Impulse vs. Strategic Planning is not just a downgrade as the Planning fills the graveyard while Impulse just bottoms the cards. Being a sorcery instead of an instant is probably what keeps it from seeing more play.
I think the major reason Strategic Planning doesn't see play in Legacy is that you have access to..
P3k cards are long overdue a reprint. Very few are even halfway decent in eternal constructed and most are only valuable due to their scarcity. Since they are getting reprinted in commander decks which is the format they best fit into, it only benefits everyone that people can get their hands on them for such decks.
Definitely agree. Portal cards and starter 1999 cards as well (goblin settler and grim tutor have no business being that high.) Glad they're being reprinted in places.
I doubt JTMS drops any lower than it is now and has room only to grow at this point unless something better is printed that replaces JTMS in eternal formats (chances of that happening in the near or distant future are incredibly slim to say the least as pros have rated JTMS as one of the top 10 cards in magic/JTMS is very powerful.)
Agreed with the cards in P3K and such not being that good in eternal. There are a few that are quite good like imperial recruiter and imperial seal but stuff like capture of jingzhou, ravages of war, rolling earthquake, and xiahou dun/legends aren't even eternal playable.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Yawgmoth," Freyalise whispered as she set the bomb, "now you will pay for your treachery."
I doubt JTMS drops any lower than it is now and has room only to grow at this point unless something better is printed that replaces JTMS in eternal formats (chances of that happening in the near or distant future are incredibly slim to say the least as pros have rated JTMS as one of the top 10 cards in magic/JTMS is very powerful.)
In the week since I posted my original question, JTMS has fallen another dollar. There are NM copies available on TCG and eBay for as low as $95.
Indeed, on a daily basis you can see that fluctuation for any card even a card that is extremely hard to find.
A 5-10% drop in one day is noticeable and could possibly mean something.
The point is it's still on its downward trajectory. People who thought it couldn't go lower a week ago have been proven wrong. There's no data confirming a bottom yet.
The point is it's still on its downward trajectory. People who thought it couldn't go lower a week ago have been proven wrong. There's no data confirming a bottom yet.
There is no confirmation of a bottom but there also isn't confirmation of it NOT being at a bottom. Two data points with a one dollar difference for a ~$100 card doesn't say much.
In the week since I posted my original question, JTMS has fallen another dollar. There are NM copies available on TCG and eBay for as low as $95.
I'll bite.
The rest of the magic crowd here tends to abide by magic market gospel. They don't check the market prices that much and rehash the group consensus.
They tend to really only notice big changes after the fact.
Don't try to convince these people one way or another with minor empirical results that are true in the moment. Like I said, they just dont check the market that often. Regardless of reality, they are likely to spout off the standard(no pun intended) group-think line without checking prices.
But based on my personal analysis at this moment, 11/20/2013 8:14PM EST right now, Jace the Mind Sculptor is facing strong downward pressure.
Quite strong in fact.
However two things to keep in mind.
1) The big oracles have not spoken. SCG, tcgplayer, etc. These are the major players which tend to set the prices (not by fiat, but because they're influential)
2) Jace TMS has a legendary (no pun intended) reputation as remains one of the most desirable cards in all magic.
The latter means that Jace is capable of weathering strong downward pressure better than other cards.
The former means that whatever empirical reality you're reading is subject to influential change by SCG repricings and reevaluations.
People tend to conflate "will always retain decent value" with "will never go down". Jace is one such card. It's dropping as we speak and will likely continue to drop--at least on ebay.
But if you're a player who habitually buys via SCG exclusively and they hold prices firm, that "price drop" doesn't mean much does it?
There is no confirmation of a bottom but there also isn't confirmation of it NOT being at a bottom. Two data points with a one dollar difference for a ~$100 card doesn't say much.
If you actually understood xkcd you'd know there's no such thing as confirmation, only evidence. I provided a hypothesis for JTMS. Others provided a hypothesis for JTMS. In the past week, the new data supports my hypothesis, and doesn't support their hypothesis. This doesn't mean their hypothesis is refuted, but it does add statistical weight to the likelyhood of my hypothesis being confirmed.
If you actually understood xkcd you'd know there's no such thing as confirmation, only evidence. I provided a hypothesis for JTMS. Others provided a hypothesis for JTMS. In the past week, the new data supports my hypothesis, and doesn't support their hypothesis. This doesn't mean their hypothesis is refuted, but it does add statistical weight to the likelyhood of my hypothesis being confirmed.
I only used the word confirmation because you used the word confirming and I wanted to keep the language similar. PhantomLotus already explained that the new "data" isn't statistically significant. It isn't evidence to support or refute EITHER hypothesis. Simple as that.
The comic was just a fun addition. You can't take two data points and use them to claim a downward trajectory.
I don't; the previous data points support the downward trajectory. The two new data points only add to the confidence of the downward trajectory.
