|
Ratings
Dec 1, 2007 17:27:45 GMT -5
Post by Oklahoma City Thunder on Dec 1, 2007 17:27:45 GMT -5
I know its late and most of you already have a roster that you are going to use this up coming season, but I feel we need to incoorporate rating changes ASAP.
With this LAL/NYK trade, things have been brought to into perspective. We are losing a little bit of realism.
The ratings would be based off of real life performance. I would do the ratings and then the committee would see if they all make sense.
Please reply to this thread & give a reasoning on why we should or why we shouldn't.
|
|
|
Ratings
Dec 1, 2007 17:28:57 GMT -5
Post by Detroit Pistons on Dec 1, 2007 17:28:57 GMT -5
i like the idea but i kept c webb because of his rating because he dosent have a team would he drop a ton?
|
|
|
Ratings
Dec 1, 2007 17:30:14 GMT -5
Post by Utah Jazz on Dec 1, 2007 17:30:14 GMT -5
I think we should. Real life improvements that are significant should be shown in the league.
|
|
|
Ratings
Dec 1, 2007 17:30:48 GMT -5
Post by Boston Celtics on Dec 1, 2007 17:30:48 GMT -5
I think we should, anything to make it more realistic. I also think that their production in this league should be factored into the new rating as well. Not real life alone or this league alone, but a combination of both.
|
|
|
Ratings
Dec 1, 2007 17:37:26 GMT -5
Post by New Jersey Nets on Dec 1, 2007 17:37:26 GMT -5
yes we should have new ratings cuz there are players (including mine) that are just improving in real life...and a example is Williams, he should be rated like CP3 (86 I think)IMO
|
|
|
Ratings
Dec 1, 2007 17:45:46 GMT -5
Post by hardballer1 - NYK on Dec 1, 2007 17:45:46 GMT -5
yes because some players are worse than their ratings say they are.
|
|
|
Ratings
Dec 1, 2007 17:46:12 GMT -5
Post by raps03 - TOR on Dec 1, 2007 17:46:12 GMT -5
yeah same here i think its good. Like hinrich should be rated higher than a 81 ;D
|
|
|
Ratings
Dec 1, 2007 18:20:18 GMT -5
Post by shayan - GSW on Dec 1, 2007 18:20:18 GMT -5
yes because some players should be rated higher than they are here
|
|
|
Ratings
Dec 1, 2007 18:30:35 GMT -5
Post by Atlanta Hawks on Dec 1, 2007 18:30:35 GMT -5
Yes, I think it would better the league if players are rated closer to how they perform here and in real life.
|
|
|
Ratings
Dec 1, 2007 19:17:03 GMT -5
Post by dagr81 - MIN on Dec 1, 2007 19:17:03 GMT -5
yes we should go for realism. this will also reward good scouts
|
|
|
Ratings
Dec 1, 2007 20:00:30 GMT -5
Post by akin - DEN on Dec 1, 2007 20:00:30 GMT -5
yeah we should cause thats the way it should be. we are based on the ratings of the real life players.
|
|
|
Ratings
Dec 1, 2007 21:21:24 GMT -5
Post by sharmoot - POR on Dec 1, 2007 21:21:24 GMT -5
its a great idea i like it, now that this changes may be made itll be easier for me 2 pull triggers on trades ive been reluctant 2 trade because of my player ratings against theirs. if i know the player im getting is rated lower but he'll play better then id pull the trigger knowing that they will improve ratings wise in the long run
|
|
|
Ratings
Dec 1, 2007 21:59:42 GMT -5
Post by Philadelphia 76ers on Dec 1, 2007 21:59:42 GMT -5
Yes, Miller should be higher than a 74
|
|
|
Post by Dallas Mavericks on Dec 2, 2007 1:19:07 GMT -5
and some i think should higher ratings because thev got suuper high salary for thier ratings
|
|
|
Post by Los Angeles Clippers on Dec 2, 2007 2:36:20 GMT -5
This seems like a cool idea to me. Most reasons have been posted here already either by Seattle's first post or others' posts. Go for it.
|
|
|
Ratings
Dec 3, 2007 15:35:02 GMT -5
Post by Chicago Bulls on Dec 3, 2007 15:35:02 GMT -5
I vote for yes
|
|
|
Ratings
Dec 3, 2007 15:49:13 GMT -5
Post by New Orleans Hornets on Dec 3, 2007 15:49:13 GMT -5
Wow someone voted no
|
|
|
Ratings
Dec 3, 2007 16:23:57 GMT -5
Post by corey - NYK/CHA on Dec 3, 2007 16:23:57 GMT -5
Wonder who voted 'no'
|
|
|
Ratings
Dec 3, 2007 17:35:11 GMT -5
Post by dagr81 - MIN on Dec 3, 2007 17:35:11 GMT -5
yeah, i was wondering the same thing?
|
|