BuzzerBeater Forums

Help - English > HOF 18yr old, transfer or keep?

HOF 18yr old, transfer or keep? (thread closed)

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
137913.14 in reply to 137913.12
Date: 3/28/2010 10:31:37 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
8888
As long as he is well trained*, he will be worth at least as much (and probably more) at 20-21yr as he's worth now, so I don't think he is going to lose any money by keeping him for as long as he can afford the salary.

The advantage of keeping him is that if his team is making steady progress up the divisions and he can make it into D.II-III where he is in a better position to train for a long time, he will have a player he can build his team around for the NBBA, which is the ultimate goal.

A well trained all-star potential player will probably cap out at 60k+ with the salary changes: that is still unaffordable if he doesn't keep promoting, and it's also not high enough to be a star player as he approaches the NBBA. If he doesn't need the 2-3mil right now to promote out of D.V and D.IV (and he really probably doesn't) I don't think there is much long-term sense in selling such a good prospect.

*Can't always take this for granted.

This Post:
00
137913.15 in reply to 137913.14
Date: 3/28/2010 10:46:47 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
522522
I guess it depends where his team is at the moment. If he is already close to making promoting then maybe he should train him, but if he isn't near promoting, selling would gaurantee him promotion.

I guess my issue with keeping him to train, is that I don't think div 3 teams (assuming he promotes in successive seasons, which may or may not be likely) can afford 100k+ salaries for a single player. I might be wrong, but at least in Australia I don't think it can be done. Maybe it's different in US div 3.

I don't think he is going to promote to the NBBA in successive seasons, which means he is going to stop being able to afford the salary at some point. Why not trade him out now for someone with even MVP potential, or Superstar potential then? You would get an easy million profit, and still have just as good a trainee.

This Post:
00
137913.16 in reply to 137913.15
Date: 3/28/2010 11:01:16 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
112112
For his player to get to 100k salary will take about 5 seasons. By that time he can easily be in D3. In every D3 around the world it is very possible to have a 100k salary player assuming you have managed your team and arena properly.

Why not trade him out now for someone with even MVP potential, or Superstar potential then? You would get an easy million profit, and still have just as good a trainee.

If he were to trade him in for a MVP or Superstar he would have a very small profit of a maximum 1 mil with most likely worse starting skils. His trainee is perfect 6'0" and great starting skills. Your not going to find something comparable if he tries to get another US trainee (To match the Merchandizing revenue he would lose by getting a foreigner).

I don't think he is going to promote to the NBBA in successive seasons, which means he is going to stop being able to afford the salary at some point.

It will take well over 6 seasons for the salary to hit a level of unreasonable. It would be much better to stop training a player by choice than be forced to by a cap when you need that player to become better still.


This Post:
00
137913.17 in reply to 137913.16
Date: 3/28/2010 11:08:36 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
522522
"In every D3 around the world it is very possible to have a 100k salary player assuming you have managed your team and arena properly."

That's basically what our arguments are revolving around. You seem to think 100k is affordable, and since you are in the US you would know best about div 3 teams in the US. I was just coming from an Australian point of view, I don't think 100k is affordable in Australian div 3. Maybe if it was your only player, but you are bound to have 10-12 players, and I don't think an Australian div 3 team could afford that.

This Post:
00
137913.18 in reply to 137913.17
Date: 3/28/2010 11:18:51 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
112112
There is no difference between the economics of a DIII Australian team and a US one except we most likely have been playing longer. Your teams have the benefit of being able to move up leagues easier making it easier for you to afford player salaries.


From: pmfg10
This Post:
00
137913.19 in reply to 137913.17
Date: 3/28/2010 11:19:31 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
206206
Well.. the player that he mentioned is a SG so it's impossible for him to have a 100k salary at the age of 21. There are only a few Centers that accomplish it so no way. I think that a 100k player for a division III team is not affordable. It's better for him to have 3 or 4 with 30k than one with 100k because it makes your team Balanced.
I think that your fine with each opinion you choose. If you want to train him for the u-21 or even the National Team I think it's better for you to keep training the HOF player because of the cap and all. But if you sold him right now you could get some money and you could buy 3 or 4 players that would make your team balanced.

This Post:
00
137913.20 in reply to 137913.18
Date: 3/28/2010 11:33:25 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
522522
Can you show me an American Div 3 team with a player with a salary over 100k?
Can you show me an Australian Div 3 team with a player with a salary over 100k?
Can you show me any Div 3 team in the world with a player with a salary over 100k?

This Post:
00
137913.21 in reply to 137913.20
Date: 3/28/2010 11:52:00 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
8888
A D.IV team with a 117k player: http://www.buzzerbeater.com/team/23949/players.aspx

Obviously not sustainable long-term, but he probably has the cash reserves to make it back into III. Whether or not that roster is sustainable in III if the salary increases again this season is a different question.

This Post:
00
137913.23 in reply to 137913.21
Date: 3/28/2010 12:05:21 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
522522
That team makes 82k in arena attendance.
Their players salaries are 200k.
Where is that 120k difference coming from to break even? Let's say Tv Contract is 60k. That still leaves 60k loss.
So unless his merchandise is 60k (which I doubt), he is losing money every week.

This Post:
00
137913.24 in reply to 137913.23
Date: 3/28/2010 12:11:11 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
112112
I could see him making 40-60k in Merchandising as the player is American and Bronson will be on the US NT. Bronson is an example of what happens if you dont plan your team properly and train more than one star instead of just concentrating on your HOF. If he had worked on a second player as well as his HOF he would have not been in such a position.

But of course you will rebut this with your one season of experience.

The whole point of this argument is that selling off such an amazing player that you were lucky enough to draft is like ripping up a winning lottery ticket. Its just plain stupid.

With proper team management and arena building that HOF is his ticket to the big leagues.

Advertisement