totally disagree about Historics. I havent looked at many this year but last year there was no comparison to Historic bronzes and current day bronzes as far as OConsistency. and there was no other explanation for them doing it. most current bronzes were rated between 30-40 and a lot of silvers were around 35-45...while most Historics were 55 and above.
91 Vincent Askew average 4.7ppg on 3.5 FGA. 96 Wennington, 5.3ppg on just over 4 FGA. 98 Keefe, 7.8ppg on just over 5 attempts. 94 Hammonds, 4.1ppg on just over 3 attempts...etc, etc, etc....look at the historics....all of these guys are in the high 60's, 70's and there is no justification for it. Should they be higher than Iggy? No, but its a video game and they have to balance it someway. The difference between these cards and Iggy is they are bronze and he is gold.
The only historics in the game that have less than 40 OConsistency is those generics (John Brown, Davis, Jones, etc...) So you cant tell me they deserved 35 while Iggy deserved 30. Its their attempt at balancing the game and the cards.
OConsistency isnt just an arbitrary stat. It works with other OUTSIDE shooting stats. By raising it, you make a player a much more "expected and consistent scoring threat" from the perimeter especially. Knowing he can avg 14ppg on a consistent basis in our minds doesnt change the fact that he doesnt.
I am not saying 2k is right, but its a game and this is the only level of control to make them play like IRL....and even that doesnt work in some cases.
Comment