BuzzerBeater Forums

Very few people like change, especially when it is percieved to not be in their best interests. Neither do I, unless it certainly is in MY best interests.
Without restating all that has been said, one thing that could be changed that would be a LONGTIME equalizer would be to modify the draft.
Why should NBBA, Div I, Div II, and Div III teams have access to the same quality players in the draft?
My proposal is to make the available players in each Leagues draft a little less devloped the higher one rises in the Divisions.

For instance, of the 48 players in a Div III League, there might be
10 5-star players (with all players 18 years old)
10 4-star players
10 3-star players
9 2-star players
9 1-star players

in Div II there might be
8 5-star players ( 80% 18, 20% 19 year old)
8 4-star players
8 3-star players
12 2-star players
12 1-star players

in Div I there might be
4 5-star players ( 25% 18, 75% 19 year old)
4 4-star players
10 3-star players
15 2-star players
15 1-star players

NBBA
2 5-star players ( all players 19 years old)
2 4-star players
14 3-star players
15 2-star players
15 1-star players

this would not check the inflation at the present, but would make it easier longterm, for Div III teams to move to a higher Division.

Also, the Buzzerbeater could adjust the star rating as needed from season to season to increase the chances of promotion.

FYI - The NBBA is the American Div I

I don't think anyone is questioning the need for changes or that there is a problem, we are questioning the specific measures taken to address the problems.

I totally agree with you. As I wrote on a french forum, I think these changes are wise and will help to have a stabilization of the prices.
Of course, some teams might not agree, especially those of the highest divisions that can earn a lot of money very easily now and don't want to lose that, they want to remain on the top and don't let other teams threaten for their spot but in the long term, keeping things as they are now would have dreadful effects.

I'm also looking forward to next season, hoping things will improve.

I think the part that you don't seem to understand is that these particular changes specifically hurt teams in the bottom half of the top divisions, not the teams on the top. The top teams will still make the most money and will feel a much lighter pinch.

In other words the gap between the top teams and the rest could possibly increase rather than the other way around.

Let me introduce an amendment if it could change the choices to draft giving the eight teams that do not go to the playoffs to have the first eight places basing them to the record and teams of the remaining postseason always based on the record so there is no risk that a team goes to playoffs does not exceed other that not go

Excuse for grammatical errors but are not very practical on english

I just ran into a language barrier. Ouch! No clue what you said there. I have a tiny headache now actually.

I like the idea of the promoted team getting the first pick in their new leagues draft, not the last pick in their old leagues draft. That or a financial boost, just like in the EPL.

Am I wrong in assuming higher quality players are available in higher leagues drafts? It's not the same appetizer as you go down buffet right?

Am I wrong in assuming higher quality players are available in higher leagues drafts?

Yes - the distribution is not affected by the league level.

I think one issue you've neglect is that a lot of time there are very few active teams and even fewer scouting players in the lower levels. When I was in Div IV, I got pretty much the cream of the crop in the draft pool.

Now that I'm in the upper divisions (II.1), I'll be lucky if I can get a guy that will see the court.


Steve

I slowed down a lot because I new I'd have one of the last picks. I'm def. investing a lot into next years draft. Not pulling a Derby by any means, but I know I'll end up around the bottom somewhere...

Slowed down = reduced your investment in scouting?

Steve