BuzzerBeater Forums

I see what your saying about tanking but I don't think you should take such a hard line approach to dealing with it. You mentioned that tanking undermines the competitive nature of the game, which is true, but tanking can also be a strategy for long term continued success at the top level.

I started the game around Season 23. Each season I competed to the best of my abilities with winning the league championship being my main goal. I managed my finances well, built up my arena and made what I thought were good purchases. This strategy worked reasonably well until I got to the Div 1. Attempting a championship run, I managed to put together a financially sustainable roster with 4 NT players, and only 1 player older than 32, but I was only able to make the semis. I just didn't have the financial depth to compete with older teams run by strong and experienced managers. Some of those teams, who didn't even seem to be competing for the championship, probably had many millions in the bank while at the same time fielding better rosters than mine.

At that point I could have stayed on the same path, remaining reasonably competitive, but probably not winning anything for the foreseeable future. I choose to tank however, because I thought it a better long term decision that would allow me to come back stronger and be a future perennial title contender in Div 1.

Also, taking away tanking as a strategy at this point seems a little unfair seeing as so many older teams have already benefited from it, some doing it even before there was a salary floor.

I see what your saying about tanking but I don't think you should take such a hard line approach to dealing with it. You mentioned that tanking undermines the competitive nature of the game, which is true, but tanking can also be a strategy for long term continued success at the top level.

I started the game around Season 23. Each season I competed to the best of my abilities with winning the league championship being my main goal. I managed my finances well, built up my arena and made what I thought were good purchases. This strategy worked reasonably well until I got to the Div 1. Attempting a championship run, I managed to put together a financially sustainable roster with 4 NT players, and only 1 player older than 32, but I was only able to make the semis. I just didn't have the financial depth to compete with older teams run by strong and experienced managers. Some of those teams, who didn't even seem to be competing for the championship, probably had many millions in the bank while at the same time fielding better rosters than mine.

At that point I could have stayed on the same path, remaining reasonably competitive, but probably not winning anything for the foreseeable future. I choose to tank however, because I thought it a better long term decision that would allow me to come back stronger and be a future perennial title contender in Div 1.

Also, taking away tanking as a strategy at this point seems a little unfair seeing as so many older teams have already benefited from it, some doing it even before there was a salary floor.

So in the midst of all this... you're hitting the nail right on the head.

Why is it, that it is more profitable to an organization to intentionally take yourself out of playoff contention, lose games, and then buy a superstar team?

Why is that more profitable than being a team that makes the playoffs 3-4-5-6 years in a row, and does a little better each time?

That's the real issue.

I have 21.5 mil.
If you make me to buy some players, and other teams like me- you will totally ruin the market.

We are not the problem in the market. We are sleepy teams. I don't have time in real life to study the game, but I like the people here and the game- as the best basketball game in the net.

If teams like me will buy players because you force them- the market will be really really crazy. We and our money are not the problem.

And off-course, there are other reasons to declare this offer- especially about training.
Bigger teams will not sell 1-2 player from their roster to find place for young players to train. if they make 5 mil for example, and they will have for example at least 5 mil, so you make them for example to pay 50k per week- or 25k- you will make them to pay hundreds of k $ per season- mil for couple of seasons because they tried to training.

Let every one play as we want or can.

*Just want to add that my plan was to buy 2 extremely talented players next season, and then train them + buying the best players I will be able.
It's a basket ball, but money is a big important part too.

Don't kill the players that want to play but can't do that well as the others.

Last edited by Noam Zaig at 11/18/2015 2:57:57 AM

All you guys threatening to quit are beyond ridiculous.Panicking because of nothing, really.You have no clue how this tax will look like and yet you are handling this situation as if you were burning alive...

I expect this tax to hit teams above 20-30 million and only the money above this line being taxed, so we are talking about five digit losses... Uuuuuuh, big deal! Lets jump out of the window. Or spend some more on better staff, bench players, scouting or whatever and you will be fine...

You have no clue how this tax will look like and yet you are handling this situation as if you were burning alive..

I think it's funny that you chastise owners for their reaction when they know not how this tax will look but then:

I expect this tax to hit teams above 20-30 million and only the money above this line being taxed,

How is it you have a clue what this will look like

your assessment may be the right one but your speculation is as good as theirs
Just saying

Last edited by Headless T Gunner at 11/18/2015 4:23:54 AM

Good reply!

