BuzzerBeater Forums

i dont see why you should just be saticfied with running one type of offense.

Because LI is the most bestest?

I could look at your 26-27 season or you could just tell me!! Especially because I don't know what skills your players had back then.

I'm actually keen to know so if you would share, I would be grateful.

My old SB players had a very reasonable salary for the level I was at when they were capped. 76, 81 and 105k. And all of them had triple 17 or higher in ID/RB/SB.

Out of curiosity, what percentage of BB teams have three players all triple 17 or higher in ANY skills? 2%? 4%? 1%? Is there even a SINGLE player in most USA Div IV leagues with three 17's? As just one example, I am playing in the finals of my Div IV, and there is just ONE player on my team with ONE skill of 17 or above (plus one legendary free throw shooter). Just TWO of your players salaries add up to mote than the average TEAM salary in my league all season long.
You guys crack me up, having your oh-so-serious conversations about your big teams, when 95% of BB teams are nothing like that.
Seriously, I sometimes wonder if that isn't a factor in the decline in participation in BB, in that the vast majority of managers are pretty much shut out of the serious conversations about game strategy by the fact that what is discussed is light years away from what they know their own teams to be.

EDIT: I went back and looked at this comment that caused such a shiite-storm, and really, it's pretty reasonable and nothing to get excited about. I see why nobody disputed the points I raised. What's wrong with you guys that you cannot look at a bit of constructive criticism? Maybe we need a symbol on some of the forum threads, a big red "X" for threads that only apply to the top leagues. It would save the vast majority of managers a lot of time reading stuff that is just pie in the sky to them, totally irrelevant to the leagues they are playing in.

Last edited by Mike Franks at 7/31/2015 11:50:33 PM

So instead of having a triple 17 player, have a triple 12 or 13 one, very cheap, very efficient for your levels.

Hi,

I don't think the conversation intended to be demeaning from the start. Teams in the lower leagues can still apply similar concepts. I've touched on this matter before in similar discussions where people try to relate in pure numbers, instead of relative to their competition. It's just much easier if things were discussed at DI/B3 level and then teams playing a tier or more below this may adjust this accordingly.

Regards.

Such a humble and eloquent response. It would be great if more people did the same.

+1

DO you seriously expect that people who are losing games and unable to promote after seasons after season of losing have anything to legitimately contribute here???

Wow. That kind of arrogance makes my point even better than I did.

Hi,

I don't think the conversation intended to be demeaning from the start.
Regards.

Thanks for your reply. No, I don't think it was intended to be demeaning. My point was just that so much of the conversation is pie in the sky to the vast majority of managers. The vast majority of managers have never even seen any "triple-17" nor have they had any players with the lofty salaries like those mentioned. And I see that no one disputes this; the best they can do is dance around it and try to justify it. "Do as I do, only less." Riiight.