Am I crazy if I were to make Nolan Patrick 136 CA / -15 PA?
That would mean he could end up with 110 in PA, so I wouldn't recommend it. -8 or -9 makes more sense.
Yea I wish there was a 130-190 range, I am just getting such a bust feel about him though. I'll keep him a -9 for the first 25 games this year, if he doesn't make an impact he will likely be bumped down to -8.
FYI
I recall doing some testing that showed that the game won't reduce a player's given/set CA & if a variable PA is used (-8, -9, etc) the PA the game gives is never less than the CA
Also, the spread of a variable PA is equally used; the game won't give a PA below a player's given CA but the game will use the full range for likelihood, but instead of giving a PA below the game will give a PA that matches the current CA).
So, with the example above, if Patrick is given a -15 the PA will be between 110 and 190 (the spread from lowest to highest being 80)
With a 136 CA Patrick is being given the starting point of the spread (110) + 26
With a 136 CA Patrick will have a 32.5% chance of getting a 136 PA (26/80), but he'll never be given a PA below 136