Progression Issue

[tcl9393]

This is a question to those of you have been a couple years into an association.

I've been trying to find a good association roster for the 360 and had no luck. The one that it seems is popular here on OS is PS3 exclusive, so I was trying to emulate it. This guy made changes of shoes, dunks, tendencies, coaching profiles, etc... but what sticks out to me is that he lowered each players progression by TEN. I assume that if I use my roster (last 2k update + coach profiles) I'll have a overload of talent on all teams in a couple years.

What I'm asking is if the progression is a big issue. Should I take a couple hours and lower everybodys? By how much? Better yet, is there a good association roster file on the 360?

Sorry for the similar thread on the roster subforum but I feel like more people need to see this! Thanks!

[outlawz1979]

The nba2k insider look in forum with rosters his are good he has Sven to

[CAN_JE]

i have a question, too. After 1st season in Association, players 29 age or older have the overall goes down strongly. For example: Hill, Kidd, Nash (-5); Earl Watson, CAmby, Fisher (-4); Jax, Salmons, Baron, M. Miller, Turk, T. Allen, Artest, Crawford, Ridnour, Odom, Terry, Marion, Korver and some other guys (-3).
For me, it's a little strange. Please, explain how it works

ps: sorry for my english

[outlawz1979]

Good question don't know bro

[winrehs_ipang]

Quote: Originally Posted by CAN_JE

i have a question, too. After 1st season in Association, players 29 age or older have the overall goes down strongly. For example: Hill, Kidd, Nash (-5); Earl Watson, CAmby, Fisher (-4); Jax, Salmons, Baron, M. Miller, Turk, T. Allen, Artest, Crawford, Ridnour, Odom, Terry, Marion, Korver and some other guys (-3). For me, it's a little strange. Please, explain how it works ps: sorry for my english

One factor is the winning percentage of their team. You can see that the player on a winning team gets a little or sometimes big boost compared to the player who's playing on the losing team.

I know it doesn't make any sense because PROGRESSION should be handled individually regardless of the performance of your team.

A concrete example would be Brook Lopez of the Nets. See how he developed into a dominant big man in the league, despite the poor performance of his team.

[cubsball899]

Quote: Originally Posted by winrehs_ipang

One factor is the winning percentage of their team. You can see that the player on a winning team gets a little or sometimes big boost compared to the player who's playing on the losing team. I know it doesn't make any sense because PROGRESSION should be handled individually regardless of the performance of your team. A concrete example would be Brook Lopez of the Nets. See how he developed into a dominant big man in the league, despite the poor performance of his team.

a) progression SHOULD relate to how well your team is playing. how often to you see a talented player drafted in to a bad team/situation and his talent goes to waste?

also, how often do you see a virtually unknown player drafted into a good team/situation and he plays well and becomes a very solid player for years? look at all the Spurs draft picks lol.

b) since when is brook lopez dominant?



on topic of the thread: what i did is lower everyone's potential down 10, i'm playing year 2 though so obviously i can't give you the results lol