BuzzerBeater Forums

Help - English > In Favor of Old Fogies

In Favor of Old Fogies (thread closed)

Set priority
Show messages by
From: w_alloy
This Post:
55
225889.1
Date: 8/29/2012 1:56:06 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
112112
When it comes to advising newer players on team building, it is far more common to see advocates of overall youth than experience. I think there is a lot of value in older players that some people overlook, and that most new players should seek to fill their rosters with players in the 29 to 32 age range outside of trainees. Here are some reasons I like older players.

Opportunity Cost
With older players you get a lot more immediate bang for your buck. You will often pay double or more buying a 24 year old compared to the same build at 32. For newer players especially this is crucial. The extra money you save could go in to your stadium setting you up for the future, or it could go in to buying an extra player which will allow you to promote, allowing you to make more cash next season.

Depreciation as a Percent of Value
Age doesn't matter, only depreciation (drops in value) matter. If age didn't cause depreciation it would be totally irrelevant. Players depreciate throughout their careers, very fast at the start (due to potential training), slowing down to a steady pace through middle age, and then at an accelerating rate as they approach and begin decline. These drops in value are closely linked to the value of the player, i.e. a player might decrease in value 20% in their 32nd year and 10% in their 23rd year (without training). But because the same build is worth far less at 32 than at 23, even though the older player might be depreciating twice as fast as the younger player as a percent of value, in real terms (what actually matters, i.e. how much depreciation is costing you for the performance you are getting) often times the older player will depreciate at a similar rate to the young player, or at least close enough that other advantages will make up for it.

Deflation is a B*tch
This game has seen a significant overall drop in prices on the transfer list over time. The more players who leave the game, the more cheap players get put on the market, and the more depressed prices get. If you make a large investment in a million dollar 25 yo SF, and then market prices gradually drop across the board, in one year you might be able to buy a similar 25 yo SF for just 600k. Deflation affects older players less than younger players because less of their value depends on market prices in future seasons, and because deflation typically happens as a percentage of net value.

Experience and Affordable Build Efficiency
Higher experience means that players just before decline on average play better per dollar of salary than any other age group. Experience does have a noticeable effect. Combine this with the fact that older players are cheaper and you can usually buy older players who play much better per unit of salary than if you bought younger players.

Imagine this scenario: a team is looking for a new PF, if he wants a 30k/week player who plays like he's a 25k/week player he can pay 300k for a 25 yo or 150k for a 32 yo. If he wants a 20k/week player who plays like he's a 25k/week player he can pay 650k for a 25 yo or 350k for a 32 yo. In this scenario the older more expensive player will often be better because the more efficient build at a young age uses too much cash (maybe you wanted to spend it on your stadium, dont have it, or could better use it to replace your SG) and buying the older player will save you ~120k over a season in lower salary because of his build efficiency, making up for the potential extra depreciation.

Of course this flies out the window once the skills start dropping, which is why a)33+ players are most efficient to start the season b)30-32 are the "golden years" as far as value for money goes and c) although the rock bottom prices of 33+ players can make them worthwhile in certain situations, one should be careful with these players.

Last edited by w_alloy at 8/29/2012 1:59:55 AM

From: w_alloy

This Post:
00
225889.2 in reply to 225889.1
Date: 8/29/2012 2:00:13 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
112112
tl;dr

This Post:
33
225889.3 in reply to 225889.1
Date: 8/29/2012 4:06:48 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
952952
I agree with all of your statement and want to add that new players often get caught in "get old for cheap" mantra. They often promote with only 30+ players and average trainees that may or may not train at all, only to find themselves demoting next season or the one after because their roster is worth less with each week passing and they can't lean on youngsters becasue they don't have them or they've been poorly trained.

The biggest mistake here I see is Arena not being expanded enough or at all. Sometimes it's better to wait one more season in lower league while expanding Arena and training players, thus being fully prepared to survive after promotion.

This Post:
00
225889.4 in reply to 225889.3
Date: 8/29/2012 5:02:18 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
112112
I agree with all of your statement and want to add that new players often get caught in "get old for cheap" mantra. They often promote with only 30+ players and average trainees that may or may not train at all, only to find themselves demoting next season or the one after because their roster is worth less with each week passing and they can't lean on youngsters becasue they don't have them or they've been poorly trained.

The biggest mistake here I see is Arena not being expanded enough or at all. Sometimes it's better to wait one more season in lower league while expanding Arena and training players, thus being fully prepared to survive after promotion.


Good points, I agree.

