Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastian Palkowski
Can you go into a bit more depth how you evaluate your players? It is always interesting for us to here something like this and improve how we display players.
|
Sure thing (Note: this approach goes for my players in my organization, rather than any outside acquisition targets)
Prior to the FHM 2 depth charts feature, I'd been keeping a spreadsheet with all of the visible player ratings and then updating those ratings each time the monthly development report came out. I had a separate tab in the spreadsheet to track how many times a player had a negative development month over the course of the season, in order to better recall in the offseason what sort of trajectory the player's been on and avoid offering multi-year contracts to players in escalating states of decline.
To crudely arrive at an "overall" player rating, I would total all 28 or so visible player ratings and then divide by 28, and then I'd use that number to develop a rough depth chart. I think the issue I had with this approach is that I was overvaluing the ratings for determination, bravery, leadership, etc. with consequential undervaluation for physical, offensive, and defensive abilities. Once I set the intangible ratings aside I found my spreadsheet depth chart was in closer - albeit not total - alignment with the FHM 2 generated depth chart.
I've also recently noticed that some of my longtime players experienced ratings improvements at some point that weren't apparent in the course of simply following the monthly development report, so that also resulted in some errors in my spreadsheet depth chart.