it is a very serious matter. All in all, imo there are much more pressing issues than this.

A partial solution could be introducing a max salary @275-300k. Players will be able to improve their skills past it without becoming more expensive. This will ameliorate the disparity between SF and other salary formulas, at least at the top level, and allow us to build monsters at a reasonably affordable salary.

Last edited by mink0ff at 03/21/2022 06:37:54

The bb economy is far from perfect but what you are asking is simply ridiculous. Let me remind you that there are also 12000 users who play the game. People should stop suggesting changes just because it suits them . I play the game since season 11 and top managers always nagging and bit**ing about things they dont like or how they think the game should be. Short rosters destroyed the game. There was a time when BB had 3x the users it has now. Its not always the BB's or the GE's fault

Well said!!!

Finally, no team should be able to afford 5 (real) elite players so it's logical that it's not sustainable. The only problem here are teams tanking for seasons only to be able to lose $500k per week for that big BBB run.

A BBB run? , Not only BBB but also BBM, the guy I played two seasons ago in the Tier 3 of the BBM had a 1.3 million $ roster. Now I think it will get only worse with people trying to tank for BBM glory.

I think a salary cap fixes it. Say the cap 1 million, no matter how long you tank, you can still only have a 1 million $.

With your example of 1M$ salary cap, having just one player like Xiaozhuo gives you only 700k left for 4 starters, 2/3 competitive bench players and 3/4 other bench players.

Please tell me how you do that. With other starters (including power forward and center) at only ±100k salary ?

I'm not saying that against the salary cap, because I've rooted for this idea for a long time, but the 1M$ mark is quite telling considering it's really hard to make weekly benefits with higher total salary.

So my point is, you can't build a strong team around a 300k$ player without having (high) weekly debts... Which is why, I think, the salary formula could be reviewed. Otherwise, such profiles as Xiaozhuo become irrelevant for most of the teams that didn't tank before.

And of course we should add a salary cap. Maybe something like 1,8 times the salary floor, which would give around 1M2 for first divisions.
It gives room for teams that have huge economy to spend it, it also allows teams to recruit to compensate injuries, but most of all it will lead to a fairer competition in B3, BBM and also in each division.

Last edited by slamdunk9 at 03/22/2022 10:51:01

without agreeing or disagreeing with the topic (well, I disagree with a hard cap for a number of reasons I won't expand on in this reply), I do think currently it is feasible to build a strong 1M salary team with a 300k player - with myself being a prime example.

While not tested in B3, I'm currently competitive in both a strong top league as well as BBM tier 1 with ~950k salary, all the while with my top player at 285k - and yes, I ran a deep 9 roster squad, so it's not like the cap is forcing me to a short roster either.

as any other builds, a top heavy builds needs quite a bit of planning to be successful, but it is still feasible at the moment