BuzzerBeater Forums

i think we must create a poll about this untill all of BB's members can say thier idea

common, you don't have to say that every 20s

Polsl about changed are pretty uncommon, and i think if they make it it will be more important ones.

But the old system of free agent was bad before it looks only to the salary,why don't reinsert the free agent on the market,but with a minimum of skills for a certain role(ie, a guard had to have at least than 10/9/9 in Js,Jr and Od))?

First off, only skilled players were ever eligible to become free agents -- I never saw free agents with skills lower than what you're proposing. And second, I fail to see how an owner can be such a complete moron as to train nothing but shot blocking and slobber over bad players for $2 million bucks a pop, and yet still amass enough money to pay for said slobber-generator. I've been playing for three seasons and have never been anywhere near $2 million.

All the free agents ever did was soak up some of the extra money that better teams had lying around. Now that the game as become much more restrictive economically, there's less of an imbalance between the cash reserves of top teams and those of their slightly less fortunate colleagues, so less reason to have free agents. In addition, to return to the point I finished with before, the primary engine of inflation roars on apace as more and more people elect to play the game. Every entering manager adds another $700,000 in ready cash (if you include the temporary start-up bonus). Free agency is like blocking the dike with your finger.

But the old system of free agent was bad before it looks only to the salary,why don't reinsert the free agent on the market,but with a minimum of skills for a certain role(ie, a guard had to have at least than 10/9/9 in Js,Jr and Od))?

First off, only skilled players were ever eligible to become free agents -- I never saw free agents with skills lower than what you're proposing. And second, I fail to see how an owner can be such a complete moron as to train nothing but shot blocking and slobber over bad players for $2 million bucks a pop, and yet still amass enough money to pay for said slobber-generator. I've been playing for three seasons and have never been anywhere near $2 million.

In the past system you could have a player with legendary in driving and handling and atrocious/pitiful in outside defence.Because the salry of this player was over the level to become free agent
When we talk about with this question,we have to point out what effects the free agent have on the market
There are two effects,one good and one bad
The good effect is that the presence of the free agent help to lowered the prices and bring them towards a fair value in the market
The bad effect is that these money used for free agent are wasted out of the market
If we find a way for a compromise between these two effects we can re-introduce the free agent.The bad system was wrong because it's not a right thing evaluete players with the salary.And if someone buy the previous described player(pitiful outside defence/legendary driving and handling) the money waste in the market are REALLY wasted,beacuase the team which buy this player,cannot sell him to some moron,so there's not a new circulation of money
If this team buy a good player,the money went out from the market,but the transfer bait a well-chain for the market because:
-the team who buy the free agent probably had to sell another(often weaker) player to have again a good economy
-this player will be bought by a team of a lower category which need that player and spent these money ehich before that cannot spend on the market
-this team will sell one of their player to lower's team categories and so on
There is a range of medium players who are poorly available on the market(and this is why the prices of the players have "strange"-for who doesn't knoe nothing of the basilar economy laws- variations not strictly related with the strenght of the players),and many teams are stopped from spending their money because they dont'find what they need
So,if we insert free agent that could create a good circulation of money in the game the good effect go over the bad effect,if we insert awful players,the good effect wins
So,we could reinsert the free agent on the market estabilishng some basilar parametres over the salary,as the presence of a certain level in the main skills for the role,or a total higher level of the skills if some player have the main skills at a very little distance from the previous standard

With the removal of Free Agents I see two more things. The prices are more stable, so it is easier to estimate what a player is worth, ensuring that you don't pay to much. If he is priced to high they simply will not sell. The other is that it puts a lot more emphasis on training, and it is harder to build a team without training to sell. The prices for good reinforcements are high, and there are no middle market. Either you get a player that needs more training or you pay 3-4 seasons income for 1 player. So I have trained my own players, and the ones I can get a good price for have become invaluable to my team, and I can not get decent replacements.

Before you had the option to sit it out on the TL waiting for a Free Agent to show up at a time with few users online. In the past I had the possibility to do just that. Now it is a different play. Still I support not having them, except for NT players, because it is more fair for those that doesn't have a whole lot of time available. One of the biggest strenghts of BB is its versatility across user groups and its strong community, and this will give an even base for members with different levels of activity. Not everyone has a lot of time on their hands, but I still want as many as possible to enjoy BB without it beeing a drain on their social life, job, family and so on. For the sake of the BB growth and community I think removal of Free Agents is for the best.

