BuzzerBeater Forums

I believe I wrote it somewhere, but I think that the easier way of defining a tanker will be the following:
Each week that the salaries total had been 10% (for example) below the average salaries (of that team) will be taxed (at the end of the year) by 1$ per 1$ difference (for example).

I totaly agree with you that the tanking issue should be handled much better than it currently does.

Many teams tank a full season,

Yes - and if they'll do that, they will be demoted. This is a fair punishment for that type of tanking.

also you can reduce your salarys without beeing worse* or get better in course of a season without forfeiting before but this will push the averages of that week below. Most teams who promote the last season, will increase their salarys in the first week in the season, and now they get fined for this week?

It just not important. They should do that at a defined time -the first two weeks for example, or suffer the consequences.
This cases are a good price for eliminating (or at least drastically narrowing) the tanking phenomenon.
Tanking is so widely seen that it is just MUST be handled.

and other teams who tank get demoted?

Teams that go bancrupt, get a money fine for the automated rescuing, which makes the rescuing a final killing etc.

and other teams who tank get demoted?

Your are saying that like they need to get a price or something...
Those who are tanking should be panished, or more precise pay a price for their behaviour.
If it had been done stupidly, they will pay more.
A good (real-BB) manager create a team at the start of the season and does not make to big changes afterwards.
It should be the same here.
Those who play hard all season should not suffer from those who tank most if it.

A good (real-BB) manager create a team at the start of the season and does not make to big changes afterwards.
It should be the same here.

So, basically you want a longer off-season?

and other teams who tank get demoted?

Your are saying that like they need to get a price or something...
Those who are tanking should be panished, or more precise pay a price for their behaviour.
If it had been done stupidly, they will pay more.
A good (real-BB) manager create a team at the start of the season and does not make to big changes afterwards.
It should be the same here.
Those who play hard all season should not suffer from those who tank most if it.

no i say that the punishment should be the same, if you say that teams who fight for compete get punished, teams who tank halfway get punished, teams who avoiid bancrupcy get punished ... But teams who punish the whole season, get nothing ... oh wait there demote, but if one of the cases above demote too, it isn't a punihshment then this is bad luck ..

And most teams who tank, do it cause they don't see the chanche to keep the league.

tanking is so easy to stop & the rule is already there & now the nba has it too

a salary floor

only problem is it is still too low

the nba is more like 80% of the salary cap & that is more like what it should be here i think around 2/3 of the league average in the previous season

example

my league has average salaries of $260k & floor of 120k

if it was 2/3 the salary floor would be more like 180k, not a massive difference from the current 120k but still enough to make it so that teams may as well have a competetive team on the floor & for 180k u would not have a winning team but u would have one that teams have to take seriously

would be the better solution, make the amount higher but relate it strictly to income ... Cause when it is combined with the TV and get bigger, newcomer in small countrys get trouble.

Disagree. It's possible to qualify to play-offs if you have salaries equal 60% of average salaries in league.
In Your example good managers will be punished only because they are able to build good team with low salaries.

A good (real-BB) manager create a team at the start of the season and does not make to big changes afterwards.
It should be the same here.

So, basically you want a longer off-season?

No. The schedule is as long as it is in the NBA (comparing to the all season period).
It may be a little more flexible rule - counting from the end of first week, but that is about it.
A big penalty needs to be set for those who save money by tanking the first part of the season.
This will be just one of the (many) criterias already exists on this game.

1) The income, and assets are different. This is not a fair definition.
For one team (the one who can pay much more than this 2/3 value) it will mean tanking until the end of the season and then push harder than anybody else.
For another team (a very poor one), it will mean use all their money from start, without investing at anything else (Arena for example).

2) This rule had not been set at the NBA for elimintating tanking.
The idea is to have a better level of competativenss, where the difference between the teams at the same league is limited (by the Cap-Floor's rules), and is being pushed forward for having better teams, by this rule.

3) Setting this rule upon a specific team's revenue is also not enough.
As the difference between the two teams above is big, one could save much more money during this process and buy a much better players at the end of this period, "minutes" (close to the closing TL window for the playoff) before the playoff.

4) My suggestion will make users think carefully during season (like a real manager do), and take action right away before season starts.

They will not be able to tank without paying a big price for that.

They will be able to improve their team upon season progress, but under the following posibilities (limitations);
a) Replacing players from their roster but keeping their salary cap.
b) Breaking the salary cap, but under the 10% limitation I've brought as an example.
c) Breaking the salary cap above this limit, and paying the price.
This is similar (in a sense) like the price a team in the NBA pay for breaking the Cap.