BuzzerBeater Forums

Nice post. Couldn't agree more on what you say about potential for starting teams. If you are starting, you can very well pick some cheap allstars or eternal allstars to train, it will take at least 3-4 seasons for them to fulfill their potential and that's pretty much the time you need to have a decent arena, a decent fan base and start making money and being competitive.

I don't know other translations, what does it mean "eternal allstar"? Is it the same as perennial allstar (7)?
OP talk about starters (4) and stars (5). They are worthless and it's wasting of time and effort to train them.
Let's say allstars (6) are debatable, however allways it's better to spend more time to find perennial allstar.

oh yeah, my bad, apologise, i wrote that in a hurry. i meant perenial allstars.

ideally every team should train only MVP+ but newbies cannot afford the luxury of spending millions to get a MVP+ trainee and wait for 7-8 seasons for their trainees to develop as MVP+s to cash in. advising newbies to buy high potential trainees IMHO is a bad advise.

which reminds me that I have recently sold for 500k a star (5) player who was part of my original roster and got trained for 3 seasons. i also bought for 50k, in the first weeks of my team, a 18yo superstar (8) PF who will be in 2-3 seasons (age 25-26) my starter PF with ~90k of salaries, probably worth 3kk+ in the market if I wanted to sell him. but i won't. he will be my starter for many seasons at a very high level for the cost of 50k. the same applies to other 2 superstar (8) trainees who will eventually become my 90k starters at SF and C.

oh yeah, my bad, apologise, i wrote that in a hurry. i meant perenial allstars.

So You are closer to me that to Wolph.
I said: "nothing below perennial allstar".
You said: "allstar or perennial allstar".
Wolph recommend to train starters or stars.

ideally every team should train only MVP+ but newbies cannot afford the luxury of spending millions to get a MVP+ trainee and wait for 7-8 seasons for their trainees to develop as MVP+s to cash in. advising newbies to buy high potential trainees IMHO is a bad advise.

I never said MVP+. I said nothing below perennial allstar. In most cases perennial allstar will be the best choise, golden ratio. Because price starts to increase exponentially with potential from perennial allstar. For all worse potentials price is practically the same. Let's say high allstar is almost equal to low perennial allstar so there will bo no big difference. However still it's better to spent more time and effort, maybe even few thousands dollars and try to find perennial allstar.

which reminds me that I have recently sold for 500k a star (5) player who was part of my original roster and got trained for 3 seasons.

Bad deal. 166k per season, it isn't worth whole effort to set him to play 48 minutes. It will be better to train nobady, buy old guy, win few games more and gain more money (maybe 1 or 2 more wins in cup, more wins in league, more attendance and merchandise, in best case promotion).

also bought for 50k, in the first weeks of my team, a 18yo superstar (8) PF who will be in 2-3 seasons (age 25-26) my starter PF with ~90k of salaries, probably worth 3kk+ in the market if I wanted to sell him. but i won't. he will be my starter for many seasons at a very high level for the cost of 50k. the same applies to other 2 superstar (8) trainees who will eventually become my 90k starters at SF and C.

And it's the best example that it's better to buy superstar for 50k than star for 1k.

Seriously the stupid thing is you giving people advice to CARE about a potential cap they will NEVER REACH.

It doesn't matter. Then potential is for rich buyer, not for you. If you sell 21yo well trained but capped player then buyer will be team worse than you and with less money. If player isn't capped then he will be attractive for better teams, which have more money but they have no chance to train from 18yo (it's hard or even impossible in competitive league).

Second, you're wrong. I was not in the same league when I drafted this player: same division, yes; same league, no. I even when back to Div. V for a season because I tanked. Besides, success is not always rising to the top in this game. Maybe some teams (like I did) just enjoy it more being in lower leagues because it eases training out of position.

So it's Your cost. Playing in lower division. In 4th division I think You have attendance, merchandise and TV contract 4 times smaller than in first division, 2-3 times smaller than in 2nd div and few dozens smaller than in 3rd. However players, trainer, scouting and arena cost the same. So incomes are smaller and expenses are the same.
There is only one thing which you can do the same as teams in higher division: it's training. Training speed is the same in all divisions. So if You were relegated because You want to train, I think it will be good idea to try to make the best training You can.

Could he have sold for more with more potential? Definitively yes, but that's because of two tings: either you wanna train him further (in case you need more potential indeed)

And it's the point.

or just because potential is overrated and overpaid for many times.

it's extra bonus but it is of course connected with point.

Fresh example:
http://www.buzzerbeater.com/player/27355768/history.aspx
I think he is little overpaid, however 2,5M was price I was able to pay. MVP (however perennial allstar will be enough for his skillset). I think with starter and star it will be impossible.
He was sold for 87k when he was 19yo. It's typical price for my customers in middle of season, when I can't find buyer for 98k during few weeks ;-)

Last edited by B.B.King at 06/24/2015 10:57:57