The point to prove was that training secondaries is more valuable than training just primaries.
And in the context of the discussion you did not even come close to achieving that. And somewhere along the way you started pulling out comparisons that were irrelivant...
If you do not understand that then feel free to never train secondaries if you wish, but you will lose out on value.
I have said a couple of times in this thread that I not only have, but I will continue a small amount of guard training to my talls due to my belief that a player is better with decent secondaries. But 10 weeks in a players first season and a half is an absurd amount of time, especially when the player has terrible guard skills already. The majority of people said his skills were good based solely on his U/21 coach who said to train inside. My SG that you commented on in another thread did not recieve a single week of secondary training. He was considered by our U/21s coach as a good allround guard and was also the first pick of our SGs last year...
Then the other argument you had was saying that the TPE could not be wrong. And many people in this thread have said that you are wrong about that and the TPE is very flawed.
I didn't say it was not wrong. I said it is is a good guide to market trends. If my tall with guard skills trains inside skills and his estimate rapidly decreases, it is because the majority of the players with his similar skills are improving their primaries due to them being made guards specifically. When my guy is has slightly better inside skills than the others he is still less attractive to the majority of buyers because he is an average allround player with no standout weapon. However when my player is 21-22 and his inside skills catch up, he will be slightly more valuable, but to train 1 player for 3-4 seasons, maket value should be meaningless as this player is specifically made for your team and more valuable to your roster.
You just continue to ignore solid evidence.
I haven't ignored any evidence. I have pointed out that the majority of your evidence has no relivance because you are trying to explain something completely different than what is actually being discussed. I said a young player who spends more time on primaries as opposed to the same player spending it on secondaries if intended on a short term sale. You never tried to prove that... You said the TPE is wrong in the majority of cases. That is definately not true and the evidence you provided showed only small margins outside the TPE. There has to be sales that calculate both the high and low.
Now... Please tell me we are done!
Last edited by Pablo Ignatio Montoya at 8/27/2010 8:37:42 AM