Will I invest 140k (10k a week) to get a player around 1500$ which I will be forced to pay for 14 weeks, so a total of 161k.Or.Will I invest nothing and pay a player around 3000$ which I will be forced to pay for 14 weeks, so a total of 37k? And I wish to point out that he will be better in Cup (and scrimmage, I like to win my scrimmages) than the other. If I'm lucky, I still will get my 1500$ without investing nothing.Who says that investing in the draft means that you will get a lesser player (one who will have lower salary and ability)?This logic is beyond meYou said that. http://www.buzzerbeater.com/community/forum/read.aspx?thr...
Will I invest 140k (10k a week) to get a player around 1500$ which I will be forced to pay for 14 weeks, so a total of 161k.Or.Will I invest nothing and pay a player around 3000$ which I will be forced to pay for 14 weeks, so a total of 37k? And I wish to point out that he will be better in Cup (and scrimmage, I like to win my scrimmages) than the other. If I'm lucky, I still will get my 1500$ without investing nothing.Who says that investing in the draft means that you will get a lesser player (one who will have lower salary and ability)?This logic is beyond me
Will I invest 140k (10k a week) to get a player around 1500$ which I will be forced to pay for 14 weeks, so a total of 161k.Or.Will I invest nothing and pay a player around 3000$ which I will be forced to pay for 14 weeks, so a total of 37k? And I wish to point out that he will be better in Cup (and scrimmage, I like to win my scrimmages) than the other. If I'm lucky, I still will get my 1500$ without investing nothing.
The idea is that by not allowing to fire or sell a player drafted (at least on the first round/s), will cause ALL users to put more into their training and into their scouting.BUT, as someone else pointed out, it would actually probably lead to teams investing in the draft to find the WORST player in the draft, (ie: lowest salary) so that for the next year, they pay the least amount of money.Great - this is a strategy, but is still mean that they invest thought and action for the draft.In addition, I'm not sure that all will do the same, and what is more important is that this will really cause users and the BB-masters to think how to improve the draft (if needed).
The idea is that by not allowing to fire or sell a player drafted (at least on the first round/s), will cause ALL users to put more into their training and into their scouting.BUT, as someone else pointed out, it would actually probably lead to teams investing in the draft to find the WORST player in the draft, (ie: lowest salary) so that for the next year, they pay the least amount of money.
The idea is that by not allowing to fire or sell a player drafted (at least on the first round/s), will cause ALL users to put more into their training and into their scouting.
NBA is drafting 60 players, that are the best of their class (to be honest, second round hardly sees any NBA action). We are drafting 154416 players + bot team drafts. You want them all to be NBA level?
But honestly, to kill training for all and give top leagues teams better draft would be a game killer.
Pini, you´re still wrong. NBA teams don´t have to sign their first rounders. Plenty NBA teams don´t. And you keep telling us the opposite.