Training Camp Insurance

[WigNosy]

The more I've thought about my "Reconstructive Training" proposal, the more I realized I don't like it being a "reactionary" thing.

Basically, it means you have to deal with bad luck by suddenly putting out a huge amount of points. And if the same player gets hit in TC in consecutive years, you're probably out of luck. It also means that teams that are "lucky" get a benefit by being able to put their points elsewhere - either to paid trainings, trades, and so on.

So here's my (revised) proposal for a new "thing" you can buy with points... Training Camp Insurance (really needs a better name).

When posting your team's Training Camp options, you may add "Training Camp Insurance" for 10 points per player. Payment must be made prior to training camp.

• Training Camp Insurance may only be purchased for players that are 27 or younger
• If a player protected by TCI suffers a decrease in potential rating during Training Camp, that player's potentials (not current ratings) are restored to their pre-TC ratings.
• A player's "athletic" ratings (Quickness, Strength, Jump, Stamina) are NOT protected as they have no potential ratings.

Note a player who gets "hit" in TC might see his current ratings drop (e.g., a sophomore slump) since TCI only keeps potential ratings safe, but the player can still fulfill his potential and make those ratings back up over the course of a season or two - he'll just be delayed when he does it.

Teams can now budget points to make sure their core can reach its potential - or they could choose to gamble with the fickle TC gods and hope for the best - but at least now if your player takes a hit in TC, it's because you chose to expose him rather than just "bad luck" - gives control back to the GMs, which I think is the biggest positive here - one of the biggest complaints about TC is that it can destroy rebuilds with no warning; now teams have the ability to protect their rebuild.

The "10 point" figure was chosen to make it require some planning to protect a young franchise player over the course of his rookie and RFA deals but not prohibitively expensive (80 points or so), and allow teams to cover 2-3 core players per year without much trouble... but at the same time too expensive to keep teams from protecting a strong young core (5-6 players) long-term.

[TheSyndicate]

Gonna think more, but initial reaction is overwhelmingly positive. Any chance I can run some TCI fraud and retroactively save Dwyane?

[IamQuailman]

Definitely interesting idea. Is there a limitation you have on how often you can use this?

[TheSyndicate]

Definitely interesting idea. Is there a limitation you have on how often you can use this?

I think being able to use it on anyone 27 or less is pretty solid. Puts the onus on the GM. If you're trying to keep a 21 yr old safe, you're spending 60 points? That sounds about right to me.

[WigNosy]

Definitely interesting idea. Is there a limitation you have on how often you can use this?

Only limitations are age of the player in question and how many points you have.

[NickMalone77]

I support this idea. My only suggestion would be to make the Insurance cost 20 points instead of 10. So 60 for Paid Trainings + Insurance.

[logpmess]

Just to be clear, if you put those points up, you either use them or lose them?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TheSyndicate]

I support this idea. My only suggestion would be to make the Insurance cost 20 points instead of 10. So 60 for Paid Trainings + Insurance.

I'm just thinking about Z-Bo, do you really think 120 points would be the appropriate cost to have insured him for the 6 years you've had him? I think that's pretty high, especially for insurance where you're not necessarily getting increased ratings or wins added.

Just my thoughts.

[IamQuailman]

I support this idea. My only suggestion would be to make the Insurance cost 20 points instead of 10. So 60 for Paid Trainings + Insurance.

I'm just thinking about Z-Bo, do you really think 120 points would be the appropriate cost to have insured him for the 6 years you've had him? I think that's pretty high, especially for insurance where you're not necessarily getting increased ratings or wins added.

Just my thoughts.

Not to mention his actuals may still decline too.

[TheSyndicate]

I support this idea. My only suggestion would be to make the Insurance cost 20 points instead of 10. So 60 for Paid Trainings + Insurance.

I'm just thinking about Z-Bo, do you really think 120 points would be the appropriate cost to have insured him for the 6 years you've had him? I think that's pretty high, especially for insurance where you're not necessarily getting increased ratings or wins added.

Just my thoughts.

Not to mention his actuals may still decline too.

It's just too...too..what's the word?

[Darth Vegito]

I support this idea. My only suggestion would be to make the Insurance cost 20 points instead of 10. So 60 for Paid Trainings + Insurance.

Yeah 20 is insane. This wouldn't be used at 20 points. I surely wouldn't use it. This is giving 10 points away for a maybe. It's insurance. Doesn't need to be outrageous.

LOVE THIS IDEA THOUGH

[WigNosy]

Just to be clear, if you put those points up, you either use them or lose them?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pretty much. Basically, you pay 10 points no matter what happens to the player in TC.

[logpmess]

Just to be clear, if you put those points up, you either use them or lose them?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pretty much. Basically, you pay 10 points no matter what happens to the player in TC.

