BuzzerBeater Forums

As a former member of III.1 I have to say it is pretty ridiculous...

As a former member of III.1 I have to say it is pretty ridiculous...

I don't doubt that!! Looks like one of the top 3, if not the very best DIII league.

And the crowd chants.."Overrated! Overrated!'

I really don't think evaluating a league in terms of salary speaks to its "toughness." You could have a team that is top heavy on salary because they have high ratings in the "sexy" categories, but the manager isn't tactically very good. Having several marginal managers in this setting would produce a league with higher tv revenues, and talented players, but that doesn't make it tough.

I think rank is a much purer rating system. A manager who can succeed with a lower salary, and consistently beats teams he shouldn't, is going to have a higher rank long term.

Which leads me to my league where we have several sub 100 teams, half of our league under 160, and we even a former NBBA team. It's not uncommon for a D2 demotee to find himself stuck in the middle of a competitive upper echelon, or even to miss the playoffs altogether. Managers in our league consistently use several strategies both offensively and defensively and our Season 14 champ made the Finals the next year in D2.

I'm done with my PL next week if there is still room I'm game for participating.

Rip

Actually, I made money for most of the season with the cup revenue while carrying an expensive Exceptional trainer. Three of my highest paid players were picked up at the end of the season for the playoff run (Istudor actually was not eligible for the playoffs but I liked his skill set for the next season and I had plenty of money). I think my success was due to good upgrades (selling players and getting good value) and being relatively good at getting good bargains. Having extra money allowed me to carry a few higher priced players through the playoffs but I didn't have them for most of the season.

As for DIII.I, it was a good league and I would say that 4 of the teams were very strong and another 3 or 4 were strong. The rest were not that good due to revamping their teams or being recently promoted. As for this season, I haven't looked at their new teams so I have no opinion on them as a group. Though Black Mambas was the team that I was most afraid of.

I've seen a lot of crappy teams with a high world/country ranking.

I think rank is a much purer rating system. A manager who can succeed with a lower salary, and consistently beats teams he shouldn't, is going to have a higher rank long term.

Well, of course you would, it's a measurement reflects favorably on you. I think a better rating system is to rank a league by the number of IV.48 alumni...

Anyway, here's the problem with rank: it doesn't measure the strength of teams. I mean, there's a little bit of transfer of rank between leagues based on promotion and demotion, but most of the rank is going to come from the cup, which is really dependent on matchups and timing. If you have a number of teams in your league that prioritize the cup over league play, then you'll end up with a league with higher ranking members, but that doesn't mean you have a tougher league.

I agree,. The ranking can be a good way to determine where a team is headed...However, take a look at this team (http://www.buzzerbeater.com/team/22817/overview.aspx) Ranked #124...If you checked them out at the end of last season, they were still in the top 100...A team facing them in the cup would be scared at first glance...but when you look at their roster, you would see they are in the midst of a rebuilding projects...So rankings can paint a picture...they can also leave out a lot of details.