Posted by isack24 on 3/30/2011 10:21:00 AM (view original):
Posted by tianyi7886 on 3/30/2011 10:05:00 AM (view original):
Posted by isack24 on 3/30/2011 9:52:00 AM (view original):
Yeah, no doubt, but when one goes up 9, and the other 1, it seems like the difference at the bottom end is WAY too much.
I agree with you somewhat, but I also see the logic of it. If a kid comes in w/o any understanding of how to play defense, or how to shoot a jumpshot, it's going to take him longer to improve his game in these aspects than someone with similar potential but a better foundation. And 1 to 2 is an 100% increase in terms of coding.
That's why I opined that speed would be different than a "talent" category. If the guy has the potential to be fast(er), he should get faster by running. There really isn't that much that needs to be learned.
20 to 40 is a 100% increase, too, but it better longer than going from 1 to 2 given the same potential and WE. Look, I understand that coding is an issue, and I also understand dalt's point about the new changes helping this. But I find it tough to believe that people don't look at this and think it's a little ridiculous given his WE/potential.
I think the new change pretty much fixes this issue. Once a player hits double digits, growth really picks up. Look at this guy, his lp/per/passing were 1 when he was recruited. Once the ratings got close to double digits, growth picks up so this problem is essentially fixed with the new recruit generation:
http://whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=0&pid=1752716