Idea for new potential system

[The Iron Goalie]

I'd like to see an update to both player potential, and player type, but for today I'll keep it to potential.

Have 3 potential ratings - Ceiling, likely projection, and floor. These ratings would be dynamic, and change throughout the season(s) as players succeed/struggle, or play in/out of their current roles. Ie if a player is killing it, their floor may rise, or possibly their ceiling etc.

Some player examples,

E. Pettersson - Franchise (Ceiling)/ Elite (Likely projection)/ Top 9F (Floor)
C. McDavid - Franchise/ Elite/ Elite
J. Drouin - Franchise/ Elite/ Top 6F
R. Dahlin - Franchise/ Elite/ Top 4D
B. Gaunce - Top 9F/ Bot 6F/ AHL top6

Having potential shown in this way would help player better understand if a player is developing well, or in need of a role change. Furthermore, it help with valuing players ie Low potential talents being worthless in trade. Imagine a low elite ceiling player that has high top 6 likely potential, vs med elite ceiling with med top 6 likely potential? You could actually have High ceiling low floor, and low ceiling high floor players + whatever else vs just ceiling + accuracy of said ceiling.

Idk if this is a think Ea could/would do, but I'd love to have a reworked potential system in general. Anything would be nice.

Click to read more...

 

[Elvs]

Cool idea, but only if EA would have most prospects at an AHL level floor which I doubt they would.

My simple idea is to just to replace the current system with a potential overall number, and the likelyness with percentages. For instance, potential 82 overall and probability reaching said potential 25%.

 

[East Coast Icestyle]

I miss the letter grade potentials they had in NHL 11. Think it was in categories, of for instance A+ Offense, C Defense, B+ Physical etc

 

[Patrik Barkov]

I miss the letter grade potentials they had in NHL 11. Think it was in categories, of for instance A+ Offense, C Defense, B+ Physical etc

It was such a great system. Don't know why they changed it.

 

[East Coast Icestyle]

It was such a great system. Don't know why they changed it.

At the time, people were clamoring for more defined player roles, so this system was born as a way to define them - I think overalls did that just fine, though.

Also miss the training page where you could select individual areas for each players to work on as well as change their player type without having to enter edit player.

NHL 11 was nice.

 

[Dicdonya]

I really want 2 ratings, overall and player type rating. This way they don't need to BS players overalls by having every single player in the game have like 85+ stick checking, and inflated defensive awareness/shot blocking/etc to make offensively gifted/defensively average players actually be good OA and in simulation.

Then they need to make the player types actually matter. Right now snipers very often don't snipe, and playmakers don't make plays, etc. If we make them have specific overalls for those types, then the types need to matter, and play generally how you would expect them to.

This leads to bringing back chemistry, which would then be influenced by these players types, as well as other factors like playing time together, maybe age, country of origin etc.

Lastly, overalls and growth must be more closely tied to production. No one considers McDavid the best player in the NHL because he scores 50 pts, why then does my prospect grow to 90+ overall, well before he ever puts up anywhere near enough points to be considered elite.

Potential should be a multiplier for stats based growth, not a linear projection like it seems to be most of the time in EANHL. Just because my guy is high elite, if he never plays like more then a third liner, why does he grow into an elite player. While on the inverse, I could have a bottom 6 prospect score 80 pts in the AHL, barely grow, then score 40-50pts in his rookie season, and still barely grow. Its just silly.

There is so much more wrong with player growth/styles/production in the game, and I have far more specific ideas for how potential should influence growth, but EA is not going to actually fix any of this any time soon, not until someone adds some competition atleast.