The whole reason to go old is saving money so that you can buy more efficient builds and build up your stadium while competing. There are a number of newer players who make poor choices which have nothing to do with player age like buying bad builds, not investing in stadium, keeping salary too high, not training well, etc. If you are making bad choices it will lead to ruin faster with older players because you will be paying higher depreciation costs (as a percent of value) and the failure will be more visible. These people give old fogies a bad name.

This Post:
00
225889.5 in reply to 225889.3
Date: 8/29/2012 5:05:23 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
126126
I agree with all of your statement and want to add that new players often get caught in "get old for cheap" mantra. They often promote with only 30+ players and average trainees that may or may not train at all, only to find themselves demoting next season or the one after because their roster is worth less with each week passing and they can't lean on youngsters becasue they don't have them or they've been poorly trained.

The biggest mistake here I see is Arena not being expanded enough or at all. Sometimes it's better to wait one more season in lower league while expanding Arena and training players, thus being fully prepared to survive after promotion.


I didn't promote, granted I rid myself of my "old fogies" right before playoffs for younger guys that would last for longer at the next level. Not promoting hurt at first, but then I looked the bright side, could get another year of training on my guards, and build my arena more, and be better prepared for D.IV, I'd rather promote, and win more than I lose, than promotoe and either fight off relegation, or worse, bankruptcy from no attendance revenue after awhile.

This Post:
11
225889.6 in reply to 225889.4
Date: 8/29/2012 5:05:36 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
952952
"while competing" is a loose term though...If your goal is to just stay in the league and build the arena, then attacking the first or second place is a waste of money because you're not promoting anyway. The best way to go is assembling a team that can win at least one game a week, and that's an away game, to maximize attendance for your home games.

This Post:
00
225889.8 in reply to 225889.7
Date: 8/29/2012 5:05:26 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
112112
I appreciate the response and debate, but I think you are overstating my depreciation while understating my income, to a very large degree.

I am making 115k per week not including the cup, and my team as it stands is easily good enough to stay in d3. 115k times 12 weeks is ~1.4 mil. I also have 400k cash and should make at least decent money off training this season. So let's assume I take a 200k loss on my two 33+ players (which I think is pessimistic), I sell my younger trainee and keep my rotation one, and I'm able to make a similar cup run to last year. This would put me at ~2.7 mil in cash next season. It should be a bit lower because my fan support will dip some, and I'll need to buy a player to stay in the cup, but it will still be more than the value of my entire current roster... and I will be retaining 6 good rotation players.

And keep in mind I'm a 3rd year manager who has spent an average of 700k+ on his stadium each season. Of course it's going to be difficult to have a roster that is worth much at this point. People said the same things about my totally different but still old rosters when I was in D5 and D4.

Last edited by w_alloy at 8/29/2012 5:18:18 PM

This Post:
11
225889.10 in reply to 225889.9
Date: 8/29/2012 7:17:09 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
112112
how much you spend on staff


Just 12k/week, see more on my thoughts about staff here: (221642.1)

if this works for you, meaning it gets you to div2, I would have to put it down to smart moves on your behalf, and i noticed your arena is growing at a solid rate which of course is helping.


Well nobody is getting to D2 without some smart moves. Although I think going old is an important part of my strategy I believe there are other parts that would be hard for most managers to emulate, which is why I didn't mention my own team in my OP. And I'm in no rush to get to D2.

I still don't think this would work for 95% of players, as one bad purchase can cripple your team


Which is more crippling, overpaying 20% for a 600k 24yo SG or overpaying 20% for a 300k 32yo SG? In the latter case the mistake costs half as much and you still have more cash to work with. Also if you buy a build that just doesn't work on your team, you are gonna lose less cash flipping him cause the transfer fee will be cheaper.

its not uncommon for a noob to over spend in their first few weeks of the game


Definitely true. These players also have a tendency to buy older players. But over spending and buying old players are two totally separate topics. Just because people who make the former mistake like to do the latter does not mean it has any impact on what is good strategy.

Will be interesting to see what you get for Tyberiusz Zelek, i assume you expected to lose money on him, but got him in order to win your playoffs anyway


Yup, but it turned out I didn't need him at all as my closest playoff game was 34 points. In hindsight it was a pretty big mistake considering how much I will probably lose on him. But it's not all bad, right now he is a very sold D3 player with an efficient build and I don't mind carrying him until I can find someone to overpay for him. I'm just praying his skills don't drop too much in the mean time.

Last edited by w_alloy at 8/29/2012 7:17:37 PM