I see many of the top draft prospects were nerfed... Why?

[Kinsella19]

Off the top of my head, both Jack Hughes and Zadina had their offensive potentials lowered. In Hughes case, it was by QUITE a lot.
If anybody has been following prospects this year, they would know that Jack Hughes is absolutely crushing it for the USNTDP U17's, and is looking every bit like the real deal that many expected him to be. However, whoever is in charge of changing the ratings for this game felt it was necessary to lower his offensive potential by nearly 50 points. Anybody want to explain this?

Zadina is another player who has had a fantastic draft season, and yet he also had his potential reduced. There are plenty of others as well.

Obviously you guys can just say "just edit them yourselves", but this isn't an option if I want to play with challenge mode on. I'm just not sure why these players (and many others) deserved to have their potentials lowered. Hughes isn't even the highest rated player out of his draft anymore (lolwut)

[Adam B]

Originally Posted by Kinsella19

Off the top of my head, both Jack Hughes and Zadina had their offensive potentials lowered. In Hughes case, it was by QUITE a lot.
If anybody has been following prospects this year, they would know that Jack Hughes is absolutely crushing it for the USNTDP U17's, and is looking every bit like the real deal that many expected him to be. However, whoever is in charge of changing the ratings for this game felt it was necessary to lower his offensive potential by nearly 50 points. Anybody want to explain this?

Zadina is another player who has had a fantastic draft season, and yet he also had his potential reduced. There are plenty of others as well.

Obviously you guys can just say "just edit them yourselves", but this isn't an option if I want to play with challenge mode on. I'm just not sure why these players (and many others) deserved to have their potentials lowered. Hughes isn't even the highest rated player out of his draft anymore (lolwut)

In the Florida Panthers game I play on our Weekly Stream (which is actually on the slightly updated draft prospect rankings - although a further one has been done if you start now), Hughes is a 1.5 current ability, 5.0 potential. I don't see a problem here.


And just checking, Zadina is Consensus 2.0/4.5 ability, but my Scouting shows him as 2.0/3.5.



Edit: Just started a new game. Both prospects still have high potential when starting. 5 and 4 stars respectfully.

[Kinsella19]

Originally Posted by Adam B

In the Florida Panthers game I play on our Weekly Stream (which is actually on the slightly updated draft prospect rankings - although a further one has been done if you start now), Hughes is a 1.5 current ability, 5.0 potential. I don't see a problem here.


And just checking, Zadina is Consensus 2.0/4.5 ability, but my Scouting shows him as 2.0/3.5.



Edit: Just started a new game. Both prospects still have high potential when starting. 5 and 4 stars respectfully.

I'm going more with the numbers here. Hughes had a 830 offensive potential when the game first came out. He's now down to around 770 I believe. The potential stars in this game quickly drop off. 770 isn't nearly enough for a player to eventually become a five star player.

[Tangerino]

and on this topic I rarely see players with a 800+ potential in either or offense and defense.. I get that they dont come often but I've simulated like 10-15 years into the future and not seen more then 2 or 3 generated ones.. and I rarely see guys come out of the 6-7th round and become good jamie benn type guys

[kexet]

Originally Posted by Tangerino

and on this topic I rarely see players with a 800+ potential in either or offense and defense.. I get that they dont come often but I've simulated like 10-15 years into the future and not seen more then 2 or 3 generated ones.. and I rarely see guys come out of the 6-7th round and become good jamie benn type guys

They shouldnt be as rare as they are now. After 10 years over half of the 800 that's in the nhl have retired, and I only see above 800s in the first 5 drafts after the start.
Then they're exceptionally rare. In the above half of 800 they should be thet rare since I consider above 850 a generational player. But in the lower half they shouldnt. If you would check the potential ability of alot of players in the start date they'd be above 800 but below 850. In some teams they're cores and in some teams they're star players

In my fictional 50 year sim (stopped simming about a month ago havent touch the game since) the top players were 790 potential and the only ones above 800 were goalies which were on the decline from 850 in the beginning to 825 after 50 years

I think this problem is due to the hidden potential for players to go above their estimated potential when they were created example a 740 potential can reach 800. Which they introduced so that late rounders could have the potential to bloom so that they wouldnt just be ahl/echl fodder

[JeffR]

Originally Posted by Kinsella19

I'm going more with the numbers here. Hughes had a 830 offensive potential when the game first came out. He's now down to around 770 I believe. The potential stars in this game quickly drop off. 770 isn't nearly enough for a player to eventually become a five star player.

He's at 785, not 770, but it's completely inaccurate to say a guy with 770 offensive potential can't become a 5-star player; the overall rating is much more complex than just looking up his offensive numbers.

I lowered his ratings to keep him in line with his current outlook. THN's 21-and-under prospect list has him as the #54 guy overall, behind, among other people, three guys who won't be picked until 2020. It looks like I went a little too far; he should be a little in front of, not behind, Krebs (Kokkonen, who's also ahead of him, appears to be a mistake; I'll fix that.) But he's in approximately the correct context overall. And he's a 16-year-old who's played 7 USHL games. Let's not turn him into McDavid 2.0 just yet.

