BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Muted players, purchased to win a CUP/avoid relegation

Muted players, purchased to win a CUP/avoid relegation

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
178639.53 in reply to 178639.52
Date: 3/31/2011 4:40:43 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
8989
The downside I see to that is that at some point you have to "give up" your trainee to the U21 and/or the NT so that the NT can own them instead. If I did the work to train up a kick butt SF for the NT, I wouldn't be too happy if that player was unavailable for any game I wanted to put him in, as opposed to being "allowed" to play him in certain games.

This Post:
00
178639.54 in reply to 178639.53
Date: 3/31/2011 4:55:06 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
387387
Hence the provision that clubs can turn down the central contract offer (but then have to keep the player for a set period of time).

This would protect clubs from having their PGs, SGs and SFs taken out of their clubss while allowing to receive some compensation for training PFs and Centres past the point of economic efficiency for their club.

Last edited by Elmacca at 3/31/2011 4:56:02 PM

This Post:
00
178639.55 in reply to 178639.54
Date: 3/31/2011 5:33:22 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
8989
That then has the downside of shrinking the pool of available NT players to only the number of coaches that are specifically training a player for that purpose. I can't think there would be many people willing to set aside 200-300K of their team salary for a few seasons to train one up in the *hopes* that that player will be good enough to be taken off their hands. Remember, there are quite a few economically unfeasible but NT worthy guards and SFs out there as well and all that salary comes out of training.

From: Marot

This Post:
11
178639.56 in reply to 178639.50
Date: 3/31/2011 8:58:31 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
916916
600k center in average ... is still probably better than 100k proficient...


I guess the 100k would be better in that case ;)

This Post:
00
178639.57 in reply to 178639.55
Date: 4/1/2011 5:11:18 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
387387
Not necessarily, that can be controlled by the number of central contracts made available. Also anything upto 300k for a franchise player is economically feasible for top league teams; there are few non big men who earn more than that.

There are quite a few 'farm' teams who do make training an NT player their main purpose, unfortunately. They have a limited shelf life (they all run out of money eventually) and the playes they've created bounce around the TL. With a central contract system, they'd have a different ending. Or at least, the numbers of these players on the TL would be greatly reduced.

From: korsarz

This Post:
00
178639.58 in reply to 178639.57
Date: 4/1/2011 6:43:17 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
202202
to be honest I don't see much in common between the topic discussed in this thread and latest posts... I see that NT-mutant-idea as a separate suggestion, much more difficult to implement, I'd prefer if it wouldn't get in the way of the discussion started here (another words, I suggest you to open another thread for it)

From: Toddday
This Post:
00
178639.59 in reply to 178639.58
Date: 4/1/2011 12:46:01 PM
HellasVerona
III.12
Overall Posts Rated:
00
players should be on the transfer list for 7 days instead of 3.

and maybe, we need to implement the idea of franchise players...

From: korsarz

This Post:
00
178639.60 in reply to 178639.59
Date: 4/1/2011 2:30:56 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
202202
players should be on the transfer list for 7 days instead of 3.

3 days is a standard in many on-line manager games, there are many reasons behind that and I don't see why it should be changed.... also I see nothing related to the topic in your post

This Post:
22
178639.61 in reply to 178639.60
Date: 4/1/2011 5:32:50 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
88
I have read every single post here. The only thing that made the most sense to me is having to pay the salary for 4 weeks no matter what and pushing the deadline back two more weeks for players eligible for playoffs.

This Post:
00
178639.62 in reply to 178639.61
Date: 4/1/2011 6:03:22 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
202202
I have read every single post here. The only thing that made the most sense to me is having to pay the salary for 4 weeks no matter what and pushing the deadline back two more weeks for players eligible for playoffs.

glad to hear that, those are the two suggestions that seem the best to me too

This Post:
00
178639.63 in reply to 178639.60
Date: 4/1/2011 6:29:03 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
4040
I can see how longer TL period can make stronger interest. Normally it is like that manager want to sell 1-2 players per month if he is really active, so it shouldnt be a problem.

Advertisement