BuzzerBeater Forums

Make it make sense!!! I’m close to tanking, this group isn’t working! Overpaying for losses!

that was some hot sauce brotha! ill just say im hoping you dont trigger him to maintain that payroll cause im still feeling that season opener home TV loss to a 900k+ payroll

to the unconventional approach, ill continue my almost 70 season complaints about that poorly structured economy and the loopholes and bandaids it creates (its tempting, almost did the same to compete in that first game, but also worried about getting stuck with some NT player that cant be fired)

Great stuff man, much appreciated!

Another disappoint start to the season for this team as well.

Thats pretty much our thing, thought I might end up blowing it up and selling off trainees for $ down the stretch. Jason made a good point, a 11k arena not exactly getting it done even at III level.

Gotta pump those guard numbers up, low offensive flow impacting efficiency

I am struggling to understand where the aggressive tone is coming from, but anyhow. Forum rules are clear.

You are obviously trying to say that it feels unrealistic to be able to buy players and not pay for their weekly salaries. I agree and, as I said last season in this forum, I absolutely believe that the rules should change such that when one buys a player, you have to pay at least one week of their salary. Currently, this is implemented only for NT players.

It is an interesting discussion why this has not been implemented in the 18 real-life years of this game. I have not asked any BB, but my assumption is that either they believe:
(1) this strategy is not beneficial, or
(2) even if it was temporarily beneficial, the market value of the players would adjust accordingly without the need for their regulation, at which point the strategy would stop being sensible

From my perspective, in am not convinced yet about (1), although I could certainly list a few negatives:
- almost impossible to do a good playoff run in div 3 and higher,
- requires very active play, at which point other strategies might make more sense,
- minimal chances on Tuesdays vs teams with a strong roster and good GS,
- minimal chances against div I and II level teams (which might partially explain why BBs haven't bothered),
- a good fraction of the economic gains are wasted if you end up in positions 5-7 and you are paired against a strong team.

And (2) is not happening, but that's not exactly my fault - in fact I am clearly pushing these prices higher. There are only a few dozen relevant TL players each week and only a handful of teams pursuing them (I am seeing the same 5-10 teams bidding against me every week).

What is interesting though about your post is that you seem to have the opinion that it is the users' responsibility to keep the game as realistic as possible with their every action, instead merely playing the game under the current setup and (optionally) requesting from BBs to make improvements. The whole game objective is basically a balance of game performance + team growth vs expenses, but actually trying to maximize that ratio is somehow wrong?

Not really sure why are you failing to understand the tone when you stated "You are obviously trying to say that it feels unrealistic". Seems that you understand where I was coming from perfectly well.

So, since you made a case...I'll give my 2 cents :-) I have thought your strategy is lame since I learned about you doing it last season before I was in this league. I don't like it. I personally believe it's unrealistic, as previously stated, it throws off the Stats, season records, and team ratings. I don't think it's in line with the spirit of a Basketball Simulation Game.

Aside from snide comments to a couple of my BB friends about your strategy, I haven't said anything publicly, because it is what it is. However, after Tough's awesome write up and rankings...I blurted out to myself "How can this "team" be ranked #2, when they aren't a team, but a rotating cycle of players each week". When that thought came to mind, I couldn't help but make a comment, more to be funny than anything else.

You are correct about the rules. And please note, I never said you are cheating, or breaking the rules. I just think it's a weak strategy, and I don't like it. You are free to run your team however you see fit as long as it's with the rules. Just like its your prerogative to run your team how you want, it's mine to point out the absurdity of it. I think its interesting you go against the grain like you do, and then get a little upset and defensive when called out on it. You do you :-) It's okay!