How is this even relevant? No one is arguing that it wasn't in a downward trajectory previously. The question is whether or not it STILL IS. For THAT question, you have provided two data points between which there is NOT a statistically significant difference. The new data point does not add confidence to the hypothesis of present downward trajectory because to add confidence, it would need to be statistically significant. It ISN'T.
How is this even relevant? No one is arguing that it wasn't in a downward trajectory previously. The question is whether or not it STILL IS. For THAT question, you have provided two data points between which there is NOT a statistically significant difference. The new data point does not add confidence to the hypothesis of present downward trajectory because to add confidence, it would need to be statistically significant. It ISN'T.
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
PS - I dunno where "two data points" comes from, anyway; there are 6 new mid-price data points (each of those based on multiple new ones), and 2 flat and 4 lower than the previous week.
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
PS - I dunno where "two data points" comes from, anyway; there are 6 new mid-price data points (each of those based on multiple new ones), and 2 flat and 4 lower than the previous week.
It isn't my "opinion"...it is very basic statistics.
Those two data points are the two that you used to extrapolate a price change.
Of those six data points that you only now have mentioned, if any of them are significant, then so be it. Otherwise, similar logic follows.
It isn't my "opinion"...it is very basic statistics.
Those two data points are the two that you used to extrapolate a price change.
It is your opinion, and very basic statistics are on my side, not yours. I never mentioned only two data points until someone else brought it up, nor did I use two data points to extrapolate a price change. Again I don't know what two data points you are referring to.
Of those six data points that you only now have mentioned, if any of them are significant, then so be it. Otherwise, similar logic follows.
I've not "only now mentioned" them; they are the same data points that I mentioned before; I simply never quantified their number. They are all significant, so be it exactly as it was when I said it before, and thus was wrong for you to discount. Similar logic always applies.
It is your opinion, and very basic statistics are on my side, not yours. I never mentioned only two data points until someone else brought it up, nor did I use two data points to extrapolate a price change. Again I don't know what two data points you are referring to.
I've not "only now mentioned" them; they are the same data points that I mentioned before; I simply never quantified their number. They are all significant, so be it exactly as it was when I said it before, and thus was wrong for you to discount. Similar logic always applies.
Explain how your numbers are statistically significant and at what level. That's all you have to do. If you can explain how they are statistically significant, THEN you can tell me how the basic statistics are on your side.
Explain how your numbers are statistically significant and at what level. That's all you have to do. If you can explain how they are statistically significant, THEN you can tell me how the basic statistics are on your side.
I am going to request that you both walk away from this one please. Arguments like this make it impossible for anyone else to enter in and, frankly, it's not really what we want to talk about. Thanks!
-Galspanic
I just bought 2 NM copies off ebay for 85 each. The price is pretty reasonable now. Looking for a third and I probably wont be willing to spend more than 80-90 as there seem to be a bunch floating around at that price.
Seeing them bouncing around between $63.00 to $70.00 with the bids on eBay, and few Buy it nows from $75 to $80.
What has made this card slip so much? Too much hype and not enough Legacy players?
Main reason would be the reprint. Everyone thought Jace was sacred and way too powerful to be reprinted again, so some value was added based only on that. Now that we know WotC can and might reprint him again, this value is forever lost.
Also, while Legacy and Commander indeed drive an interest for Jace, it's still the casual players who are driving the demand on this one. Jace is a cool card, every single casual playgroup probably has a ''cool kid with a Jace, wow!''. Legacy was just helping the demand here, but the meta shifted quite a lot since Jace's prime, and he's not even played that much anymore. Among the top decks, only Miracles and BUG use him a 3-of (max).
I think the major reason Strategic Planning doesn't see play in Legacy is that you have access to..
Careful Study (Better in some decks.)
Faithless Looting (Better in some decks.)
If you want to go really deep...
I mean the list goes on and on.
Feel free to bid on my cards here!
I doubt JTMS drops any lower than it is now and has room only to grow at this point unless something better is printed that replaces JTMS in eternal formats (chances of that happening in the near or distant future are incredibly slim to say the least as pros have rated JTMS as one of the top 10 cards in magic/JTMS is very powerful.)
Agreed with the cards in P3K and such not being that good in eternal. There are a few that are quite good like imperial recruiter and imperial seal but stuff like capture of jingzhou, ravages of war, rolling earthquake, and xiahou dun/legends aren't even eternal playable.
Currently Playing:
Retired
In the week since I posted my original question, JTMS has fallen another dollar. There are NM copies available on TCG and eBay for as low as $95.
A price fluctuation of 1% in a week is not statistically significant, in my opinion.
Indeed, on a daily basis you can see that fluctuation for any card even a card that is extremely hard to find.
A 5-10% drop in one day is noticeable and could possibly mean something.
Feel free to bid on my cards here!
The point is it's still on its downward trajectory. People who thought it couldn't go lower a week ago have been proven wrong. There's no data confirming a bottom yet.