We are not the problem in the market. We are sleepy teams. I don't have time in real life to study the game, but I like the people here and the game- as the best basketball game in the net.

I thought this is the case for a lot of teams with 20+ million bank accounts. Thanks for contributing.

Once again: should I be punished for managing my finances well? What is the difference between me paying the salaries needed to win and Div I team doing the same if we both earn say 150k weekly?

No you should be making less money for making the game less enjoyable for others and intentionally putting your team in a position to only lose. When you don't then you should have attendance like everyone else. This has more to do with realism than daytrading ever did and quite possibly as much as the training inconsistencies.

I'm sorry but -1700 PD and 0-22 record? You can't honestly call that "managing my finances well"...surely no more than saying "daytrading is managing your finances well". In fact at least daytrading is "managing" something while tanking isn't

Last edited by Lemonshine at 11/18/2015 6:11:23 AM

You have no clue how this tax will look like and yet you are handling this situation as if you were burning alive..

I think it's funny that you chastise owners for their reaction when they know not how this tax will look but then:

I expect this tax to hit teams above 20-30 million and only the money above this line being taxed,

How is it you have a clue what this will look like

your assessment may be the right one but your speculation is as good as theirs
Just saying

Just an educated guess from various statements. I don't know if Marin or Perpete mentioned it, but it was said, that there was a certain treshold and the money above that would be taxed. Plus only a handful of teams will qualify for that. The richest teams I know have about 20 million, so...

Lucky that none of the persons complaining now, works in Formula 1 or some other competitive/regulated environment - where every season teams have to deal with new rules and regulations...

tanking can also be a strategy for long term continued success at the top level.

Sure, but it shouldn't....tanking does not usually work in the NBA (at the very least you need other managerial skills to pull it off) and NEVER works in any other league in the world.
Nowhere in the world can you make about the same amount of money from fans with a 0-22 record and a 12-12 record. Look here:http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance/_/year/2015/sort/allPct and then ask yourself if that seems to bear any correlation with on-court performance.

At that point I could have stayed on the same path, remaining reasonably competitive, but probably not winning anything for the foreseeable future. I choose to tank however, because I thought it a better long term decision that would allow me to come back stronger and be a future perennial title contender in Div 1.

Yeah well, there are other ways than taking the easy way: this guy http://www.buzzerbeater.com/team/162788/history.aspx took 10 seasons to get to D1 (from D5, although probably that was a bot league), another 5 seasons to get into the B3 and he has never relegated nor missed the KO phases of the B3 (in all but one appeareance getting to the quarterfinals or better). Has this other guy ever took the easy way? http://www.buzzerbeater.com/team/37519/history.aspx. Some of the best managers have built perennial contenders without tanking, those who needed tanking or bought titles are just not as good as those managers in my opinion. It's just as simple as that.
I started in s24 from D3, never missed the playoffs and I made the finals in D1 last season. I'm in a year where I will have to acquire a younger roster and, possibly, trainees and I'm many seasons away (probably) from securing a place at the top, however I'm not interested in winning by taking the easy way or any shortcut, especially because I would be no better than those I'm criticising.

So let's say it out loud: with trading mostly killed, tanking is the easiest way to get to the top and stay there. The problem is that it's completely unrealistic, it's counterintuitive and, more importantly, anyone can do it, it doesn't involve any skill or balancing exercise. I don't care if others have done it in the past, people made millions from daytrading too, but we still killed it, because it was good for the game. Preventing people from hoarding millions each season while not being competitive is also good for the game.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 11/18/2015 6:26:48 AM

@Lemonshine: I like the suggestions and we'll consider them next time we discuss solutions for tanking. As you also admit, your solutions aren't perfect. That's why it's so hard to take any route: each one has holes and needs exceptions, etc...

@Mike Franks: It would probably be less stressful for you if you accept the way training works in BB and not try to push change in a fundamental part of the game. It's not going to happen. Also, try not to post 4 posts in a row, rather use the @ sign to reference other managers.

@Everyone: Seems like the only thing we can all agree upon is that the fans response to tanking is inappropriate. Actually, seems like fans don't punish extremely bad results (like 0-22) with enough disdain, which makes tanking a financially viable option. So, it would make sense to change that fan response. It would't affect teams in bot leagues, and that's fine, there seems to be no solution that addresses that atm. We just need to figure out how to implement it

The discussion here has been helpful and I think you should all be commended for that. I understand that things can get heated and that sometimes we veer off topic but all in a all, I think it was constructive.