BuzzerBeater Forums

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.

You keep missing my point. I'm not sure why you think I'm saying there are no overpaid players in the NBA, but since skills are subjective in the real world compared to objective in this game, the NBA has no choice but to act on salary in order to force teams to feature skilled players. Then there are contracts in the NBA, which can turn out good or bad (which is why some players are overpaid and some underpaid), which does not apply in this game anyway...

You keep missing my point. I'm not sure why you think I'm saying there are no overpaid players in the NBA, but since skills are subjective in the real world compared to objective in this game, the NBA has no choice but to act on salary in order to force teams to feature skilled players. Then there are contracts in the NBA, which can turn out good or bad (which is why some players are overpaid and some underpaid), which does not apply in this game anyway...

How are the skills subjective in the real world?
Does LeBron James jump higher in Miami than he did in Cleveland because Miami "thinks" he jumps higher?

The skills are just as objective as here. The subjectivity is just the same as here. Do the skills that the player has, fit in with my team, fit in with my offense, fit in with my defense? If not, should I try and force it, should I find a different player whom can, or should I change my offense? Sometimes even a simple option of "should I bring this player off the bench" like with jason terry.

How are the skills subjective in the real world?
Does LeBron James jump higher in Miami than he did in Cleveland because Miami "thinks" he jumps higher?

The skills are just as objective as here.

no, but LeBron play a little different role in cleveland then in Miami which maybe hide 1-2 weaknesses better or underline his strength more.

And the discipline "jumping high", is properly one you can measure very good but for example the Jumpshot is described more roughly in real live then here where agent know it "exactly" and put it into salary calculation.

While in basketball, the scouts often have problems to predict how player, will play after a single good season or when they reach a higher level(i.e. Morrision).

Also there are in reality manager who are better or worse, in getting the max paycheck.

Really?

Are you sure you're not mistaking skills for stats?

I won my II.div league from this position from salary point of view (179161.3).

So if you go after the fan survey, which already drops for a team who loses most of his games in divI, it does not matter if it's a tanker or normal team. Tanker still nets near 500k. How do you differenciate a tanker and a normal team? Can you say 100% that this or that team is a tanker because of ...
That's why the salary floor needs to be adjusted.

Your skill floor suggestion is way out there. You can make teams pay extra salarys, what happens to teams under the skill floor, they get removed from the league?, get additional skills assigned to them?, get fined? If I have mono/double/tripple skill players, I already get punished by salary and ingame performance.