BuzzerBeater Forums

And i am just saying that draft is something which works in a close league, but not in one with relegation and promotion. Since the good player end as the top teams, instead of the bad teams. While kukoc say that the draft is needed, since relegated team would be screwed without it likes his one(hhe won the lower league 22-0).

I can see that you like my team. I did try to get up for 8 seasons, built my team in divI, relegated, sat in a minus, promoted with good tactics and crunching.
It's the player salary floor that should be adjusted. You can not assign draft picks depending on the teams next season! You can only assign them based on the season that just ended. The team that came last in that league is the weakest at that level. Why would you give the best draftee to a promoting team? He also might make the playoffs in the league he just promoted to. There is a serious hump you need to get over to be a regular in divI, I have overtaken it, you don't know what it is. Academys are just a way for stronger teams to guarantee themselves a good draftee. It has nothing to do with tanking.

Here is the list of teams relegating in last 5 seasons in Estonia. 3 have been able to promote again and hold their spot after relegation (bolded). I did go for 10 seasons but it was taking too long. Are you saying it's easy to get back up? The draft system is not the problem for tanking.

S15
BC Puukäed – relegated after 2 seasons in divI, playoff team in divII for 3 seasons, then relegated to divIII
BC Drunken Weirdos – relegated after 12 seasons in divI, relegated to divII ... quit
Pärnu Pärnad – relegated after 3 seasons of being on the edge of relegation, got back up after 2 seasons, relegated again, did not make the playoffs in divII
A.Unit – relegated after 7 seasons in divI ... quit

S16
BC St.Patrick – relegated after 10 seasons in divI, promoted, has not relegated
BC Lakeside – relegated after 12 seasons in divI, made the playoffs in divII ... quit
PK Kuusemäe – relegated after a few promotions and relegations, promoted again, relegated again, did not make the playoffs in divII
GAG vilistlased – relegated after his first promotion to divI, made the playoffs 2 seasons in divII, then relegated to divIII

S17
Raketid – relegated after his first promotion to divI, promoted again, has held his spot in divI
BC Valga Maakad – relegated after his first promotion to divI, playoff team in divII
Atlanta Trump Towers – relegated after 4 seasons of being on the edge of relegation, relegated again ... quit
LaLunaBasket – relegated after his first promotion to divI, promoted again, has held his spot in divI

S18
PK Kuusemäe – see S16
Bc väikesed Kunnid – relegated after his first promotion to divI, relegated from divII, is relegating in divIII
BC RV – relegated after 9 seasons in divI, relegated from divII, is relegating from divIII
Pärnu Pärnad – see S15

S19
Dalkia/Nybit – relegated after his promotin in S18, has been a divI team before, but it took him 4 seasons to get back up, is currently second with a 13-1 record in divII
Tegris – relegated after 3 seasons in divI ... quit
H2O – relegated after 4 seasons in divI, took him 4 seasons to get back up last time around, now is relegating from divII
TTÜ Tartu Kolledž – relegated after 4 seasons in divI, pragged about his tanking in the forums, has spent the money he earned, is trying to get back up, is failing pretty badly, sitting on a 8-6 record currently.

Last edited by Kukoc at 7/9/2012 4:51:53 PM

Excellent summary. What I would also like to know is of the three relegated teams that were able to bounce back which ones purposely tanked the season and which had fought to survive. My thesis is that if you throw the whole season and amass a fortune it is eaier to bounce back but if you fight and fail you are likely doomed.

So as the only league I know is the ABBL here it is.

S19
Pancakes with Jam and Cream - fully tanked the season and banked a fortune now 13-1 and looking good.
Glenelg Tigers - semi-tanked now 12-2 but unlikely to bounce back with a strong 14-0 team ahead of them.
Slam ! - 6-8 with no chance of coming back.
SmeltzTroopers - banned for cheating. RIP.

S18
Chelsea Seagulls - I was at the salary floor the whole season, training young superstars and preparing for the return. Now I am not only back but have the 3rd best record in the ABBL, tanking pays.
Hadders Heros - 4/10 in division II may be heading down.
Zazzocalypse - relegated again now in division III.
Kynlala Knights - 0/14 in division II heading down.