That said, another reason I don't like it, is because in truth, there are some ways you are being rewarded for this strategy. And sometimes your rewards are at the expense of others. Like it was previously said, someone had the bad luck of not only facing you in week 1, but it was also a TV game...So, your strategy left a negative impact on another team that goes beyond that one game. Because of my dislike for your strategy, I am disappointed to see you get rewarded for it. But that's just me, and my opinion :-)

Fortunately, few are doing what you do...if it were more prevalent, I would lose interest in this game fast. And like was previously said as well, BB has a history of the band aid approach to "Fixing" things, rather than working on the foundation of the problems. One of the easy solutions, like you said, charge the salary for a week when firing a guy...kind of like they do with staff. However, to me, that doesn't address the real issues of this game, and just creates other problems. It's already challenging enough to manage your players, arena, staff etc. with all of the restrictions, and then add in minute management, it's another layer of difficulty. However, one thing most of us do to survive all of that, is to buy scrimmage scrubs to balance out minutes, and still get a win over bot teams. However, if what you are doing causes BB to charge one weeks salary for any purchased player...teams are going to have to choose between staying in the tournament, or blowing up game shape etc.

Nothing against you personally :-) I am just not a fan of your strategy...and the #2 ranking put the whole issue on the Tee for me to speak out against it Real life sports is full of drama...Looks we both did our job to make this feel more realistic...you with your lame strategy, and me with my criticism of it

Good luck the rest of the way!

p.s. The deleted message below was a duplicate of this message. Not sure why why it posted twice.

Last edited by Jason at 7/27/2025 10:37:50 PM

Your original message is still full of personal insults. You claim now that it is "nothing against you personally", and you still don't find it appropriate to apologize. Instead you start your new message still claiming that your tone was appropriate given the situation and because I "go against the grain" (?).

Bottom line is, it is completely illogical to me to say that a strategy should not be possible, yet to frame it in as anything other than an issue with the game economy mechanics. You are clearly misdirecting your frustration. I believe the rules should probably change, and you appear to agree, you just don't want it to be a "bandaid". And I don't buy the bandaid argument. There are plenty of one-line code changes that would fix this issue and take fully into account the singular side-effect that you mentioned. It is a little like the issue with the team stats where (as far as I understand) for 18 years the cumulative performance is divided by 48 minutes instead of the total length of the game (leading to wrong ratings for games with OT), because people like to see higher numbers.

And to be clear, I am not trying to make a point by following this strategy. I am simply seeking high DMI players in the TL and I try to value them appropriately given their DMI/(overall cost) ratio. If optimizing that sensible metric to its logical conclusion goes against what the BB community considers realistic "basketball simulation game", then the rules should change.

For the last few months, given the TL situation, this strategy appears to work. Closer to the beginning of the season you can win some games. In the middle of the season you can stay at the salary floor without buying players. Towards the end you buy players for relegation series. Overall you can fairly safely end up somewhere in positions 4-7 of div III leagues and have good chances to remain in div III.

Very valid argument here. I actually kinda like the strategy, as it poses outside the box functions and actually challenges the game to make an actionable offense against it. Sort of like when James Harden would get freebie free throws just by swiping his arms into a defender.


Not to mention it gives all opposition managers a challenge to actually gameplan and or acquire players to match up with your team. What you’re doing is no different than when I tried to buy the African NT big man to try and upset LA Lords last season in the finals…. and it almost worked! going down on salaries a week or 2 is worth it if you

1) win league bc of it
2) get your next round cup winnings
3) win a critical TV/rivalry game
4) win that relegation series

The bigger issue that everyone can agree with is that it screws with the economic integrity of the game. I actually had the time to run quick maths based off of your transfers and subtle economic overview, my projections calculated that you’re making between 140,000 and 160,000 a week given this sort of strategy, which for a middle of the road D3 team that is critical to getting your bankroll to a standard that can compete with seasoned veterans or guys with boatloads of cash.


My ranking is based off record and management performance, which is why I have some teams ranked pretty standardly. I definitely understand some people’s frustration over the strategy but looking at the stats he’s 5-0, so he was deserving of at least a top 4 rankings! Most of us can agree we will question its sustainability but for right now it’s definitely working out for Asingratitos AT THIS POINT IN TIME.


Looking forward to the matchup between AZ and Asingratitos in the next week


Last edited by tough at 7/28/2025 1:42:57 AM