BuzzerBeater Forums

A player like Dwight Howard havent place in BB.


PD: Inflation coming again pfff.....:s

Last edited by Marot at 3/29/2010 6:33:08 AM

I think your suggestion has good theoretical basis.. but emprically we are finding that newly promoted teams are competing quite well in their new leagues. about 1900 teams promoted two seasons ago, only to fall back this season, out of 45000. So that says on average newly promoted teams are doing far better than expected.

edit.. sorry that 45000 number is wrong.. its just under 12000. The point is still valid, but the number was wrong

I ahve jsut realized that you are counting all leagues righht? You should count all levels separately. Of course in the lowest level almost everybody capable of running the team decently will stay above, if he already managed to be promoted. With helps of bot teams, non-acvtive teams, or with no so so good managers as a competition. I am pretty sure the numbers will decline significantly with highe and higher levels. Could you make those numbers for Divs 1 and Div 2 (separately) public?

im sure it will decline too... but it should given bot levels etc.

before i give the number i want you to tell me what it should be and what would be too high?

I know that in my country and I.1 it is around 1 of 4 new teams staying above. I think it should be around 50% maybe slightly over. And that is because the relgation penalties. That thing shouldn't be in the game at all I think. Many clubs relegate right after they've been promoted in the first year. Although they tend to/have to have similar rosters to slighlty below average (it depends on a country I guess) Div 1 team they are punished mightily if they fail to stay above, so it is hardly beneficial to be promoted then. They were being on their way to be competititve and now that choice is a bit of given away because of that harsh penalties. I don't think 20% is that high cause if they don't deserve to stqy above, they would be probably flushed away to Div 2 by the next wave of rookies. Without harsh penalties for relegating team bigger roatiton wouldn't be a problem.

I know from my former Div 2 that there were 2 new teams (or re-promoted appearing in the same league again) from 4 (or 5 in one year) staying above for the period of my existence there. I didn't see much of a problem, weaker roookie terams ended up 7th or 8th and stromnger ones starte to challenge old teams of the league. That's in a country existing from Season 3 with 4 levels of competitiion, so some newly Div2 are quite new. But sooner or later we will reach equilibrum worldwide and then such al eague would be more challenging if those ration of new teams staying above would be kept - which probably won't be the case as the game tends to "closingů the leagues from top to the bottom slowly but steadily. If there wasn't artificial gaps among levels, with equilibrum reached league with 2/4 rookies staying above would be more as there won't be as much treadmilling teams as there is now.

Other problem is unbalanced leagues. In my country there is 25% of bad luck ending in big 8 where 7 from TOP 9 teams are and if you are in Div 1 first time you have no chance to stay above there - which leads to 3 (6th to 8th) relegating teams of Great 8 insterad of 2 and 2 making it even harder for 2 rookies to stay above as they are competing for 5 th place to be saved. if you keep those relegating penalties, with current salaries, probably even experuinced fromer Div 1 team promoting to that strong 7 in Big 8 would be face against mission impossible because as you wish he couldn't kep his player in Div2 thus losing competiveness against top dogs.

For example I expect my gate receipts to fall from just over 500k to below 250k. That is not realistic and i don't see a purpose for that. I admit I got promoted underdeveloped not having top roster yet but you want to promote if you got a chance (and I got to the strong 7 anyway, not complaining, it happens).

I want to react just on the point that there isnt equilibrium between great 8 and big 8 sometimes. Im not sure how it works now but I think that stronger teams (country ranking) should be promoted into weaker side and weaker teams into stronger side. Something like that could solve problem. Althrought will suck to promote as a weaker team, but if anyone can avoid relegation for 2 seasons, have meanwhile plenty time to get some great players.

When you reach the point where Top 7 teams of one side simply can't relegate unless they decide to, you can't fix that.

Im not sure what to point out to help in here, so I just let thinking flow.

In the real world are players people which have theirs moods,are unhappy with somebody, get sick, want to move and these things, so even top manager can be suprised by unfortunate events and sometimes doesnt achieve what he planned...

Here if some teams catch the train soon and know how to survive, is hardly possible to get them. I think that changes like better merchandise revenue if you have raised drafted players, is the step into right direction, because you can prepare your team into condition which will be more efficient, however is truth that once you want to move from 2DIV, your team have to demonstrate great ability, which possibly cannot be made meanwhile you train 3 of your 21y centers-drafts on PG position a passing skill...

so by my count, there were 96 division 1s in season 10, therefore there were 92*4=368 teams who promoted into division 1 after season 10.

There were 136 teams which promoted in season 10 to division 1, who were subsequently demoted after season 11.

Therefor the average survival rate of newly promoted teams is 63.0%, just 10% less than what it would be if you thought all teams in a division were perfectly equal.

the numbers get more complicated when you look at lower divisions because although every country has a D2, not all have a D3, but 326 teams went up into 2, and then down into 3 the next season.

There were 376*4=1472 division 2s, but there were 16 countries which had no division 3... so that means 1472-(16*4)=1408 teams the promoted to division 2, making that a 76.8% survival rate.

The numbers could be off a bit due to bot promotion.. i haven't thought about it too carefully.. and i can't remember exactly whether the metric i used to detect promotions and demotions includes or doesn't include bot promotions.... but i do know the amount of bot promotion is small in the upper divisions, so i trust those numbers are not too far off.

Of course you could argue that its harder in the big countries... but particularly when you are dealing with D1 in big countries.. of which there are only a handful its going to be really tough to tell based upon N=4 or 5 what the real survival rate is..you need to look over multiple seasons.. and i'd assume your argument is that these recent changes have made it more difficult so looking over too many seasons back wouldn't be relevant.

EDIT) I was counting countries wrong, 96 exist now.. 92 existed after season 10, and only 16 countries only had 2 divisions after season 10.



Last edited by BB-Forrest at 3/29/2010 10:39:24 AM

Although I think the question Big8 vs Great8 should go to another topic I would like to react on that as well.

It seems to me that besides having a good team when you get promoted you should also have luck and avoid the best division to where you're going to!

In that sense I fell that I was the most lucky guy geting promoted from the IV division because not only I entered a III division where there are no relegated teams (I guess there were bots on the II division), but also I was placed in the weakest conferece of the division where I could TIE my first game against the winner of the regular season 11. By chance, there are even two teams in my conference that do not enter BB since the 16 and 19th of March (wich will eventualy turn to bots).

It is logical that I can TIE plenty of games and be with a huge enthusiasm not only for the cup games but also to the matches against the other conference! You may say that it is impossible to avoid this but I would answer that there are to many lucky steps. As said before, a strong conference will probably continue to be stronger until the best teams get promoted from that side.

I propose that every season the teams of the same division are shuffled and you get new conferences every season. By doing this you still have the lucky step of geting into the weakest division/conference, but you will know that the next season everything may change and you can as much luck as the other ones! I also think this would promote better competition as players in the weakest conference will put more effort on getting promoted that year and balance both conferences!

I am saying all this knowing that I really am in a lucky division and conference!

What everybody think about it?

Cheers

I wonder about numbers for Div 1 for countries with at least 400 users. Because you know you still get new countries alike Ghana in that survey.

It seems you just multipled by 4. That is not a good approach as if you think there are actually still bots, then more new teams promotes, so percentages would be lower.

no... actually.... if there are bots in D1, that means more teams promoted... which would mean the survival percentage would be higher... not lower.