S17
SmeltzTroopers - tanked the entire season and bounced back easily.
Snuffies - 12/2 this season with a good chance but didn't make finals last season.
Doncaster Flames - relegated to division III.
High School Drop-outs -7/7 in division II struggling after falling short last season making finals.

S16
hopelessly addicted - tanked the season and bounced back.
AVALON JETS - relegated to division III, then won it and now 9/5 in division II.
adams guns 6/8 in division II.
Canberra Crushers went bot.

Is not the pattern 100% clear? Every team that bounced back had tanked the season in the ABBL. No team that didn't tank has bounced back. So of the last 12 teams that could get back 3 did, but far more are either dead or in division III.

Under the current model you can make $500k a week profit while tanking, plus do difficult training out of position that can add a fortune to the value of your players, plus do a little day trading on the side seeing you don't care who is on your roster (I didn't) and then hopefully get a $1 million draft pick. (I didn't). Does anyone doubt under the current economic model that with $8,000,000 as well as whatever you got for selling your players (and most of the tanking teams could buy similar players for less than they sold them as the prices go down and down each season) that you can promote? You can have $1-200k players at every position and just make a small loss each week and sweep through division II.

Last edited by yodabig at 7/9/2012 10:23:08 PM

Here is the funny part in Estonia. None of the bolded (promoting) teams were tankers.
BC St.Patrick - relegated because he thought he was safe from relegation games, sold his roster for offseason and surprisingly dropped to 6-th. Lost his relegation games. Was heavily in minus to get back up.
Raketid - was battling hard in his relegation season, surprisingly lost while having a home court in relegation games. He ended 6-th on his league side.
LaLunaBasket - Like I said I got promoted to a league side where only one team relegated in the previous season. I was building my team the whole divI season. I came into 8-th spot, but I did everything I could to not relegate, it was not enough.

Oh, maybe, I am misunderstanding what is the main problem of tanking because I have just started two seasons. I don't know what the stituation of the higher league is. But my point of view, you can't save much when you are in lower league, maybe there is a big different in the higher one.

If the fund raising is important to all, just show them winning is more benefial then losing.

Thought some of the posts suggested, I agree:
1) raise the salary floor.
2) make different TV contract revenue between the playoff teams, 5th & 8th, but also relegation team
a) playoff teams - the highest TV contract revenue
b) 5th & 8th - the lowerest TV contract revenue
c) relegation team - the average league revenue from playoff teams, 5th and 8th.
3) adjust the arena attendence affection extend to 5 matches before.
4) now is no different between you lose 1 point or 10 points, even 40 points in one match. So, make 2 or 3 level of negative effects when you lose.
5) The arena attendence may also take the PD value as reference.
6) adjust the minimum attendence of each level of league.( maybe it has. I don't know)

thank you!

Last edited by Cliff Green at 7/12/2012 11:36:08 PM

Not to you, but everyone. Please do shutup about the drafts. This is about tanking. Now I may not be such an experienced bb player BUT a simple a way I've figured out to fix this IS: Depending on what league you are in, introduce sponsorship contracts. At the moment I'm in league 3. Earning roughly 20k a week with a full arena. A tanker however would be earning 100k a week, if I'm not correct.

Sooo, why not make a sponsorship contract which determines how much money you earn per game won, but not only that, but also how much money you will win if you make the playoffs.

Eg. In III.2 (random) team A earns 30k a week. Through the contract he earns another 20k per game + 10k for every time the fan favourite is played 40+ minutes (listed in the fan survey) therefore 50k all up and 80k per week. Team B however has 5 players, all of which are scrubs. He has the same sponsorship contract, although he is tanking so the only extra money he is earning is from the star player earning or the fan favourite. As an enticing factor for both teams, if you make the playoffs, you earn an extra 100k...

Newly promoted players will have larger contracts though. Simply because they have to adapt to a harder league therefore they'll be earning something like 80k in EXTRA money. Any flaws, or further ideas, let me know. :)

It's the player salary floor that should be adjusted.

Disagree. I won my conference a couple of seasons ago while juste 10k above the salary floor. I shouldn't be punished for training salary efficient players.