Do you have to specify which player it's on or just a blanket 30 points for insurance up to 3 players?

[WigNosy]

Just to be clear, if you put those points up, you either use them or lose them?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pretty much. Basically, you pay 10 points no matter what happens to the player in TC.

Do you have to specify which player it's on or just a blanket 30 points for insurance up to 3 players?

You have to specify the player(s) in advance of TC.

[WigNosy]

I support this idea. My only suggestion would be to make the Insurance cost 20 points instead of 10. So 60 for Paid Trainings + Insurance.

I thought about 20, but stuck with 10 for a number of reasons. Mostly because every team should be able to earn at least 30 points per season without breaking a sweat (15 media points, 5 preseason presser points, 5 points for DCs, plus at least 5 points for wins, streaks, etc.). Teams that are rebuilding without the benefit of allstar selections, high win totals, and long win streaks should have access to this, plus a few points for trades. They are likely to have at least 3 young players on rookie deals or RFA deals (e.g., Jefferson, Randolph, Iguodala on the 2005 Hornets). Keeping that young core intact is a 30-point-per-year proposition here, which is doable at 10 points per player. Much less doable at 20 points per player - it's HARD to accumulate 60 points in a season without trades.

[WigNosy]

I support this idea. My only suggestion would be to make the Insurance cost 20 points instead of 10. So 60 for Paid Trainings + Insurance.

I'm just thinking about Z-Bo, do you really think 120 points would be the appropriate cost to have insured him for the 6 years you've had him? I think that's pretty high, especially for insurance where you're not necessarily getting increased ratings or wins added.

Just my thoughts.

And consider that to keep Iggy protected would be ANOTHER 120 points. Just to protect 2 guys for 6 years, you're looking at 240 points if we bump the cost to 20. That's Orlando luxury tax territory.

[Xist2Inspire]

This is a great idea, though from my experience, I'd rather protect the ratings as opposed to potential. This would more accurately reflect real-life young players who don't lose their skills, just their ability to go beyond a certain point (the "they are who they are at this point" players). That way, instead of paying to protect a future that may never come to pass (and if the ratings drop low enough, it's very likely that it never will), you're paying to keep the player at a certain level, regardless of his future.

This should probably be more expensive (maybe this is worth 20 points?) and brings up the question of which is more likely to decline, ratings or potential? This might also require a little more restriction on how often it can be used (4 TCs tops?), so that we don't have teams paying to keep their B/B players for 6-8 seasons. Perhaps both could be implemented? Wig's suggestion seems to work best for the Y/G, Y/B, and O/G players that drops in potential kill, but my proposal is aimed more towards the G/G, G/B, and B/B players that don't really care about drops in potential (see: LeBron), but are gimped by the ratings drops that accompany them (see: Vlad Rad).

Having both methods of protection available would provide an interesting trade-off: Do I pay more to keep what I have now, but risk losing the ability to improve? Or do I pay less to keep the chance of improvement high, risking an immediate setback? It really gets interesting for guys who could benefit from both methods of protection (see: Granger), as well as the middling guys who only have average potential to improve, but could die from a ratings drop (see: Devin Harris). Do you pay for those guys, and if so, how much, or do you just leave it to fate for them?

[ballsohard]

After getting <expletive deleted> so many times by this, I'm against it. I would like to see my rapist terrorize a while mother generation of sim league players.

[NOLa.]

Like the idea as is: for potentials only, 10 points per player with a max of 3 players a training camp.

Sent via Morse code

[78#]

After getting <expletive deleted> so many times by this, I'm against it. I would like to see my rapist terrorize a while mother generation of sim league players.

I'm leaning this way as well. I also think there's a slight method to the madness of TC even though it's as a random as one sim game.

[NOLa.]

After getting <expletive deleted> so many times by this, I'm against it. I would like to see my rapist terrorize a while mother generation of sim league players.

Cruel

Sent via Morse code

[TheSyndicate]

Like the idea as is: for potentials only, 10 points per player with a max of 3 players a training camp.

Sent via Morse code

Where do you see a max of 3 in the proposal? I think the max of 27yo is enough

[Darth Vegito]

Not sure about raping "while mothers" though. Seems a bit much.

[NOLa.]

Like the idea as is: for potentials only, 10 points per player with a max of 3 players a training camp.

Sent via Morse code

Where do you see a max of 3 in the proposal? I think the max of 27yo is enough

Yeah I was reading about the example of 3 players at 30 points and must have thought later that was the proposed rule.

Sent via Morse code

[Inner_GI]

I'm so so about it. Part of me says this is perfect, because I have some of the worst luck in the league, but I do wonder if it will create imbalance in the league.

There needs to be limitations on 3 things:

1. Age - 27 sounds good
2. Number of Players - 3 or 2
3. Can't protect player's potential if they are already blue current?