BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Idea for Rookies

Idea for Rookies

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
251291.3 in reply to 251291.2
Date: 12/6/2013 4:41:13 PM
Springfield Storm
IV.21
Overall Posts Rated:
7676
No you don't have to lower the salary scale or give money to teams. As it is now, after a couple seasons of training the salary is going to spike up anyway, this is just accelerating the proccess. Also Div.1 teams don't need that competetive edge that lower divisions do so you wouldn't have to change the skills. Most players on the National teams are on Div.1 teams anyway. Most new players don't like training because it's slow and your trainees don't produce until year 3 or 4. This idea would give Div.5 teams a reason to actually train. They will actually reap the benefits for not just the first season, but every season after that. It gives them more short term benefits while still rewarding them if they stick with it. And you can't deny that there would be more involvement in the training for U21 and national team rosters.

This Post:
00
251291.5 in reply to 251291.4
Date: 12/6/2013 7:06:37 PM
Springfield Storm
IV.21
Overall Posts Rated:
7676
No because people would actually want to train. Small nations don't produce enough quality players for the national team. This fixes that. Also, how would players be more expensive? They are going to cap just like they do now? So a player might be slighly more expensive until he caps and then it's the same as now.

This Post:
22
251291.7 in reply to 251291.6
Date: 12/6/2013 8:31:10 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
I think that it should be more a case where there are players with higher skills but who are already at or near their cap (and maybe even who are older) so that you can get a more useful player from the draft rather than discarding everyone who's not 18 yo, 4+ ball potential with decent starting skills. A 22 year old nearly capped star potential guard, for example, could be very useful as a backup in most higher leagues and as a starter in lower leagues, but wouldn't terribly unbalance the game to the extent that bumping up the starting skill levels for the lottery picks would be.

This Post:
00
251291.9 in reply to 251291.7
Date: 12/6/2013 9:40:40 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
116116
I've always liked the idea of older draftees having higher potential starting skills. 18yo max is respectable. Maybe 19 is strong, 20/21 is proficient. 22 is prominent. The age/max skill level ratio would have to be analyzed a bit to ensure balance. And I especially love the older the draftee, the lower the potential.

This would also help make the draft more productive for the top 1-6 teams. As it currently stands, it's highly unlikely to get a worthwhile draftee if you're one of the last picks. And that's not too realistic. I'm real life, you're not likely to get a franchise player, but you are likely to be able to draft a backup.

This Post:
00
251291.11 in reply to 251291.10
Date: 12/15/2013 7:11:19 AM
Kitakyushu
ASL
Overall Posts Rated:
12341234
I think 18 yr old draft picks are fine as is.(Highest skill being 7). But I think that 19yr old draft picks should be able to have some strongs. If this were the case, people wouldn't be firing their 19yr old draft picks. I drafted a 19 yr old HOF and I kept him, because he is a HOF and he is from a small country. He is only 5 or 6 pops behind some of the other 21yr olds that started to get trained from 18.
I am the U-21 coach and I see it every season....people are firing everything 19 that has less than superstar potential.
Even if it could be 5 strongs max for a 19 yr old, that would change some peoples minds about tossing their 19 yr old draft pick in the trash.

This Post:
00
251291.12 in reply to 251291.11
Date: 12/17/2013 7:11:15 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
297297
Even with strongs they would like be inferior to 18 year olds. Especially big men. Throw in a proficient or 2 and you might have a guy that can keep up for U-21 teams