BuzzerBeater Forums

This suggestion is an enhancement of a suggestion brought by "Coach Regan" who wrote:

Maybe each division can have an optional 'D-league' equivilent? Players only under 21. Players can be on your normal division roster as well as D-league roster.....

I agree with the D-League concept, and wish to define how do I see it.
Here is my concept for this idea.

1) A player that his playing at D-League cannot play "simultaneously" (on the same period) at the regular league.

2) "The period" - A player who joins the D-League is joining this league on a weekly manner.
Meaning - each week his owner can decide whether he wants him back to his roster or not

3) There is no meaning for games and minutes playing under the D-League.
Each player there will get training time, and there is no need for to have games there.

4) The training under D-League will be (much?) slower than training when playing on the "regular" leagues.

5) Users who send players for this D-league will pay for this "service".
This will be payed in addition to the payroll for that player.

6) Should the training be upon user request or just random? I'm not sure.
It may be more interesting (the range of player's abilities in the game will be wider) if it will be random.

Last edited by Pini פיני at 12/8/2011 5:03:21 PM

Really? An alternative league where you can pay to send your players for slow, random training??? What a great idea...

What is the aim of this suggestion? If the games do not even matter why do you play the games; or if you don't have the games at all then what sort of league is this?

I suppose the idea (or the implication?) is to firstly reduce the importance of game shape management, and secondly to increase the amount of training done in the game. I however don't really understand the game-design point/aim here, given your description of the concept.

This would also heavily increase the work for the servers so the delays would become worse.

he want top teams have young trainees, since a game fails if you train 22-24 year olds instead of 18 year old. Thats why we should buy d-league places, to put in 18yo who train slow, and probadly loose value through the slow speed and the cost they make. But hey top teams training 18yo again, the world is wonderfull.

But hey top teams training 18yo again, the world is wonderfull.

Well, even that is questionable since the top teams would probably rather train 21-yo players.

is the worry that top teams cant train players from 18 (and remain competitive in cup and tournament), and also maybe that there arent good enough (affordable enough) 21 year old + coming through that the top teams would want to buy and train?

Im not sure this idea would help to change these dynamics.

Something that would help is being there for new managers and encouraging them to train up 18 year olds well. The bigger the supply of well trained 18 -21 year olds that come through the more that will be available for the top teams at affordable prices to train onwards...

Something that would help is being there for new managers and encouraging them to train up 18 year olds well. The bigger the supply of well trained 18 -21 year olds that come through the more that will be available for the top teams at affordable prices to train onwards...

is that really a problem, today?

And with slow training speed and random training which cost money, it won't make much sense anyway cause the gain in value through training isn't that big even today, and with bigger supply and not optional training i doubt you would make a econoically good decision.

The idea is that like on the actual D-League, where the games practicaly does not interest anyone, so is this league.
Hence, there is no meaning of actualy playing.

It has nothing to do with GS management.
As I wrote on a specific week a player could not play on both leagues (or be sold).
In addition, it could be define that one more drawback will be that the GS when returning to the "real" league will be only (and always) "Average" (for example).

Regarding the Training issue you've brought;
Yes, it is (almost) exactly that.
In most cases, the drafted players are just does not worth the hustle of real-training at their team (again - exactly like in the NBA). But, the players are still may be observed as future prospect fot that team, but only if he could be trained.
This suggestion makes the draft a little bit more something that worth investing at. Especially at higher leagues.

Regarding a server issue who had been brought here (by someone else).
Are you realy sure you can tell how much will it cost in server time? I doubt that.
Are you realy sure that the BB-masters will not prefer adding this (or any other feature) that may be worth paying more for better servers? You don't and cannot know.
Any "Real" feature will cost in performance, should we close all this "Suggestions" forum? No we don't.