|
Post by Spencer on Sept 3, 2007 15:32:33 GMT -5
I want to set the price for RCing a player over 25. I think it should be at least 2.
|
|
|
Post by The X-Factor on Sept 3, 2007 15:36:47 GMT -5
It should only take 1 RC.
Reasons being:
Usually after the age of 25 players tend to decline regardless. So in essence you're risking upgrading an above 25 year old player who is on the decline while you could have upgraded another more younger player.
I think there should be a limit of 2 upgrades per career on an above 25 year old and any player above 25 years old who had 3 RCs already obviously can not be upgraded. If said player had previously 2 RCs then only 1 RC can be made. If he had 1, then it's still 2. If he had none, and it's also 2.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Sept 3, 2007 15:42:47 GMT -5
I think it would take more effort for older players to progress, so IMO it would need to take at least 2 RCs for them to improve. For me RCs = extra effort. So youd need extra effort to improve an older player.
|
|
|
Post by gmgreggor on Sept 3, 2007 15:46:02 GMT -5
Is there a max age on this? Isnt very realistic for 33 yr old to get a RC becuase he took a hit in TC.
|
|
|
Post by duce on Sept 3, 2007 15:46:08 GMT -5
I won't vote because I recently changed my mind on this. The decline of older players really helps parity imo.
If we definitely are doing this, then that is perfectly cool with me, but I don't have a real opinion of how many it should cost.
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on Sept 3, 2007 15:46:35 GMT -5
i agree completely with martinez
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Sept 3, 2007 15:46:50 GMT -5
Is there a max age on this? Isnt very realistic for 33 yr old to get a RC becuase he took a hit in TC. No age limit. It isnt very realistic, but it was a majority vote.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Sept 3, 2007 15:47:26 GMT -5
i agree completely with martinez I think alot of guys will agree with you, but I think its a pretty selfish view as well. Not surprised by it though.
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on Sept 3, 2007 15:47:40 GMT -5
I won't vote because I recently changed my mind on this. The decline of older players really helps parity imo. If we definitely are doing this, then that is perfectly cool with me, but I don't have a real opinion of how many it should cost. if the player is that good chances are he got RC'ed 3 times before the age of 25. The players that will be upgraded won't affect league parity too much
|
|
|
Post by gmgreggor on Sept 3, 2007 15:48:44 GMT -5
Well, I think it should definately be more than 1 so I voted 2.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Sept 3, 2007 15:49:46 GMT -5
I won't vote because I recently changed my mind on this. The decline of older players really helps parity imo. If we definitely are doing this, then that is perfectly cool with me, but I don't have a real opinion of how many it should cost. if the player is that good chances are he got RC'ed 3 times before the age of 25. The players that will be upgraded won't affect league parity too much True. Good players get RCs 3 times before 25. Now things may change, but overall I dont think it will affect anything league wide that much.
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on Sept 3, 2007 15:53:30 GMT -5
i really don't see the point of it being more than 1 rc. Players can only be RC 3 times and the % of players over 25 that will get RC is slim so its not more work and if it is its slight
|
|
|
Post by gmgreggor on Sept 3, 2007 15:53:38 GMT -5
Why not a 5 yr window of entering lg instead of by age?
Some guys are 23,24,25 when they come into lg. But they will still adapt to the NBA or not make it. If a guy hasnt progressed within 5 yrs of entering lg then he pretty much is what he is. And a 30+ yr old rarely gets better. Would that make it more realistic?
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Sept 3, 2007 15:55:36 GMT -5
i really don't see the point of it being more than 1 rc. Players can only be RC 3 times and the % of players over 25 that will get RC is slim so its not more work and if it is its slight Because its less realistic that guys over 25 would improve dramatically IMO. I think it takes more effort for older players to progress. I think its more of a risk to try and upgrade older players, but then again thats why I like it being 2. I think it would limit the amount of RCs used on older players.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Sept 3, 2007 15:56:11 GMT -5
Why not a 5 yr window of entering lg instead of by age? Some guys are 23,24,25 when they come into lg. But they will still adapt to the NBA or not make it. If a guy hasnt progressed within 5 yrs of entering lg then he pretty much is what he is. And a 30+ yr old rarely gets better. Would that make it more realistic? Its more realistic, but it makes my process more difficult. So, no, LOL.
