WXV Rules Discussion 2017

[upthemaidens]

Why not just base the cost of a player by their exact price in SC?  Come up with a salary cap that allows for all AFL players to be on a club list.

Because 2 worthless spuds averaging 55 cost as much as Bont. Clearly Marcus has more value than them in WXV.

But the price of a player doesn't necessarily have to represent their actual value.   

[GoLions]

Why not just base the cost of a player by their exact price in SC?  Come up with a salary cap that allows for all AFL players to be on a club list.

Because 2 worthless spuds averaging 55 cost as much as Bont. Clearly Marcus has more value than them in WXV.

But the price of a player doesn't necessarily have to represent their actual value.   

Isn't that the whole point...?

[upthemaidens]

Why not just base the cost of a player by their exact price in SC?  Come up with a salary cap that allows for all AFL players to be on a club list.

Because 2 worthless spuds averaging 55 cost as much as Bont. Clearly Marcus has more value than them in WXV.

But the price of a player doesn't necessarily have to represent their actual value.   

Isn't that the whole point...?

I would of thought the salary cap/prices are to help avoid clubs becoming over powered and keeping the Comp relatively even.

[GoLions]

Why not just base the cost of a player by their exact price in SC?  Come up with a salary cap that allows for all AFL players to be on a club list.

Because 2 worthless spuds averaging 55 cost as much as Bont. Clearly Marcus has more value than them in WXV.

But the price of a player doesn't necessarily have to represent their actual value.   

Isn't that the whole point...?

I would of thought the salary cap/prices are to help avoid clubs becoming over powered and keeping the Comp relatively even.

Yes, so if a player is very good, and having a lot of them would make you overpowered, the salary cap would prevent that...

[GoLions]

#scrapthecap

[upthemaidens]

Why not just base the cost of a player by their exact price in SC?  Come up with a salary cap that allows for all AFL players to be on a club list.

Because 2 worthless spuds averaging 55 cost as much as Bont. Clearly Marcus has more value than them in WXV.

But the price of a player doesn't necessarily have to represent their actual value.   

Isn't that the whole point...?

I would of thought the salary cap/prices are to help avoid clubs becoming over powered and keeping the Comp relatively even.

Yes, so if a player is very good, and having a lot of them would make you overpowered, the salary cap would prevent that...

The AFL have a salary Cap for a reason.   The salary of a player in real life doesn't always reflect that players actual value. 

[Purple 77]

You share my exact view and attitude towards the cap UTM.

[Nige]

[meow meow]

If a team has 20 stars and 20 draftees, while another team has 40 average players, and the two lists are worth the same how does that keep the comp even? A team full of 75 average players with 25 more of the same in the reserves vs 15 of the best with a handful of good players and 20 nothings in the reserves doesn't look even to me. Unless the reserves competition counts as much as the seniors?

[upthemaidens]

If a team has 20 stars and 20 draftees, while another team has 40 average players, and the two lists are worth the same how does that keep the comp even? A team full of 75 average players with 25 more of the same in the reserves vs 15 of the best with a handful of good players and 20 nothings in the reserves doesn't look even to me. Unless the reserves competition counts as much as the seniors?

So don't fill your team full of 75 averaging players then. 

[Purple 77]

To clarify, IMO, salaries should be a reflection of scoring power and scoring relevancy, not trade value.

[upthemaidens]

To clarify, IMO, salaries should be a reflection of scoring power and scoring relevancy, not trade value.

Could pretty much just base it off the players actual averages.
   The Cap could be something like 3000 and your squad needs to add up to less.  Rookies given a minimum starting average.

[meow meow]

To clarify, IMO, salaries should be a reflection of scoring power and scoring relevancy, not trade value.

So you agree that 2 irrelevant 55 average players should cost a small fraction of a 110 average star. Good. In SC pricing they're worth the same so we cannot go off those raw prices.

[meow meow]

To clarify, IMO, salaries should be a reflection of scoring power and scoring relevancy, not trade value.

Could pretty much just base it off the players actual averages.
   The Cap could be something like 3000 and your squad needs to add up to less.  Rookies given a minimum starting average.

Do you really think 2 Nathan Browns should cost as much as Tom Mitchell in the salary cap? Really?

[meow meow]

2 Jed Andersons cost as much as Bont under that system. Sounds reasonable.