[JeffR]

Originally Posted by kexet

They shouldnt be as rare as they are now. After 10 years over half of the 800 that's in the nhl have retired, and I only see above 800s in the first 5 drafts after the start.
Then they're exceptionally rare. In the above half of 800 they should be thet rare since I consider above 850 a generational player. But in the lower half they shouldnt. If you would check the potential ability of alot of players in the start date they'd be above 800 but below 850. In some teams they're cores and in some teams they're star players

In my fictional 50 year sim (stopped simming about a month ago havent touch the game since) the top players were 790 potential and the only ones above 800 were goalies which were on the decline from 850 in the beginning to 825 after 50 years

I think this problem is due to the hidden potential for players to go above their estimated potential when they were created example a 740 potential can reach 800. Which they introduced so that late rounders could have the potential to bloom so that they wouldnt just be ahl/echl fodder

No, we didn't alter the system to account for that. But the system may be underestimating the possibility of players exceeding their potential for other reasons and starting them a little too low, I'll check on that. I also suspect something we just corrected that was slightly stunting the development of high-potential, long-career players in historical may have been doing the same thing in modern games, but I'll need to see more tests to be sure it's had an effect. If not, I'll consider doing one or two new things, either slightly upping the potential generation ranges or the making the "generational player" procedure less rare.

[GmOfTheYear]

I don't know this was addressed in the latest update but the last time I played which was the update before the last one, there were about eight 5 star players and 5 of those were goalies. So not only were there less amazing players but they were mostly goalies. Not only is that no realistic but its not fun. Why not allow a connor mcdavid or crosby to generated every 10 years at least. And there needs to be more 5 star players period. I'm not sure how many are in the game in the current roster but whatever that number is, it should be around that 20+ years down the road.

[DaximusPrimus]

Originally Posted by JeffR

He's at 785, not 770, but it's completely inaccurate to say a guy with 770 offensive potential can't become a 5-star player; the overall rating is much more complex than just looking up his offensive numbers.

I lowered his ratings to keep him in line with his current outlook. THN's 21-and-under prospect list has him as the #54 guy overall, behind, among other people, three guys who won't be picked until 2020. It looks like I went a little too far; he should be a little in front of, not behind, Krebs (Kokkonen, who's also ahead of him, appears to be a mistake; I'll fix that.) But he's in approximately the correct context overall. And he's a 16-year-old who's played 7 USHL games. Let's not turn him into McDavid 2.0 just yet.

Hughes has done more than that. He's got 14 points against JUST, USHL competition in 7 games. USDP's also play NCAA competition where he is well above 2 PPG. 2.18 PPG to be exact. That is better than what Eichel, Kessel, Patty Kane and Matthews did in the USDP. He is actually on track to be the highest producing USDP player ever right now and he's doing it at 16 years old. The hype if anything should be much much higher for this kid. He's basically a Patrick Kane level stickhandler and passer with a two-way game at center. Kids the real deal.

[Kinsella19]

Originally Posted by DaximusPrimus

Hughes has done more than that. He's got 14 points against JUST, USHL competition in 7 games. USDP's also play NCAA competition where he is well above 2 PPG. 2.18 PPG to be exact. That is better than what Eichel, Kessel, Patty Kane and Matthews did in the USDP. He is actually on track to be the highest producing USDP player ever right now and he's doing it at 16 years old. The hype if anything should be much much higher for this kid. He's basically a Patrick Kane level stickhandler and passer with a two-way game at center. Kids the real deal.

Exactly. Thank you. I subscribe to THN and their lists are pretty garbage, especially the one used to justify his nerfing.

[DaximusPrimus]

Originally Posted by Kinsella19

Exactly. Thank you. I subscribe to THN and their lists are pretty garbage, especially the one used to justify his nerfing.

THN's lists aren't to bad. I like some of the write-ups they do for the actual draft.

https://www.hockeyprospect.com/ ran by Mark Edwards is a great resource to use for the draft. They release a Black Book every year that is massive and has tonnes of information on the coming draft and future drafts well worth the price tag. Nothing really compares to what they are doing. Of course Bobby Mac and Craig Button have some great insight as well.

I'm in the process of starting up a catch all prospect site with a few people in the industry. Should be launching before the WJC.

[Kinsella19]

Originally Posted by DaximusPrimus

THN's lists aren't to bad. I like some of the write-ups they do for the actual draft.

https://www.hockeyprospect.com/ ran by Mark Edwards is a great resource to use for the draft. They release a Black Book every year that is massive and has tonnes of information on the coming draft and future drafts well worth the price tag. Nothing really compares to what they are doing. Of course Bobby Mac and Craig Button have some great insight as well.

I'm in the process of starting up a catch all prospect site with a few people in the industry. Should be launching before the WJC.

I look forward to your site. Keep me updated man!