BuzzerBeater Forums

I used the SF situation as an example only. Obviously everyone wont just train SF.
The extra training that would come out of the D-league would not just affect high-potential players, but all potential players at all positions, in all leagues.
So what you might find are the following scenario's:
- Team A draft's good potential player which fits into his training plan, but already has too many trainee's. Lets new trainee play in D-league and receive training. Normally, would just fire him or sell him for peanuts.
- Team B draft's 3 'Star' potential players. Instead of firing them, decides to put one of them through the D-league. They receive training, as opposed to just being dumped. After 2 years he has a 20 year old star potential player who has a $10k salary, which he puts on the market for sale.
- Team C drafts an 'All-star' potential player who has atrocious stats in out of position area's. Normally he would fire him, because he is useless, and not only that, this player doesn't fall into his training plan. Instead, this user puts him through the D-league, and the player gets out of position training for a few years. After 2 years, he has a kind of player that is very rare in the league market at the moment. IMO.

So its that Team B and C scenario, whereby teams just fire their draftee's which would A) Lead to them training them and giving the market more variety, (particular situation C) and also
B) Players become more interested in the draft. I think this is the key message for the D-league idea. Current draft is a mess, and if there can be more options given to user's with their draftee's, then that part of the game would improve and become more fun.

Hey Shoei

yer good points. Let me clarify a few.
At this stage the D-league would economic free. The only cost incurred would be for the salary of the players that are playing in it, which, the idea has been suggested that only 3 league players... So in essence, max 3x 18-21 year old league players, which you might already have anyways. So the economic expenses would be minimal.

I like your example of O'bannon, adam morrison, eric montross, kwame brown, micheal olowakandi etc etc Yes these guys did become first round rejects after a few seasons. But when comparing NBA to BB, if you go through your league's previous draft, you would probably find about 5-6 of them are still playing. (FYI, my league had 6 guys from First round still being played). In the NBA, this number does not tend to be that low. Maybe after a few seasons yer, not after 7 weeks.

So one of the idea's of the D-league would be that teams would be more likely to keep some of their draft picks, and train them into useable backups/starters for lower leagues.

how many nba players out there on every year being drafted eventually develop to stars versus to how many become regular starters versusthe bust and role players and those who didnt get renewed.

- I would say there is a much higher level of rookie's being retained in NBA, than there is in BB.

that is why i never invest money in rookies at all.

-Maybe a D-league would change your view on this?

but i think with the current low prices, training player isn't that valuable already, if you now train them "with cost"(at least the salary or like initial suggested with a fee) the avaible player will be even more but the need is still the same. This will make training there own player even less valuable, don't knw if you get them the effect you like.

At the beginning of the game we trained, most player just because there wasn't valuable target, now we have aconstantly I just say the average player get trained four season, and one or two position training is the most common options, then we already need 1 player every season for training. But we don't loose player and the finished product are often cheaper, then the initial drafted player through the ton of player who stay in game through free agency. So i don't think, that especially with slower training, the d-league would be good for the market since it just raise the amount of avaible player even more maybe the starting skill decline of the first trained player with high potential will help this trend else i would think that the cut off of the free agency will help more.

something ive realised is that everyone has different opinions about the current state of the market. Not everyone is on the same page with regards to whether ceratin players on the market are 'cheap, well-priced, expensive' or wehther or not there are a variety of skilled players. Its very opinion based.
I come at it only from my own personal perspective and history of looking/buying players, which may be different to other peeps.

Otherwise i do understand wher you are coming from. Whats the point in having 4 trainee's if you are already struggling with 3?
Maybe look at that scenario from a different angle. Eg: I only have 1 trainee at the moment that i really care about. All my other training pretty much goes to waste. I can afford to buy another 18 year old or 2 to train, but i dont know how I will fit him into the minutes given my current league-cup standing. Imagine if you could do that without jepordising your league/cup?

There is a downside to training (especially in the upper leagues), but I think that it is good. Think about it. If there was a way to train effectivly and win in the higher division (like micronations can), play the cup with full strenght and the league with full strenght with no downsides. It would be a pointless game. The game is about choise. What will you focus on and what are you willing to sacrifice to get what you want.

I think that is an excellent point, the current system does balance things a bit.

I still think there is a place for a D-League but it should have a large nuber of restrictions.
Age: Max 25. (We aren't developing 33 year olds)
Salary: Max $10,000. (Developing players not fine tuning stars)
Potential: Max All-star. (LeBron or Dwight or Kobe aren't going to the D-League)
Time: Half a season. You can buy or sell players at any time but moving them from your team to the D-League team should only happen twice a season during the offseason and during the all star break.
Trainer: Max one less than the real team. If your real team has a level 6 trainer the D-League can't have greater than level 5.
Costs: Income = 0, outgoings are normal with a salary floor. (No gate reciepts, TV money or Merchandising for D-League but you still have to pay your players and trainer.) The salary floor should be set so teams would be silly to not have a roster of ten guys on salaries of $4,000 each as well as a star or two so $50,000 seems a nice round figure.

So if you want a D-League team you can but it will cost you about $60,000 or more a week. Obviously even division V teams can still run it at a profit by selling some of the players they train but it would still require quite a bit of management and investment up front.

Reading all of this it sounds beautiful and elegant but would probably be another complication for a new player. I can't remember how they run the development teams in other games. I think in Hattrick you can just call up a random player once a week from your development squad but they were always useless.

Last edited by yodabig at 12/22/2011 5:26:31 PM

hey yoda, nice summary, how you have described it is great, even if some of the numbers got tweaked a bit ie: age limit, salary limit etc.

Im personally thinking the restrictions should be slightly harsher, eg lower age, less salary, etc.

i think it would be a complicaiton for a new player. But you know what? When i first started playing this game, about the only thing that made sense straight up was .... well atually i was going to say setting a lineup but even that, that proved to be more complicated than originally thought.
so its more just a little extra feature that as a player becomes more experienced, they can start to take advantage of.