Rosters and Ratings: NHL 13 player growth

[Benzy19]

Haven't played much GM yet, but I noticed that Ryan Murray jumped from 69(or whatever he is) to 80 after the first year, then he jumped to 88 after year 2. I wasn't Columbus and tried to trade for him but they wouldn't move him for anything.

 

[Petes2424]

Ive been testing over the last days here trying to find logic in these ratings.

Center 18..... 4 yellow stars..... 65 ovr (1st overall)
1yr 4 yellow stars..... 66 ovr 7 g 7 a -15
2yr 4 yellow stars..... 67 ovr 9 g 8 a -1
3yr 4 yellow stars..... 68 ovr 9 g 9 a +4
4yr 4 yellow stars..... 69 ovr 30g 29a +21 Sent to AHL Still only progressed 1 point

L Wing 18..... 4 yellow stars..... 66 ovr (3rd overall)
1yr 4 yellow stars..... 74 ovr 16 g 22 a -7
2yr 4 yellow stars..... 79 ovr 26 g 16 a +10
3yr 4 yellow stars..... 80 ovr 26g 23 a -3
4yr 4 yellow stars..... 80 ovr 18 g 24 a +20

R Wing 19.... 3.5 yellow stars... 59 ovr (2nd overall)
1yr 3.5 yellow starts.. 61 ovr 3 g 16 a -11
2yr 3.5 yellow stars .. 64 ovr 4 g 25 a +8
3yr 3.5 yellow stars.. 64 ovr 1 g 4 a -13
4yr 3.5 yellow stars.. 68 ovr 2 g 25 a +12 Sent to AHL


I've signed them all and put them all on the first line. I've gutted my team with a few years left in the game to get a better judgment of how these ratings work. I also have the following..

D...... 19.... 3.5 stars........ 64 ovr (21st overall)
1yr 3.5 stars........ 67 ovr 3 g 11 a -20
2yr 3.5 stars........ 71 ovr 5 g 6 a -8
3yr 3.5 stars........ 73 ovr 0g 9a -9
4yr 3.5 stars........ 76 ovr 4 g 9a +6

D...... 23.... 3.5 stars........ 72 ovr (20th overall)
1 yr 3.5 stars........ 76 ovr 7 g 23 a -16
2 yr 3.5 stars........ 81 ovr 4 g 27 a -23
3 yr 3.5 stars....... 85 ovr 11g 28a +5
4 yr 3.5 stars....... 85 ovr 10g 22a +33

Those are the NHL guys Im testing

In the AHL I took some similiar guys and put them into slots for top minutes.

Center.. 20... 3.5 stars..... 68 ovr
1yr 3.5 stars..... 72 ovr 13g 23 a -24
2yr 3.5 stars..... 73 ovr 22g 29 a -7
3yr 3.5 stars..... 77 ovr 2g 13 a +2 Sent to NHL
3yr 3.5 stars..... 81 ovr 9g 18 a +4 Sent to NHL

LW....... 22.... 3.5 stars.... 62 ovr
1yr 3.5 stars... 64 ovr 15 g 26 a +12
2yr 3.5 stars... 69 ovr 11 g 18a -7
3yr 3.5 stars... 83 ovr 19g 40a -6
4yr 3.5 stars.. 81 ovr 8 g 16 a +12 Sent to NHL

RW...... 20.... 4 stars...... 61 ovr
1yr 4 stars..... 63 ovr 12g 17 a -6
2yr 4 stars..... 65 ovr 12g 18 a -6
3yr 4 stars.... 67 ovr 10g 19a -18
4yr 4 stars.... 68 ovr 2g 25a +12

D......... 18.... 4 stars....... 62 ovr
1yr 4 stars...... 66 ovr 8g 3a -25
2yr 4 stars...... 69 ovr 8g 4a +10
3yr 4 stars...... 72 ovr 10g 5a -15
4yr 4 stars..... 75 ovr 1 g 7a +35

D......... 21.... 2.5 stars.... 72 ovr
1yr 2.5 stars.... 72 ovr 10g 17a +3
2yr 2.5 stars.... 72 ovr 8g 10a -23
3yr 2.5 stars.... 72 ovr 3g 10a -10
4yr 2.5 srar.... 72 ovr 8g 22a +21

