BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Draft picks should affect the audience ("Greg Oden law")

Draft picks should affect the audience ("Greg Oden law") (thread closed)

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
207417.22 in reply to 207417.21
Date: 1/27/2012 4:51:07 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
105105
When they come from the own youth team, i would understand your point a bit ... Since people follow there career for a longer period.
This just summarizes it all, as there is no much difference between a player who came straight from collegue to your own team and one who came from your youth club.

BTW - Lebron, Wade and Bosh are all top-players. Do you think that the fans see them all at the same way? No they don't.
What about - Rondo, Pierce, Allen and Garnet?
Who do you think the Clippers fans preffer - Griffin or CP3?

This Post:
00
207417.25 in reply to 207417.22
Date: 1/27/2012 7:06:41 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
When they come from the own youth team, i would understand your point a bit ... Since people follow there career for a longer period.
This just summarizes it all, as there is no much difference between a player who came straight from collegue to your own team and one who came from your youth club.


there is a big difference, since on a own youth team, he is already in your area, most likely at your games(since usually they hand out cards for free, and a pro sportler is often intrested in his sport), and you are sure that your club give him a chanche when he get good enough(so the fans debate early if he fgonna make it).

if you now look on a drafted player the player is most likely raised in another part of the country, has no connection to the club and didn't know if he should post "go buzzISR" on his twitter account when they win, since he could also land on the loosing team. the fans don't follow up the promising player of there home team8since there are usually >90 player who might get drafted), couldn't watch their games since their aren't in the area etc.

This Post:
00
207417.26 in reply to 207417.23
Date: 1/27/2012 7:49:16 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
766766
sorry, im not sure what u mean here
5 balls in familiar with the star players


u mean when u drafted them, they were 5 ball players?

im not sure what my players were when i drafted them, it was so long ago. season 11 i think!

But i do have a lv 5 PR manager as well. I upgraded him about 2 seasons ago, and didnt really notice the difference in merchandising. maybe an extra $1k.

its difficult to tell with all this though, because merchandise is made up of so many other factors.

This Post:
00
207417.27 in reply to 207417.24
Date: 1/27/2012 8:08:31 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
105105
Doesn't 10K or even 20K sounds very few (comparing to the total income of a team) for having so much drafted players you are using?

I think that it is noting to look down on. I will be getting 20k extra every week of the season. 280k extra just for having trained some of my own drafted players. Sure its not much, but if you got a lot more i think tanking would be a more attractive tactic since that is what often is needed to grab a great draftee. An if you got say 50k extra every week you'd get 700k extra every season as a bonus. And making tanking more attractive really doesn't sound like something you would stand behind =)
The affect of losing money (due to lack of audience because of aq losing team...) should create an equilebrium.
As there is already tanking, it proves that the lose due to a losing team is not high enough.
And I "grat" you for joining the "group agianst tanking"...

This Post:
00
207417.28 in reply to 207417.27
Date: 1/27/2012 8:36:38 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
Doesn't 10K or even 20K sounds very few (comparing to the total income of a team) for having so much drafted players you are using?

I think that it is noting to look down on. I will be getting 20k extra every week of the season. 280k extra just for having trained some of my own drafted players. Sure its not much, but if you got a lot more i think tanking would be a more attractive tactic since that is what often is needed to grab a great draftee. An if you got say 50k extra every week you'd get 700k extra every season as a bonus. And making tanking more attractive really doesn't sound like something you would stand behind =)
The affect of losing money (due to lack of audience because of aq losing team...) should create an equilebrium.
As there is already tanking, it proves that the lose due to a losing team is not high enough.
And I "grat" you for joining the "group agianst tanking"...


to be honest i think it is even to high, maybe not for the tanking but with high income differences you had it is hard to catch up. If it get even higher loosing would be only affordable with tanking, till you have enough to actually turn into a winning team.

This Post:
00
207417.29 in reply to 207417.28
Date: 1/27/2012 10:17:23 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
105105
Doesn't 10K or even 20K sounds very few (comparing to the total income of a team) for having so much drafted players you are using?

