Zadeva: Help Please!!!!

This is from the guide:
Player with attributes 180 - 25 - 25 or 70 - 90 - 90 /where the first one is the primary main attribute and the last two are secondary main attributes/ is not as good for the given position as a player with attributes 120 - 30 - 50. Similarly a player with attributes 130 - 80 - 30 or 80 - 80 - 80 is not as good as a player with attributes 100 - 80 - 50.

Wouldn't the 180 - 25 - 25 be the best if the first attribute maters most, not the 120 - 30 - 50??
Confused that they are trying to say. Anyone got any idea???

They are saying that just because the first attribute is higher doesn't mean he is better. You need the second and third attributes to make the player good. For example:

The 180-25-25 guy has better first attribute but lacks the second and third attribute. Lets say for argument's sake that there is an ideal ratio and anything in excess is just waste. Thus there is always a limiting attribute. Let's say the ratio is 4:3:2 for simplicity. Thus with the first guy, he has far in excess of the first attribute, and not enough second attribute. Thus he would play like:
35-25-17
while the second guy would be limited by his second attribute which is higher and he would play like:
40-30-20

This is one thought on how to analyze the guide but nobody is certain. Nobody knows the "ideal" ratio but I strongly believe that excessive primary can just be seen as a waste of sorts.

Hope that makes sense.

I have heard in town that anything you said was bullshit.. Lol.. Merry Christmas goalie! Try to keep some pucks out of the net next year/in the play-offs.. Just like Dwane Roloson, unbelievble..

Well word is out then eh!? Looks like my street cred' is gone. Nobody reads my nonsense anyways

Haha... I have done my job then..

PS. I want to re-do your jerseys sometime but I don't have the stuff here. I'll do them up better when I move back to school. Maybe add the danish cross and some more layers... thoughts?

That sounds great, and no.. You can do it as you want to.. I will just give you the time you need and then I will fix some russian pleasure girls when you hitting Europe some day.

Sounds like we have a good understanding... but man oh man did this get off on a tangent from the original question... shame on you coach!

Sorry, I have been together with Britney Spears to many times..

It says,
Similarly a player with attributes 130 - 80 - 30 or 80 - 80 - 80 is not as good as a player with attributes 100 - 80 - 50.

130-80-30 <----not as good????

100-80-50 <---- he is better????

20 more third attribute is better then 30 more first attribute??? dosnt add up to me

That is correct. If you use the 4:3:2 ratio I talked about the first guy would only be as good as:
60-45-30
whereas the second guy would be
100-75-50
much better. Do not forget those third attributes. I neglected them last season and my team strength shot through the roof when I trained the third attribute.

My experience runs like this. The 2 secondary attys need to be 50% of the primary atty. Canucks got things about where I do that 3rd atty needs to be 50% for recognition of primary. There is a reason a 100 primary plus 1 atty junk guy doesn't contribute 50 stars. That's the limit based on 2nd and 3rd atty. Again this is best guess. Tried 60% on 3rd atty and was terrible for me. Still training my way out of it. I interpret canucks analysis identically on the players mentioned. Now you have TWO NOOBS opinions.