BuzzerBeater Forums

And as expected after his trying to narrow it down only to all-star players, now he gone to a deeper narrowing.

Let me guess your next argument step...
Hmm. all-star players who played in Chicago and their initials are M.J., they have been the greatest player to play the game, and their name is NOT Michael Jordan...

Training draft players consists Dejuan Blair, Lopez, and others on that level.
They are not thrown, quite the opposite - they have a significant role on their team.

So I should stop using your method, eh?

Summary;

1) Most of the teams in the NBA has a player they drafted in the last 3 seasons, that has a significant role on their team.

2) The draft is the same as it is in the NBA - each league has the same pool of quality good players to choose from.
It is not like choosing from 50K pool, but like having separate leagues with separate players that set their name to the draft and each league has the same potential on the draft....Hey, wait, this is exactly what it is...

3) As "yodabig" have said - training your own draft players is what is expected from BB-managing game.
For that, the draft quality (not potential but the mature-ness of the players) is needed to be adjusted for the different leagues.

Then, another adjustment is needed to be made for making the game competitive as giving better players to higher divisions causes the opposite.

How?
For example - a contract that must be paid, and is adjusted to that a player with the same skills will ask for much more in higher leagues (and specifically drafted players).

0) The basic here is - Training drafted player is the basic of BB-managing.

1) The draft for higher leagues will have players that will be more ready - higher skills.

2) They will be older, as higher league users should not be able to get to higher maximum level.
Any draft's best player (for example) from any division can get up to "500K DMI when in respectable GS after ending his 21 YO season, and upon maximum training" (numbers are for example). Meaning - same potential, different readiness.

3) Another option that may be used in addition or instead that one, is that you will get the same player, at an earlier age, but he can be trained slower at higher division, and that will be applied to any training at an higher league.
Of course the comparison is when both teams at different divisions are using the same trainer skill, and the same training schedule for that same player.

4) But still, an higher team will get a better player, and hence need to pay more for that.
This should be upon salary.
Same player - higher salary when playing at higher league.

5) Basically the idea of harder to train at higher divisions , older players at higher divisions and higher salary at higher divisions is something that can be seen all over the real world.
The same player that will get to the NBA will get much more than he got in Europe.
The same player playing in the NBA with the same level of trainers will have slower improvement, as the league is harder, and they need to concentrate more about the next game than working on their own skills.

6) A reminder to all;
You are playing at a league which is one of those three huge nations I've brought as an example of nations that does not contain a single team at the first division that joined the game at the last 14 seasons (out of 18 that is been played...) - [Maybe it was true until current season, and was changed this season, but it is still a fact that points to competitiveness issue on this game.]
I find it related and important to mention, as user here (not naming a single user) are acting with interest.

After looking deeper into the NBA rosters, I admit standing corrected to some degree about the stats in the D-League Thread concerning NBA and their own players (beeing a Mavericks follower I have plenty excuses for that, given that we hardly keep our rookies or picks, not to speak of actually playing them), at least concerning the stats, not necessarily the conclusion, but may you explain to me why you keep insisting that 0) is true?

This is dogmatic logic, not really based on reality ...

I really like your post and that of #42.

My proposal always has been not to make the draft better for the top division I think that would be very unfair. Instead I think the middle section of the draft should be improved so that there are a lot more players that could be trained if the teams drafting them are willing to do it. When you constantly draft $2k role players what can you do?

I think on average most players taken in the first round (by teams that scout) should be $3k or higher wages and star or higher potential with $4k all stars being the average. Remember that these players are already almost free on the market so adding more wont change anything there. I do not want any change in the rarity of the best players, just the median to be shifted a lot.

I do not want any change in the rarity of the best players, just the median to be shifted a lot.

That will also affect what people want to train, at least in the long run. First you may think you have a great opportunity to train your new better draftee, then later on you realize pretty much everyone got the same guy - so you actually need to train an even better player to stay competitive. The overall effect is not zero, but I am quite unsure if it achieves the goal either. The goal is to train your own draftees, no?

It's important to consider the overall player supply and demand in most of the draft discussions. You need, say, 12 players per team, each of them having roughly a 12-season career. (Whatever the numbers are, you get the point.) Thus on average you need to get one new player a season to keep refreshing your team. The supply of new players is based on draft and "short-lived" new teams (if they keep playing, then they don't really contribute to the supply but instead just join the overall refreshing cycle). In each league you draft 48 guys a season, while you only really need about 16, right? (The number of bots is irrelevant.) I believe the new teams that stop playing contribute some additional younger players to the market, either by selling (normal transfers or bankruptcy sale) or through free agency (going bot), but I don't know the numbers. Anyway, the number of players needed from the draft is somewhat reduced due to the effect these teams have. Free agency effect is basically the same regardless of the skill levels. In the end, free agents take jobs of drafted players.

So, whether the goal is to make it easier for all teams to concentrate on training their own draftees, or even force them to do so, the overall supply and demand of the players needs to be taken into account. I don't think that even a short-term solution of giving everyone a trainable draftee is really helping, making the draftee level higher will just adjust the requirements most users have for their trainees in the long run.

Well the fact is that the vast majority of teams don't train well. New players, afk players and half interested players probably make up 2/3 of all players in this game, they fill the lower leagues and there are legions of them.

Then in the middle divisions there are lots of teams that are not interested in training, they don't like that aspect of the game, or are in a too tight league to risk it or they just think training GS each week gives their team such a massive advantage that they stick with that.

Then there are those that try but for whatever reason should be good but are just incompetent.

Finally I estimate that leaves about 10% who actually train properly.

Seeing as those 10% are looking for good prospects from the other 90% no wonder that you can pick up a $4.5k superstar with good skills right after the draft for $10k.

I think everyone is so different at training that even if you gave everyone EXACTLY the same guy they would turn out differently. But they wont be. Even if everyone got a $4k all star each season there will be different heights, different skill balances, different aggerssion wrecking some that constantly foul out.

Obviously this would flood the market with $4k allstars so their value would crash from $5 to $1 and a lot of them would be fired instead of the $2k 6th men but would that really upset the balance of the game?

would that really upset the balance of the game?

It will affect what people look for in the market and what overall skill levels are used in the game. There will continue to be a balance between the supply and the demand.