I think that it is noting to look down on. I will be getting 20k extra every week of the season. 280k extra just for having trained some of my own drafted players. Sure its not much, but if you got a lot more i think tanking would be a more attractive tactic since that is what often is needed to grab a great draftee. An if you got say 50k extra every week you'd get 700k extra every season as a bonus. And making tanking more attractive really doesn't sound like something you would stand behind =)
The affect of losing money (due to lack of audience because of aq losing team...) should create an equilebrium.
As there is already tanking, it proves that the lose due to a losing team is not high enough.
And I "grat" you for joining the "group agianst tanking"...


to be honest i think it is even to high, maybe not for the tanking but with high income differences you had it is hard to catch up. If it get even higher loosing would be only affordable with tanking, till you have enough to actually turn into a winning team.
I love your "concepts".
Instead of making the game better by solving tanking & the salary differences, let's allow tanking to be worth money (this is after all a "good" BB-managing desicion...). And of course you will be agianst solving the salary differences by Salary-Cap, and we all know why...

This Post:
00
207417.30 in reply to 207417.29
Date: 1/27/2012 11:09:00 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
Doesn't 10K or even 20K sounds very few (comparing to the total income of a team) for having so much drafted players you are using?

I think that it is noting to look down on. I will be getting 20k extra every week of the season. 280k extra just for having trained some of my own drafted players. Sure its not much, but if you got a lot more i think tanking would be a more attractive tactic since that is what often is needed to grab a great draftee. An if you got say 50k extra every week you'd get 700k extra every season as a bonus. And making tanking more attractive really doesn't sound like something you would stand behind =)
The affect of losing money (due to lack of audience because of aq losing team...) should create an equilebrium.
As there is already tanking, it proves that the lose due to a losing team is not high enough.
And I "grat" you for joining the "group agianst tanking"...


to be honest i think it is even to high, maybe not for the tanking but with high income differences you had it is hard to catch up. If it get even higher loosing would be only affordable with tanking, till you have enough to actually turn into a winning team.
I love your "concepts".
Instead of making the game better by solving tanking & the salary differences, let's allow tanking to be worth money (this is after all a "good" BB-managing desicion...). And of course you will be agianst solving the salary differences by Salary-Cap, and we all know why...


why? I have a winning team, and i think the bonus i got from it is to big. Also i think if you reduce the income, team who aren't winning, loose more money in comparision to me, which lead to so weak roster that they couldn't compete anymore - that is not a tanking solution.

And also i am not tanking, even when i lost 7 games this season.

Sorry your all against me are egoist approach is a very low level,

Last edited by CrazyEye at 1/27/2012 11:15:06 AM

This Post:
00
207417.31 in reply to 207417.30
Date: 1/27/2012 11:58:08 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
105105
Sorry your all against me are egoist approach is a very low level,
This explains why you are against Salary-Cap and Luxury-Tax...

And of course the fact that you are not using your own draft players, and you are not investing in it, and basically playing eBay-managing has nothing to do with that you are against the suggestion presented on this thread.

Last edited by Pini פיני at 1/27/2012 12:00:07 PM

This Post:
00
207417.32 in reply to 207417.31
Date: 1/27/2012 12:17:13 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
Sorry your all against me are egoist approach is a very low level,
This explains why you are against Salary-Cap and Luxury-Tax...

And of course the fact that you are not using your own draft players, and you are not investing in it, and basically playing eBay-managing has nothing to do with that you are against the suggestion presented on this thread.


Salary cap wouldn't be a solution, since it still favours the money, since salary efficient players are more expensiv to buy, but guess what would be even better under a cap. If it get implemented my player would instantly gain eextra value, instead of loosing it through aging. So why should i be against it? Course i doubt the efficiency of it, since a salary cap is just for guarante profits and it is good that top teams loose money like today.

Ok i confess i always take the player i need over hthe player i get from the draft, but ->
Scouting: $ 10 000


And i ask me why you joined a ebay managing games, when you hate that player get transfered?

Advertisement