Finished the 4th season. With one season to go, the player drafted #1 overall is still not progressing even though I sent him to the AHL where he had a great season. Another player that was in the AHL last year and jumped to an 83, was sent to the NHL, and he regressed to an 81. This guy just came off his rookie deal and he went backwards? Weird. Three players stayed the same. Two NHL guys who've never played in the AHL and one in the AHL. The center who I played in the AHL for his first two seasons just popped up to an 81 after his second year in the NHL playing on the 4th line. The 2.5 star guy changed to white stars and even though he had a good season, he's not changed 1 ovr in 4 years.



Although Im standing by this thing is completely random, it does look like guys that play in the AHL for a couple years MIGHT progress better.

 

[Benjamin]

I just played 55 overall Morgan Rielly in the NHL with Top 4 minutes and played all situations. He jumped from 55 to 75 overall.

 

[Petes2424]

I just played 55 overall Morgan Rielly in the NHL with Top 4 minutes and played all situations. He jumped from 55 to 75 overall.

Quite a few of the 2012 drafted players climb quickly. Not sure if it's pre-determined or not.

 

[Benjamin]

I'm doing tests on player growth. I made a player that's 18, 65 overall, 4 star potential, center, playmaker.

Test #1- #1 center and plays all situations on a random Swedish team so has 55-65 overall team mates. Puts up 26 points in 82 games. No playoff games played. 65 overall -> 79 overall.

Also, some random player on the Swedish team I chose went from 62 overall to 77 overall at age 25 while getting 3rd line minutes.

Test #2- #1 center and plays all situations on Pittsburgh, line mates are Crosby & Malkin. Puts up 31 points in 82 games. Puts up 2 points in 5 playoff games. 65 overall -> 78 overall.

Test #3- #4 center and with no other minutes on Pittsburgh. Puts up 12 points in 82 games. Puts up 3 points in 18 playoff games. 65 overall -> 78 overall.

Test #4- #1 center and plays in all situations on WBS Pens in the AHL. 65 overall -> 79 overall.

Im going to try a season with him in the CHL tomorrow.

Conclusion: I don't understand player development.

Edit:

Attributes
71 - Slap Shot Accuracy
70 - Slap Shot Power
73 - Wrist Shot Accuracy
72 - Wrist Shot Power

87 - Discipline
81 - Offensive awareness
70 - Poise

80 - Deking
82 - Hand Eye
80 - Pass
80 - Puck Control

70 - Defensive Awareness
65 - Faceoffs
63 - Shot Blocking
70 - Stick Checking

61 - Aggressiveness
65 - Body Checking
86 - Durability
70 - Fighting Skill
70 - Strength

82 - Acceleration
80 - Agility
74 - Balance
67 - Endurance
77 - Speed

Im gonna try something similar but with a grinder with no offensive stats and still 65 overall.

 

[Kellogs]

That makes it seem more pre-determined than random. If player development is pre-determined, how does the game select how a created player develops? Although, Test#4 could be an outlier. Have you tried re-running that test to see if you get the same result? The only final alternative theory I could offer is that as long as you play that player at a level that is much higher than what his player role dictates, he'll be able to improve as long as the team is successful. I would be really interested to see if the overall jump is replicated if he played on the fourth line of a terrible team (like Columbus).

One final point, could you post the attributes he starts with?

 

[Top 6 Spaling]

Anyone seen any like breakout years from guys? Like someone getting 5+ overall points in an offseason all I ever see is 2 and 3

Yakupov jumped from a 63 to an 80 in one off-season. Extreme case, but woah.

 

[Benjamin]

Did another test.

52 overall ,18 years old, 3.5 star potential, Goalie.

Played him as Columbus's starter, he played all 82 games. He jumped from 52 to 75 overall.

 

[TheFlyingV]

Have any of the Canucks prospects like Jensen, Gaunce,Schroeder and Kassian became good Players after simmons seasons?

He scored 40+ goals for me in the 19-20 season on the 2nd line, he's 85 overall. Total beast for me. That was only his first or 2nd NHL season though, took some time to get there.

