BuzzerBeater Forums

Very, very good post.
I like your analogy with million dollars houses.
It's been explained countless times but people just can't grasp it.

I am only D.III. I can afford to buy a 100k C. with a plan, I could even pay 10 times what they are going for. But I won't balance my budget.
I have seen teams with one of those in my league. They scrap 2 or 3 extra wins with them. But it's not efficient enough. They usually end up parting ways.
It looks a bargain but it's not, alone it won't get you promoted in many countries.
They are worth nothing to me. If I was offered one, I would refuse it.

Those players are for Top 2 leagues. And as those who need them already have them, this is what drives prices down. It's been explained countless times... There is no demand. It used to be part of BB 101, how to make cash and buy your way up the leagues. It's not anymore for close to 10 seasons, this was the middle ages of Buzzerbeater.
Stop living in the past boys, move on.

The current pricing system promotes renting players for short periods. Others may disagree but I would prefer that this strategy's effectiveness is reduced.

I don't see many of these rentals, they are bought for speculation mostly.

Anyway, rentals aren't new. Maybe players were more expensive to buy but we had more cash and players were easy to sell afterwards, sometimes with a benefit ! Remember prices were constantly rising. I don't know which is worse.

I don't see it as a bigger problem today.
The problem is more that it's too easy to tank and save cash to sustain a monstruous salary mass for a short time, like for 2 or 3 relegation games. This is tremendously efficient. I am cool and relaxed with gaming, I can lose but I'd really hate to lose a relegation fight against this kind of cheap "smart" tactics.

I see loads of rental tactic, very often.

I don't see many of these rentals, they are bought for speculation mostly.

Really? I find this tactic is growing more and more common all the time due to the deflation in the transfer market.

I didn't picture it to myself as rentals but on second thought, it's plain rental and can be called that.But I don't relate it to deflation but to tanking. It's one of the byproducts of tanking for me.

I am afraid the BBs don't see all the negative effects the too easy tanking is responsible for.It's not only about fairness blablabla like they talk about. It's disruptive in many ways.

The news say the strategy is not very successful... I don't know what they are talking about. The nocive tanking is the one when teams tank hard and still stay up. It seems they only look at tanking that win leagues.

Tanking? Tanking was around back in the old days too just that not as effective. Why wasn't it effective? Because a whole season of tanking you will be lucky to buy 2 solid players. Now a days if you tank for a season, you can buy 3-5+ gun players with spare cash on hand to go over the soft cap especially tanking in the top divisions.

The only reason why tanking has become such a popular tactic because of the fact that money value is so deflated. Deflated to the point you see these type of transfers. I wouldn't be surprised if it hasn't reached equilibrium yet and player prices may continue to fall unless something is done to deter player devaluation. The reason why I say it hasn't reached equilibrium yet is because the BB world need to wait a full cycle for the high potential guys (not allstar*) to all retire to assess what is needed to be done. Whether it be to reduce the number of high potential to be drafted, reduce the number of free agents, set a player salary cap, move playoff transfer deadline earlier or any idea you can come up with. So, the biggest problem isn't tanking but player value.

Last edited by Whitebeard at 8/20/2012 11:44:31 PM

Tanking? Tanking was around back in the old days too just that not as effective. Why wasn't it effective? Because a whole season of tanking you will be lucky to buy 2 solid players. Now a days if you tank for a season, you can buy 3-5+ gun players with spare cash on hand to go over the soft cap especially tanking in the top divisions.

The only reason why tanking has become such a popular tactic because of the fact that money value is so deflated. Deflated to the point you see these type of transfers. I wouldn't be surprised if it hasn't reached equilibrium yet and player prices may continue to fall unless something is done to deter player devaluation. The reason why I say it hasn't reached equilibrium yet is because the BB world need to wait a full cycle for the high potential guys (not allstar*) to all retire to assess what is needed to be done. Whether it be to reduce the number of high potential to be drafted, reduce the number of free agents, set a player salary cap, move playoff transfer deadline earlier or any idea you can come up with. So, the biggest problem isn't tanking but player value.

Said like a boss.

Thank you for this intelligent answer.

Some good points and some points I disagree with.

Cash now has more value and is harder to generate. 10 seasons back, nobody was worrying about losing purchasing power but more about gaining more as fast or faster as the others, draftees or trained players were selling for more every new season. So after selling you could buy.
You say a tanking team couldn't have bought 2 solid players. It's wrong because a top team's roster was worth 10M+.They would have sold for good cash because there was not enough trained or half-trained players. So it could buy you back a team without even tanking.
Players were assets. In the case you wanted to rebuild, saving on salaries was not the best strategy, it was better to invest on players, the margin benefit on them was higher. You didn't even have to train them.

I like to pick random examples to illustrate my points.
So let's look at Austalia's ABBL, season 10 : http://www.buzzerbeater.com/league/1041/overview.aspx?sea...
The league's winner is : (38624)
The finals last game was played on Dec 12th, 2009.
So to remind us what was going on at the time, let's look at a sold player around this date. The closest is this player.(2452316) .C, 26 yo, sold $ 1 299 000. He was probably more skilled than he is now. what was his avg rating ? S10 : 10.5... Ok player, I guess. what if it was a fluke ? Sold for $ 1 863 000 a few weeks later.
So when somewhat ordinary players sell for this amount and covers you several weeks of salaries, there is really no need to save on them. Salaries are not a problem.
Let's dig it. what was this money for ? with this sell for $ 1 591 900 (I let you look at the player:(669524)), cash was raised to buy this player for $ 3 378 700(3110125).
This was just before the market crash that occured in the beginning of 2010.

All good. So what was the problem ? It looks like heavens.
Older teams had their assets growing and growing. what about new teams ? :) The starter's kit : crap roster, 300k... The gap was becoming unsurpassable.

I'd have a lot more to say about this but I'll leave it there.

He wanted to win and paid top dollar to do that.. Its foolish yes but at same you have to do it at some point in Bb