|
|
|
Post by The X-Factor on Sept 3, 2007 16:07:50 GMT -5
i really don't see the point of it being more than 1 rc. Players can only be RC 3 times and the % of players over 25 that will get RC is slim so its not more work and if it is its slight Because its less realistic that guys over 25 would improve dramatically IMO. I think it takes more effort for older players to progress. I think its more of a risk to try and upgrade older players, but then again thats why I like it being 2. I think it would limit the amount of RCs used on older players. No one's going to spend 2 RCs on a player.
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on Sept 3, 2007 16:21:31 GMT -5
i really don't see the point of it being more than 1 rc. Players can only be RC 3 times and the % of players over 25 that will get RC is slim so its not more work and if it is its slight Because its less realistic that guys over 25 would improve dramatically IMO. I think it takes more effort for older players to progress. I think its more of a risk to try and upgrade older players, but then again thats why I like it being 2. I think it would limit the amount of RCs used on older players. TC already brings the player down so I think the 1 RC on the player is already hard enough
|
|
|
Post by djmyte on Sept 3, 2007 16:26:16 GMT -5
There should be less upgrading, not more.
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on Sept 3, 2007 16:44:26 GMT -5
There should be less upgrading, not more. it not more. You still are limited to how many RC's you can earn and spend and players still have the same amount of times they are allowed to be upgraded. This just simply widens the base of players you can upgrade. Obviously upgrading guys over 25 has more of a risk due to declining in TC.
|
|
|
Post by Adelaide on Sept 3, 2007 16:54:50 GMT -5
I agree on 1 RC as well.
|
|
|
Post by cjmjones008 on Sept 3, 2007 17:02:38 GMT -5
1 but u can make a case for 2
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Sept 3, 2007 18:21:55 GMT -5
I agree with two, if u want to waste it on someone over 25 then go for it.
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on Sept 3, 2007 18:27:38 GMT -5
I agree with two, if u want to waste it on someone over 25 then go for it. if its detrimental in your opinion to use a RC on a guy over 25 why make the price to use a RC on him steeper than for it is for a guy under 25. It just isn't logical. Why should you spend more on a less effective method of using your RC? Does anyone not agree with this?
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Sept 3, 2007 18:33:28 GMT -5
I agree with two, if u want to waste it on someone over 25 then go for it. if its detrimental in your opinion to use a RC on a guy over 25 why make the price to use a RC on him steeper than for it is for a guy under 25. It just isn't logical. Why should you spend more on a less effective method of using your RC? Does anyone not agree with this? its pretty simple, if u want a guy over 25 to be upgraded it should take two because its unlikely they really improve at the age or older in real life. One rc for anyone under makes sense and if u really want someone over 25 to be upgraded two should be the price, its fair for everyone in the league.
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on Sept 3, 2007 19:24:18 GMT -5
if its detrimental in your opinion to use a RC on a guy over 25 why make the price to use a RC on him steeper than for it is for a guy under 25. It just isn't logical. Why should you spend more on a less effective method of using your RC? Does anyone not agree with this? its pretty simple, if u want a guy over 25 to be upgraded it should take two because its unlikely they really improve at the age or older in real life. One rc for anyone under makes sense and if u really want someone over 25 to be upgraded two should be the price, its fair for everyone in the league. I'm sorry Dan your answer made no sense and was just redundant. If you say its hard to upgrade a player over the age of 25? So a player that comes into the NBA 4 yrs out of college at the age of 23. You are telling me they only have 2 years to improve before they reach their peak? Also I think your argument is more geared to players over the age of 30 which will be hard and TC will counter product the use of 1 RC on the player. A use of an RC there is more to prevent decline than rather to improve. Also players do improve as they become Veterans especially role players (bench players) as they've really worked on one aspect of their game for quite a number of years ex. Jim Jackson, Robert Horry, and perhaps the best example Jerry Stackhouse totally reinvented himself after the age of 30.
|
|