OOTP Developments Forums - View Single Post

greenOak · 02-17-2015, 07:35 PM

There's lots of variance in scouting, and these random drops in players potentials are quite common. A player may be 5.0/9.0 on draft day for example but end up at 6/0/7.5 by the end of the season. This can be the result of the player simply never being as good as a 9.0 or just shear randomness where your scout thinks a player is worse than he actually is. It's not the result of improper scouting or poor development. It isn't too often potential actually goes up in my experience (which is silly), but a player can still improve if their current and potential are the same (7.0/7.0 for example). Hell, I've had players who were rated 4.0/4.0 at one point in time end up as 8.0/8.0 players - it's the hidden offensive potential and defensive potential, which doesn't change, that actually drives ratings. FWIW, Jyrki Antonen (the guy I drafted 4th overall in my dynasty I have on here) dropped from a 4.0/8.0 to a 4.0/4.0 but I'm not actually worried about his development at all. It's just the scouting in this game is full of these random drops.

McDavid usually ends up as a 9.5 in my leagues, so even though his potential is 8.5 right now for you, I would bet on him ending up closer to 9.5 by the time he reaches prime so long as he is getting regular playing time (3rd line minutes or more). Draisaitl I'm not sure about. He may actually turn into a 8.0/8.0 or he might have just been a 7.5/7.5 all along.

I'm personally dissatisfied with the scouting engine in FHM (and this is one of my problems with it), but it is what it is, and the reality are going to be random drops in players potentials that you're best off just ignoring. As a general rule of thumb, you shouldn't pay much attention to your scouts opinions on young players unless you have to (drafting is an example - relying on stats is even worse imo). Ratings for older players will be accurate, but you'll be better off evaluating young talent based on what you're assistant GM guy says in the trade screen, or just using draft position as a proxy for player potential since the AI drafts like God in this game.

Just as a note, Jack Eichel also seems to be quite underwhelming in my experience. I think it might have something to do with development in the NCAA but I'm not sure.

02-17-2015, 07:35 PM	#2
greenOak Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Aug 2014 Posts: 203	There's lots of variance in scouting, and these random drops in players potentials are quite common. A player may be 5.0/9.0 on draft day for example but end up at 6/0/7.5 by the end of the season. This can be the result of the player simply never being as good as a 9.0 or just shear randomness where your scout thinks a player is worse than he actually is. It's not the result of improper scouting or poor development. It isn't too often potential actually goes up in my experience (which is silly), but a player can still improve if their current and potential are the same (7.0/7.0 for example). Hell, I've had players who were rated 4.0/4.0 at one point in time end up as 8.0/8.0 players - it's the hidden offensive potential and defensive potential, which doesn't change, that actually drives ratings. FWIW, Jyrki Antonen (the guy I drafted 4th overall in my dynasty I have on here) dropped from a 4.0/8.0 to a 4.0/4.0 but I'm not actually worried about his development at all. It's just the scouting in this game is full of these random drops. McDavid usually ends up as a 9.5 in my leagues, so even though his potential is 8.5 right now for you, I would bet on him ending up closer to 9.5 by the time he reaches prime so long as he is getting regular playing time (3rd line minutes or more). Draisaitl I'm not sure about. He may actually turn into a 8.0/8.0 or he might have just been a 7.5/7.5 all along. I'm personally dissatisfied with the scouting engine in FHM (and this is one of my problems with it), but it is what it is, and the reality are going to be random drops in players potentials that you're best off just ignoring. As a general rule of thumb, you shouldn't pay much attention to your scouts opinions on young players unless you have to (drafting is an example - relying on stats is even worse imo). Ratings for older players will be accurate, but you'll be better off evaluating young talent based on what you're assistant GM guy says in the trade screen, or just using draft position as a proxy for player potential since the AI drafts like God in this game. Just as a note, Jack Eichel also seems to be quite underwhelming in my experience. I think it might have something to do with development in the NCAA but I'm not sure. Last edited by greenOak; 02-17-2015 at 08:11 PM.