Editing Future Rookies in Association Mode

[RapboY]

Quote: Originally Posted by bluedevil259

I disagree. If anything, some should be lower. If you look at the potential ratings of this year's rookies on the game, a large amount of 2nd rounders were in the 50's. Even DeAndre Jordan, who supposed biggest strength was his upside, only has a 59 potential rating. So, if you want things consistent with the rest of the players in the game, i don't think these are too high at all.

well, what i meant was some could be higher, and some could be lower.. although i'm just sure that rubio should have a higher potential, (i was thinking 88-92).. i don't know yet who needs to have lowered potential, so i didn't mention it.. thanks for pointing it out though..

EDIT: BJ Mullen's age anyone..?

[bluedevil259]

yeah. i agree with you there. there just needs to be a greater range of potential ratings across the board.

and regarding the BJ Mullens' age thing, that's really weird. I never noticed before, but his birthdate isn't listed anywhere, not even on Ohio State's website.

[RapboY]

Quote: Originally Posted by bluedevil259

yeah. i agree with you there. there just needs to be a greater range of potential ratings across the board. and regarding the BJ Mullens' age thing, that's really weird. I never noticed before, but his birthdate isn't listed anywhere, not even on Ohio State's website.

i've started organizing the xls sheet provided by dazpoo, and actually, there are too many 70 somethings on the potentials.. dazpoo if you want to or can edit the potential ratings, please do.. if not, then i'll just do it when i have free time tomorrow..

and on bj mullen's age.. it's weird right? he's projected as a top 5 pick, and no one's asking how old he is.. not one draft site mentions anything about his age.. i guess he does look young, he's gonna have problems though if he looked like greg oden lol..

[DC]

Quote: Originally Posted by RapboY

how'd you come up with the potential ratings? i think some of them could be higher..

I think being conservative is the way to go with POT. I think he did a good job with them. I don't see too many superstar players in that class. I usually reserve 85+ for star players

[dazpoo23]

bluedevil259, one of te first things i did in the game was to up deanrdeas and javal mcgees potential ratings.

I tried to estimate by how much and at what rate these players would improve in lieu of listing there 'ceiling' as it were. So rubio for example wouldnt have as much upside as thabeet or mullen. Its like, even though Tyler Hansbrough is one of the best players in college basketball right now, i havent given him a tremendous potential rating, its tough to overcome hype of percieved players, alot of what we already hear is based on objects players havent let accomplished. So like DC said i thought it was best to be conservative.

In terms of using the file to make improvements, thats why its there. I want people to make edits, i want improved rosters too. So as long as re-up them and share with other users then its ok.

[wpdougie2180]

ESPN.com has Mullens listed at Age 19 but does mention that he is a year older than everyone in draft class

[bluedevil259]

Quote: Originally Posted by dazpoo23

bluedevil259, one of te first things i did in the game was to up deanrdeas and javal mcgees potential ratings. I tried to estimate by how much and at what rate these players would improve in lieu of listing there 'ceiling' as it were. So rubio for example wouldnt have as much upside as thabeet or mullen. Its like, even though Tyler Hansbrough is one of the best players in college basketball right now, i havent given him a tremendous potential rating, its tough to overcome hype of percieved players, alot of what we already hear is based on objects players havent let accomplished. So like DC said i thought it was best to be conservative.

Yeah, I see where you're coming from. That's basically what I tried to do for mine too. . .and good idea with raising McGee's and Jordan's potential. I went and did that as soon as i read that.

Quote: Originally Posted by wpdougie2180

ESPN.com has Mullens listed at Age 19 but does mention that he is a year older than everyone in draft class

i haven't seen it, but i'm guessing it's saying that he's a year older than his class, as in other freshmen, since most incoming freshmen are 18.

[RapboY]

Quote: Originally Posted by wpdougie2180

ESPN.com has Mullens listed at Age 19 but does mention that he is a year older than everyone in draft class

wow.. nice one, thanks!

Quote: Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

I think being conservative is the way to go with POT. I think he did a good job with them. I don't see too many superstar players in that class. I usually reserve 85+ for star players

yeah, it's ok.. but just a little too many 70 somethings.. there should be quite a bit more 60+'s also, not so much, but just a bit more.. well, i don't know.. i'll research a bit more before i do edit the stats..

and one more thing.. it's just wrong how association handles the potentials of players.. players just decline too slowly.. just too many players reach 40 and are still playing in the league.. and still competitive at that, like they are still sixth men of teams.. and that's the role they want.. being 6th men.. i was like, retire already! lol.. anyway, that was just a thought.. what i do is edit the potentials of some of the players when they are already around 33, so that they start declining then.. or else, they won't.. lol..

oh, and thanks dazpoo

[JohnDoe8865]

Quote: Originally Posted by RapboY

what i do is edit the potentials of some of the players when they are already around 33, so that they start declining then.. or else, they won't.. lol..

Have you got a template or maybe a formula that you use to universally decrease the potential rating of older players? I'd like to use it in my association.

[bluedevil259]

^^ I second that. . . if lowering potential really does make the player decline, that's def something i want to incorporate into my association