 

[red wiiingz boy]

1: Detroit rookie Jan Mursak (3.5star pot) always goes from 69ovr to 82ovr (both be a gm and gm connected). And his speed jumps to 95 or something, kinda weird if you ask me. Also, he played in the AHL, not in the NHL.

2: Another Detroit rookie Cory Emmerton (3star pot) also makes a big jump. From 73ovr to 80ovr. He also played in the AHL, but he did get 10ish NHL games.

Have any of you guys seen this before? It's kinda weird, 3 times in row for Mursak now...

 

[Benjamin]

That makes it seem more pre-determined than random. If player development is pre-determined, how does the game select how a created player develops? Although, Test#4 could be an outlier. Have you tried re-running that test to see if you get the same result? The only final alternative theory I could offer is that as long as you play that player at a level that is much higher than what his player role dictates, he'll be able to improve as long as the team is successful. I would be really interested to see if the overall jump is replicated if he played on the fourth line of a terrible team (like Columbus).

One final point, could you post the attributes he starts with?

I just simmed a season with him in the OHL. Again he jumps from 65 overall to 78 overall. Theres no way for him to not grow a ton.

I also simmed the goalie again as a starter on Columbus for 82 games and went from 52 to 74 overall.

 

[Kellogs]

Alright, did the test, however with the attributes you listed, the player starts off at 67 OVR, not 65 OVR. Anyways, based on what I see it makes sense. The player already has good offensive attributes. At this stage, it takes a significant jump in multiple offensive categories to notice a big overall jump. I would take a guess that the jump you've seen is due to the player improving his defensive abilities with some minor improvements in offensive categories, mostly due to the fact that he was played in a lot of defensive situations in all simulations. Simply increasing his defensive awareness to 80 brings him to 70 overall. Increasing it to 85 (also a realistic possibility) makes him 72 overall. Give him an across the board minor increase of 3 in each attribute on top of the big increase in DA gets the player to 77 overall.

I would also venture to guess that the player who played fourth line minutes received the lowest increase in his offensive attributes. The other three simulations, the player probably received very little improvement in his offensive categories because he was playing well above his level and did not put up a decent amount of points given the minutes he received. Although I would guess there is a possibility that if he had a good season in the AHL, that player might have received the highest increases in offensive categories, however these do not translate into any noticeable jumps in the Overall rating.

 

[Petes2424]

That makes it seem more pre-determined than random. If player development is pre-determined, how does the game select how a created player develops? Although, Test#4 could be an outlier. Have you tried re-running that test to see if you get the same result? The only final alternative theory I could offer is that as long as you play that player at a level that is much higher than what his player role dictates, he'll be able to improve as long as the team is successful. I would be really interested to see if the overall jump is replicated if he played on the fourth line of a terrible team (like Columbus).

One final point, could you post the attributes he starts with?

The more I look at it, the more I think "Real Players" meaning guys like Morrissey, MacKinnon, Yakupov, Grigorenko, etc, are already pre-determined. I've put them in every different scenario except for not playing them at all, and they all progress basically the same, give or take a point or two.

Having said that, when you get later in the game is where it seems to go completely random. Most 1st and 2nd round picks "make it" compared to NHL12 where it was more up in the air. On the flipside, Ive been trying to find guys in rounds 3-7 who make it. Used to be goalies and defensive dmen, etc, you could still get in late rounds and they would progress. I've yet to see anyone's POTENTIAL change (for the better) as it did in 2012. That random German def defenseman who all of a sudden was a 76 B prospect after two years not signed.

I just started a new GM and I will try and keep valid records on growth. The 5 year study I just did crapped out in 2037 as the players didnt grow at all in the final season of Be a gm. What I did determine is it matters ZERO if you play the guy in the NHL or in the AHL. In fact Im more inclined at this point to say they grow better in their determined slots like "minor top 4", etc, instead of playing the player "up"..

 

[Benjamin]

Just simmed a season with a 54 overall grinder, 18 years old, 3.5 star potential on Anaheim's 4th line with no PK or PP time. He put up 14 points in 82 games. All his stats were 65ish but had 75 checking.

He grew from 54 overall to 74 overall.