We are able managers, and can cope with changes. As we have seen in the past (although some bugs and stuff have appeared) that the changes done are for the best of the experience of BB as a game that lives, prospers and are the most realistic online basketball manager game there is. ...oops, going of track... Yes, I love BB ;)

Last edited by Svett Sleik (U21-Scout Norge) at 8/12/2009 10:04:51 AM

With the removal of Free Agents I see two more things. The prices are more stable, so it is easier to estimate what a player is worth, ensuring that you don't pay to much. If he is priced to high they simply will not sell. The other is that it puts a lot more emphasis on training, and it is harder to build a team without training to sell. The prices for good reinforcements are high, and there are no middle market.

"The prices are more stable" is a lie,the Free Agent started a 0$ to reach what we could consider,in the main part of the cases, the fair value market of that type of players.Nowadays tha value of the market is made from how much someone want to spend for some players,so often si higher than the fiar value of the market
"There are no middle market" is the worse thing you can hope for the game and for all the community.For the teams which are under this"middle market",the not-availability of medium level players made by Free Agents it's a complete disaster,because they cannot find what they need to improve;if I'm at the bigninng and I'm training guards, I need a center of medium level(ie 8/8/8 in IS/ID/REB) but i cannot find them on the market at a reasonable price,so I cannot spend my money on it and I had to lose some games,losing money from arena attendence.
Who is under middle market cannot spend their money on market,so also who is over the middle market cannot find some buyer for their mplayers when they had to sell them for buying better players,this is not a virtuous circle
We(th whole BB community) NEED middle market,and if Free Agent is the only way to create it,we have to re-introduce them
So,if you say that, your phrase "For the sake of the BB growth and community I think removal of Free Agents is for the best" doesn't have sense,if you use the previous arguments to justify it

your phrase "For the sake of the BB growth and community I think removal of Free Agents is for the best" doesn't have sense,if you use the previous arguments to justify it

If you include my whole post in your reasoning, instead of picking grapes to justify your goal and silence the opposition, I'd appreciate it. I said despite the challenges to find middle range players, it creates a stable base and stable prices (Notice how I said stable, not fair).

I need a center of medium level(ie 8/8/8 in IS/ID/REB) but i cannot find them on the market at a reasonable price,so I cannot spend my money on it and I had to lose some games,losing money from arena attendence.

You can't hope to have a winning team in the first season as long as you don't play against bots. That is underestimating most of the other managers in the game. Losing money from arena attendance if the meridian is you winning every game, then yes, and you must be Lucky the leprechaun.

If you don't want to pay overprice for players, just don't. If it is above market value they simply won't sell. If they are sold however, that IS the market price, although it sound like you want to get players thrown after you. Who wants to train a player to a decent level and sell him for half or 1/3 of what you can get for him if you train a couple levels more? I don't. If you do, give me a call and I'll give you the recipe for what kind of players I'm going to need.

picking grapes?Those phrases that I underlined are the matters that you use for saying that the disappearance of FA from the market is good.
Your opinion is respectable for the FA issue,but if we entry in the heart of the matters,they are not right in the way you affirm
What do you call "stable prices" remove the possibility for many users to buy players on the market and remove money for the whole market, both for who is sellingCardenas or Fanesi both for who is selling the worst player in the game.So we cannot call it stable price
And the ability of a manager is also for paying the players at the fair price or less,but as is in the management of the matches,there are many users very awful on the market,I cannot pursue them.But other players can do that.And this make the market price.But if the economic condition of the various countries is different and someone has money to waste,why I should pay for it?
Your opinion is respectable for the FA issue,but if we entry in the heart of the matters,they are not right in the way you affirm

Last edited by Steve Karenn at 8/12/2009 12:23:00 PM

I saw the FA market as a big club easy money market. Buy cheap and sell them higher. Teams with a lot of cash bought players "below" market value and sold them with a profit. Who had the cash and the time could make a fair profit with weekly free agent signing -> selling. Relax and let the prices settle a little. There will always be players on transfer list (yes in every range). You might have to look a little harder to get those decent skilled bargain deals, but they are still there.

I have to disagree, because the price free agents sell for are the real market value prices. Many teams with a lot of money would bid but they wouldn't overbid so those players most often were signed for the amount of money they are really worth...

no offense but your wrong many free agents were bought low and then sold for a much higher price.

example

people online 368 buy free agent for 250k (low price not much competition on bidding)
then resell when
people online 3425 sell free agent for 500k (very good chance of sale)

i have seen countless examples of managers doing this.

try reading the now closed day trading post in bb global