I still think attendance should be a function of perceived financial power. If fans think you have money to spend, they should expect you to try to compete.

In some lower leagues you could win even while being below the salary floor. Obviously there should be different constants for different league levels. Should they tie it to the whole season running salary average or start of the season salary etc. There are a bunch of things to think about.

I shouldn't be punished for training salary efficient players.

This is a really strong statement. Should a team be punished to spend anything if he can outplay 4 bot teams in his conference? Perhaps that one more salary efficiant player "you are punished" to add, might take you to promotion level (while your opponents are already spending over the raised floor)? Maybe your leaguemates are not good enough or are more focused on cup games. Maybe your memory fails you (we can't actually check if you are telling the truth here, or remember the facts correctly, right?).

We actually have no real parameters for tanking teams. I just hear: "everyone is doing it", "it's the only tactic available if you want to win" bla bla bla. Then there are the suggestions how to spot and punish a tanker. If a team loses by (insert any number here). If he loses (insert that number again) 2-6 (whichever you like of these numbers) times in a row. Has walkovers in a row. Has (insert number again) walkovers in a season. All this is irrelevant tbh, as teams have different league/cup/tvgame/rivalgame you name it goals. It's called tactics to get ahead of your league-/countrymates. If it sometimes requires you to start your subs and have towelboys back them up, so be it (unless ofcourse you want to train GS the whole season).

Obviously we still need to leave some leverage in the salary floor (for teams who have been sitting in +-0 for a long time and have a team full of 33+ players), to actually make some money and help teams get back to their feet. But the current salary floor in the top divisions is too low.

With salary floor we are not trying to punish salary efficient teams, but trying to limit excess income for teams who are not trying to compete.

NB! I think your idea of tieing fan reactions to available funds is a good one. But I think most of us know that "The general manager is doing everything he can to try to improve the team" and "I am familiar with the star players, and am not afraid that they will be transferred" are not really heavy hitters compared to "The team played well in our last league game" :)...

I know and this is why they should increase the impact it has on attendance, provided fans already have a rough idea of your finances, which I doubt.

But salary should never be considered for anything else than to decide how much a player costs to his team. A skill floor (aggregate skill count) would make more sense than a salary floor, for what it's worth, even if there is no real life equivalent.

But salary should never be considered for anything else than to decide how much a player costs to his team.

Just like in the NBA there is a minimum you have to spend (85% of the salary cap). It's your own choice, are you filling that cap with more salary efficiant players or get fewer higher salary prime skilled players.
Remember your goal should be winning, not getting most income while finishing second.

In the NBA the goal is the same as it is here, dissuade tanking by forcing teams to be competitive. Putting a minimum spending floor is the only way to force tanking teams to hire players with skill.

In this game player skills are objective, measurable numbers. Even salary is a function of player skills. Why use salary as a measuring tool for competitiveness when player skill is what determines it?

Your goal should be winning, not spending more money than the next team.

Putting a minimum spending floor is the only way to force tanking teams to hire players with skill.

Are you trying to say, there are no overpaid players in the NBA? LOL. You can just check how many teams have used their amnesty exception. You can look at the salaries paid in 2011. Although you have to be familiar with the NBA in order to know who is overpaid. Reading NBA.com once a week is not enough... I can throw in a few names: R.Lewis (22.1mil), G.Arenas (19.2mil), A.Jamison (15.0mil), B.Davis (13.9mil). Although I would never have signed J.Johnson, E.Brand, R.Gay to max deals and are currently overpaid, they still do produce at a decent level.

I had a suggestion about how salary floor could be calculated, some time ago. Belgium has 440 users, so basically divIII is their lowest league (leaving only 104 teams to divIV - enough to fill 6,5 leagues out of 64 divIV leagues). Ofcourse you can win lower divisions with all SF lineup. Every competition level needs to be looked at. The salary floor might be fine in the lowest league. It's not fine currently in the top divisions.

Your goal should be winning, not spending more money than the next team.

Nobody is forcing you to spend anything. But you will pay the minimum salary floor that is considered "competitive" in that division level.