BuzzerBeater Forums

Looking at the transfer-list, in some cases, 160 TSP players are going for as little as 3m; due to salary inflation, very few D1 managers can afford to pay the weekly salaries of such players which is one reason they are so cheap on the transfer list.

There has been an influx 150TSP+ players. There are far more of these players than there are managers that can afford to pay the weekly salary of these players, which drives down the TL value. That's an advantage for the top B3 managers who will simply eat their inflated salaries . . . something very few managers can do.

And it doesn't just stop at the 'Lebron' type of players. You see 140-130 TSP players with salaries at 230K+ which only D1 managers can afford to play those inflated prices. If more managers are able to afford to pay the weekly salary of any particular player, that will drive up their value on the transfer list, making it harder to buy these players at a discounted price.

It would be much harder to buy a 155-160+ TSP player if they were going for 6m+, as they should.

I was recently in D-1 and if I were not tanking, I could have easily bought a NT center with 144 TSP for around 300K, but why? Because I can easily absorb the player's salary. Imagine being able to buys 5 NT players for under 1m, because no one can afford to pay their weekly salaries. Well, if you are in D-1 or competing in the B3 you can do that at a faction of the cost -- which is a massive and unfair advantage.

I believe if we adjust the cap or fix the inflated salaries it will make for a more competitive and healthy economy, driving up the TL value of players. These inflated salaries will not stop the upper echelon of B3 teams from acquiring 'Thanos' like power, acquiring 160+ TSP players like they are affinity stones at a discounted transfer-list price; while they simply absorb their inflated salaries, something only the 1% of managers will be able to do if they save up the money/revenue.

Anyways, I like the 8-man rotation idea, because it forces B3 managers to use up cap space on three additional roster spots so they can't just buy 5 160+ TSP players without any depth at all; however, if the 8-man rotation is put into practice . . . the salary inflation will need to be addressed one way or another.

Otherwise, no team could afford to field a competitive roster under the current salary cap with an enforced 8-man rotation.

Last edited by A-Dub at 10/12/2021 8:28:39 PM

I think maybe to control players playing time there should also be more fouling, some even matches finish with one team with 20 fouls and other teams sometimes like 6 fouls for the whole team for the whole match, I think there should be more fouling and more fouling out players, that maybe will force teams to have bigger roster and control their playing time

I think maybe to control players playing time there should also be more fouling, some even matches finish with one team with 20 fouls and other teams sometimes like 6 fouls for the whole team for the whole match, I think there should be more fouling and more fouling out players, that maybe will force teams to have bigger roster and control their playing time

More fouls? No thanks. That would hurt training minutes. Players already foul out in the first 10 minutes of a game, I'll pass on any solutions involving increased injuries or fouls.

Last edited by A-Dub at 10/12/2021 8:13:25 PM

i would like to know if those ideas to increase the revenue would mostly advantage top teams and help them stay above everyone else or if the teams in lower would still get a shot at becoming the best teams ?

I basically addressed your question in my above post: (312180.30), but to summarize:

I believe that by fixing the salary inflation, by any means deemed necessary or appropriate (i.e. raising the salary cap, lowering player salaries, or a mixture of both), this will help lead to a more competitive and balanced economy, because more managers would be able to afford the weekly salary of any particular player which would help drive up a players transfer list value.

Moreover, with the 8-man rotation being enforced, B3 managers and all manager alike, would need to pay for three additional roster spots instead of simply paying five 160+ TSP players and no depth players.

In theory, they would be at a competitive disadvantage if they were to play three scrubs as substitutes during a B3 match. And of course by substitute players, I mean, the three depth players would need to be slotted in the 'backup' positions and not just simply dressed as reserves that won't receive any game minutes.

Just to add to that: if salaries were to be lowered, I would like to see a more balanced approach where salaries reflect TSP rather than individual skills, more or less.