 

[dyzfunctioned]

I've also found the player growth really random too. A few examples:

Bartschi jumped to an 86 overall from a 69 overall during one year in the AHL. Played 2nd line in NHL one season and stuck at 86 overall. Next season he gets bumped to first line, drops to an 85 (team won Stanley Cup).

Ristolainen - I know a lot of people say this guy turns into a stud... Have had him for ~4 seasons and he's 61 OVR and potential has dropped to 3.5*.

Wannstrom - drafted this guy as a 61 OVR 3.5 Red *. Played fourth line minutes in the AHL if he wasn't scratched and he turned out into an 82 OVR after a few seasons.

Eberle - Stuck at 85 playing top line most the time, then after 3 seasons I drop him to 2nd line and he jumps to an 89...

MPS - 79 OVR 4*, labelled as a 4th line FWD and I've played him on the third line with PK time, won a cup etc... hasn't budged an inch.

Galchenyuk - Heard other people say he was a stud, he's currently a 67 OVR and his POT has dropped to 2.5*.

 

[Benjamin]

I've also found the player growth really random too. A few examples:

Bartschi jumped to an 86 overall from a 69 overall during one year in the AHL. Played 2nd line in NHL one season and stuck at 86 overall. Next season he gets bumped to first line, drops to an 85 (team won Stanley Cup).

Ristolainen - I know a lot of people say this guy turns into a stud... Have had him for ~4 seasons and he's 61 OVR and potential has dropped to 3.5*.

Wannstrom - drafted this guy as a 61 OVR 3.5 Red *. Played fourth line minutes in the AHL if he wasn't scratched and he turned out into an 82 OVR after a few seasons.

Eberle - Stuck at 85 playing top line most the time, then after 3 seasons I drop him to 2nd line and he jumps to an 89...

MPS - 79 OVR 4*, labelled as a 4th line FWD and I've played him on the third line with PK time, won a cup etc... hasn't budged an inch.

Galchenyuk - Heard other people say he was a stud, he's currently a 67 OVR and his POT has dropped to 2.5*.

Agreed it seems random but you cant expect every player to develop perfectly.

 

[dyzfunctioned]

Agreed it seems random but you cant expect every player to develop perfectly.

Agreed. Just seems crazy you can give a player every opportunity to develop (ie: Dumba, Ristolainen, Galchenyuk, etc.) and they don't turn out whereas you develop a player poorly (Wannstrom, Roy, Bunz, a few others) and they can take huge jumps.

 

[HeroByMistake]

I did a fantasy draft in gm mode and I'll give you the first year growth on a few of my players.

NHL
Ryan Nugent-Hopkins.
He spent all year on the third line with no PP or PK time.
He played 57 games with 28pts and plus 6.
He grew from 80 to 86.

Gabriel Landeskog.
He spent time on the first and second lines with some PP time.
He played 39 games with 25pts and plus 11.
He grew from 82 to 87.

Jordan Eberle
He spent time on mostly first line, but played second as well with lots of PP time.
He played 75 games with 48pts and plus 23.
He grew from 84 to 86.

David Rundblad
He spent all his time on second line and played PP.
He played 68 games with 34 pts (10goals) and plus 19.
He grew from 76(I think?) to 86.

But this one was by far the best...
John Gibson
He spent the year in the CHL.
He grew from 61 to 81.

 

[1972]

Agreed. Just seems crazy you can give a player every opportunity to develop (ie: Dumba, Ristolainen, Galchenyuk, etc.) and they don't turn out whereas you develop a player poorly (Wannstrom, Roy, Bunz, a few others) and they can take huge jumps.

I had Galchenyuk for 5 years and he never passed 76 overall, I played him in every possible situation and he could never develop, Sam Reinhart on the other hand went from 65 ish to 82 in one year in the CHL.

 

[Benjamin]

I had Galchenyuk for 5 years and he never passed 76 overall, I played him in every possible situation and he could never develop, Sam Reinhart on the other hand went from 65 ish to 82 in one year in the CHL.

Without a roster update Galchenyuk potential is 2.5 stars. Maybe thats why?

 

[dyzfunctioned]

I had Galchenyuk for 5 years and he never passed 76 overall, I played him in every possible situation and he could never develop, Sam Reinhart on the other hand went from 65 ish to 82 in one year in the CHL.