There is no confirmation of a bottom but there also isn't confirmation of it NOT being at a bottom. Two data points with a one dollar difference for a ~$100 card doesn't say much.
http://xkcd.com/605/
I'll bite.
The rest of the magic crowd here tends to abide by magic market gospel. They don't check the market prices that much and rehash the group consensus.
They tend to really only notice big changes after the fact.
Don't try to convince these people one way or another with minor empirical results that are true in the moment. Like I said, they just dont check the market that often. Regardless of reality, they are likely to spout off the standard(no pun intended) group-think line without checking prices.
But based on my personal analysis at this moment, 11/20/2013 8:14PM EST right now, Jace the Mind Sculptor is facing strong downward pressure.
Quite strong in fact.
However two things to keep in mind.
1) The big oracles have not spoken. SCG, tcgplayer, etc. These are the major players which tend to set the prices (not by fiat, but because they're influential)
2) Jace TMS has a legendary (no pun intended) reputation as remains one of the most desirable cards in all magic.
The latter means that Jace is capable of weathering strong downward pressure better than other cards.
The former means that whatever empirical reality you're reading is subject to influential change by SCG repricings and reevaluations.
People tend to conflate "will always retain decent value" with "will never go down". Jace is one such card. It's dropping as we speak and will likely continue to drop--at least on ebay.
But if you're a player who habitually buys via SCG exclusively and they hold prices firm, that "price drop" doesn't mean much does it?
If you actually understood xkcd you'd know there's no such thing as confirmation, only evidence. I provided a hypothesis for JTMS. Others provided a hypothesis for JTMS. In the past week, the new data supports my hypothesis, and doesn't support their hypothesis. This doesn't mean their hypothesis is refuted, but it does add statistical weight to the likelyhood of my hypothesis being confirmed.
I only used the word confirmation because you used the word confirming and I wanted to keep the language similar. PhantomLotus already explained that the new "data" isn't statistically significant. It isn't evidence to support or refute EITHER hypothesis. Simple as that.
The comic was just a fun addition. You can't take two data points and use them to claim a downward trajectory.
I don't; the previous data points support the downward trajectory. The two new data points only add to the confidence of the downward trajectory.
How is this even relevant? No one is arguing that it wasn't in a downward trajectory previously. The question is whether or not it STILL IS. For THAT question, you have provided two data points between which there is NOT a statistically significant difference. The new data point does not add confidence to the hypothesis of present downward trajectory because to add confidence, it would need to be statistically significant. It ISN'T.
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
PS - I dunno where "two data points" comes from, anyway; there are 6 new mid-price data points (each of those based on multiple new ones), and 2 flat and 4 lower than the previous week.
It isn't my "opinion"...it is very basic statistics.
Those two data points are the two that you used to extrapolate a price change.
Of those six data points that you only now have mentioned, if any of them are significant, then so be it. Otherwise, similar logic follows.
It is your opinion, and very basic statistics are on my side, not yours. I never mentioned only two data points until someone else brought it up, nor did I use two data points to extrapolate a price change. Again I don't know what two data points you are referring to.
I've not "only now mentioned" them; they are the same data points that I mentioned before; I simply never quantified their number. They are all significant, so be it exactly as it was when I said it before, and thus was wrong for you to discount. Similar logic always applies.
Explain how your numbers are statistically significant and at what level. That's all you have to do. If you can explain how they are statistically significant, THEN you can tell me how the basic statistics are on your side.
I am going to request that you both walk away from this one please. Arguments like this make it impossible for anyone else to enter in and, frankly, it's not really what we want to talk about. Thanks!
-Galspanic
WUBRGPauper Battle BoxWUBRG ... and why I am not a fan of Wayne Reynolds' Illustrations.
- H. L. Mencken
French Duel Commander
WBR Kaalia of the Vast WBR
RUG Maelstrom Wanderer RUG
UWRMiraclesRWU
Modern
UWRControlRWU
Standard
Ummm no...
Trade Thread
https://www.facebook.com/clymer.hammitt/media_set?set=a.356235817917819.1073741833.100005942112103&type=3
OTHER ORIGINAL COMIC UNRELATED TO MAGIC: 5Head©
https://www.facebook.com/clymer.hammitt/media_set?set=a.110946379113432.1073741826.100005942112103&type=3
If you enjoy these, feel free to add me as a friend and get notified when new comics are loaded
What has made this card slip so much? Too much hype and not enough Legacy players?
Cube on Cubetutor
Come trade with Puca Trade!, the best place to get those hard to get cards no one else will trade!
Also, while Legacy and Commander indeed drive an interest for Jace, it's still the casual players who are driving the demand on this one. Jace is a cool card, every single casual playgroup probably has a ''cool kid with a Jace, wow!''. Legacy was just helping the demand here, but the meta shifted quite a lot since Jace's prime, and he's not even played that much anymore. Among the top decks, only Miracles and BUG use him a 3-of (max).