looksshootsscores
Registered User
- Jul 2, 2010
- 124
- 2
Hi all.
Little bit of an overwhelming task, but with some extra free time (I'm working from home and working half the amount of time as usual), I wanted to play GM/Franch. mode, but just couldn't get over some absolutely egregious player ratings/potential evaluations and from what, in my opinion, made trade values, contract demands and statistical achievements unrealistic.
So far, I've gone through every NHL team and some of their farm/prospects placed in non-AHL teams as well. I even took a look at the entire 2016 draft class among skaters with at least 20 NHL GP. I wouldn't say my ratings changes were earth-shattering, but it did produce 15 ratings changes (most cases a bump of 1-2 to their overalls or the odd instance of a slight downgrade--Fabbro for ex., went 82 to 81 after putting his off. awareness back to earth (think it was 87...)
I've devised a system for rating defense that has worked OK so far. I put every defenseman from each overall rating 91 & on into a box (similar to that dumb lunch room meme that was going around for a bit) and based on my opinion (after awhile you almost have the rating in your mind and some statistical references--and reading Pronman, Wheeler, Forecaster, LastWord, etc.) I determine if they should be moved up a table or down. For ex., Sergachev,84, was re-upped to 86, with a comparison of he and some of the initial 86 members--though 85 could be understandable as well. 84 did not seem appropriate based on others in this table (Spurgeon, Pulock, Faulk..) just to name a few.
For D this has been effective and it could be effective for centers too--but wingers, I wonder if there is an easier way to go about changes but am planning on trying this.
I'm sharing in part, to see your thoughts on this system and to ask what other ways you've determined some of these tougher calls. My next step is going to be evaluating prospects--I've already had some head aches (Jack Quinn, Ty Smith, etc.) but am hoping to wrap it up before Jan. when I have to use up a few weeks of vacation days and can really get down to the GM Mode.
Of course my luck--there will be a full roster update with NCAA-signed players on their AHL affiliates (ha!)
Thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts and have a great day, holiday and if possible, a somewhat OK rest of the year!
-lss
Little bit of an overwhelming task, but with some extra free time (I'm working from home and working half the amount of time as usual), I wanted to play GM/Franch. mode, but just couldn't get over some absolutely egregious player ratings/potential evaluations and from what, in my opinion, made trade values, contract demands and statistical achievements unrealistic.
So far, I've gone through every NHL team and some of their farm/prospects placed in non-AHL teams as well. I even took a look at the entire 2016 draft class among skaters with at least 20 NHL GP. I wouldn't say my ratings changes were earth-shattering, but it did produce 15 ratings changes (most cases a bump of 1-2 to their overalls or the odd instance of a slight downgrade--Fabbro for ex., went 82 to 81 after putting his off. awareness back to earth (think it was 87...)
I've devised a system for rating defense that has worked OK so far. I put every defenseman from each overall rating 91 & on into a box (similar to that dumb lunch room meme that was going around for a bit) and based on my opinion (after awhile you almost have the rating in your mind and some statistical references--and reading Pronman, Wheeler, Forecaster, LastWord, etc.) I determine if they should be moved up a table or down. For ex., Sergachev,84, was re-upped to 86, with a comparison of he and some of the initial 86 members--though 85 could be understandable as well. 84 did not seem appropriate based on others in this table (Spurgeon, Pulock, Faulk..) just to name a few.
For D this has been effective and it could be effective for centers too--but wingers, I wonder if there is an easier way to go about changes but am planning on trying this.
I'm sharing in part, to see your thoughts on this system and to ask what other ways you've determined some of these tougher calls. My next step is going to be evaluating prospects--I've already had some head aches (Jack Quinn, Ty Smith, etc.) but am hoping to wrap it up before Jan. when I have to use up a few weeks of vacation days and can really get down to the GM Mode.
Of course my luck--there will be a full roster update with NCAA-signed players on their AHL affiliates (ha!)
Thanks for reading and sharing your thoughts and have a great day, holiday and if possible, a somewhat OK rest of the year!
-lss
Your post focused on D, so I will too.... two reasons, really ~ first, you have guys like Cernak (77 iirc) or Weegar (78) who are super low rated when they're top guys on their team irl... second, teams like Carolina or the Islanders (whose bread and butter is their dcore) tend to need lots of work. I can't get over how bad the NYI are.... Adam Pelech, third pairing guy....