Haven't had as much luck with Reinhart - he stayed at 65 for two years and then just jumped to a 75. Playing top line in the AHL now so hopefully he takes another jump.

 

[1972]

Without a roster update Galchenyuk potential is 2.5 stars. Maybe thats why?

he was 4.5 yellow stars, its wierd there are a few players who can't seem to progress while others do extremly quickly. for the Sabres Ennis and Hodgson are both 4 yellow yet Ennis progressed alot faster.

 

[n00bxQb]

he was 4.5 yellow stars, its wierd there are a few players who can't seem to progress while others do extremly quickly. for the Sabres Ennis and Hodgson are both 4 yellow yet Ennis progressed alot faster.

Players generally have a breakout season between the ages of 19 and 25 and the most likely age is 25.

A 4.5-star potential player will end up between 75 and 99 OVR in his prime in all of my tests, although most commonly between 85 and 89 OVR.

5 years in, Galchenyuk is only 23. He still has time to grow, although it's possible he may not.

 

[Kellogs]

The more I look at it, the more I think "Real Players" meaning guys like Morrissey, MacKinnon, Yakupov, Grigorenko, etc, are already pre-determined. I've put them in every different scenario except for not playing them at all, and they all progress basically the same, give or take a point or two.

Having said that, when you get later in the game is where it seems to go completely random. Most 1st and 2nd round picks "make it" compared to NHL12 where it was more up in the air. On the flipside, Ive been trying to find guys in rounds 3-7 who make it. Used to be goalies and defensive dmen, etc, you could still get in late rounds and they would progress. I've yet to see anyone's POTENTIAL change (for the better) as it did in 2012. That random German def defenseman who all of a sudden was a 76 B prospect after two years not signed.

I just started a new GM and I will try and keep valid records on growth. The 5 year study I just did crapped out in 2037 as the players didnt grow at all in the final season of Be a gm. What I did determine is it matters ZERO if you play the guy in the NHL or in the AHL. In fact Im more inclined at this point to say they grow better in their determined slots like "minor top 4", etc, instead of playing the player "up"..

I would agree with that, which is why people are seeing consistently similar results across the board. Add a small bit of randomness, and some statistical based growth and you can see some small variations across the board. When EA released information on BeAGM, they described how they modeled player development based on historical data. It's not inconceivable that players get assigned a certain growth pattern, and that new players that are CPU generated for the draft get assigned a particular growth model based on percentages.

Just simmed a season with a 54 overall grinder, 18 years old, 3.5 star potential on Anaheim's 4th line with no PK or PP time. He put up 14 points in 82 games. All his stats were 65ish but had 75 checking.

He grew from 54 overall to 74 overall.

Again, it all depends which attributes went up. Overall doesn't tell the whole picture especially with the weight attributes are weighted, particularly offensive awareness and defensive awareness.

Agreed it seems random but you cant expect every player to develop perfectly.

Randomness would show a large variation in results between different individuals and various GM modes. The fact that for the most part we always see the same players grow rapidly, the same players grow slowly, and in your example, the same created player grow the same way (at least in the overall rating) regardless of the situation that player is placed in suggests that randomness doesn't play a large role in year-to-year changes in player ratings.

 

[Benjamin]

I would agree with that, which is why people are seeing consistently similar results across the board. Add a small bit of randomness, and some statistical based growth and you can see some small variations across the board. When EA released information on BeAGM, they described how they modeled player development based on historical data. It's not inconceivable that players get assigned a certain growth pattern, and that new players that are CPU generated for the draft get assigned a particular growth model based on percentages.



Again, it all depends which attributes went up. Overall doesn't tell the whole picture especially with the weight attributes are weighted, particularly offensive awareness and defensive awareness.



Randomness would show a large variation in results between different individuals and various GM modes. The fact that for the most part we always see the same players grow rapidly, the same players grow slowly, and in your example, the same created player grow the same way (at least in the overall rating) regardless of the situation that player is placed in suggests that randomness doesn't play a large role in year-to-year changes in player ratings.

This actually makes a lot of sense. Players development/growth is some what pre-determined