I'm perceiving the market gaps between diamonds, golds, and the rest to be based solely on name recognition rather than attributes and productive value. While there are a couple golds I would like to acquire, simply because I like those players, I can't justify the price, as it seems a platooned roster of silvers provides comparable meaningful attributes and production.
Given pitching is overpowered and the attribute based nature of the game, I see offensive production to be far more valuable than anything else. That being the case, as a zone hitter, I'm mostly valuing vision, power, and contact, in that order, with some additional consideration given to handedness and lineup fit.
But when considering the odds for obtaining diamond/gold as an item reward as well as their market evaluation, I'm questioning if I'm overlooking/undervaluing other critical attributes. Or am I correct that the market evaluations are simply a result of name recognition and scarcity rather than productive value?
What attributes do you use to evaluate players and assign value?
Given pitching is overpowered and the attribute based nature of the game, I see offensive production to be far more valuable than anything else. That being the case, as a zone hitter, I'm mostly valuing vision, power, and contact, in that order, with some additional consideration given to handedness and lineup fit.
But when considering the odds for obtaining diamond/gold as an item reward as well as their market evaluation, I'm questioning if I'm overlooking/undervaluing other critical attributes. Or am I correct that the market evaluations are simply a result of name recognition and scarcity rather than productive value?
What attributes do you use to evaluate players and assign value?
Comment