Draft class editing Rubic.

[John1974]

I am posting this because I would like to come up with a draft class edit rubic that will be posted for us to refer to when doing draft class edits.

So hear are some starting thoughts on potential.

NBA star
To have an A potential in the game a player must have a rating between 81-100.

1. I think anyone who was a NBA great IE Jordan, Magic, Bird, etc... should be 91-100 rated.
1A. Anyone who was a star but not on the level of the greats should be 81-90

To have a B rating in the game a player potential rating will range from 61-80.
2. B level players who are solid players who had decent careers, and did contribute should have potentials 71-80

2A. B level players who came off the bench did some good things but never got to be the guy or big part of a team should have potential 61-70.

Now what I have noticed in the game over the years when it comes to the players true potential.

1. A players true potential will begin to drop with every TC. Some players potential drop quicker than others this seems to be more random by the game.

2. Players with 90 or higher potential almost always developes because he has more chances to develope with TC's thanks to high potential. If they start with high potential it takes longer for that potential to drop to a level where the player wont have a chance at developing in TC. Example a Player has 95 potential after TC it drops to 91, 2nd TC it drops to 86, Next TC drops to 79, still sold TC as you can see so it can be a few TC's where the guy can still develope. Basically a player with very high potential has more chances to improve in TC because of his high rated true potential.

3. As you can see from #2 above a guy with a potential of 80 MIGHT have less TC's to improve when compared to a guy with 90 basically because his potential will drop to a lower level before a guy with higher potential.

4. 1-3 doesnt mean a guy who is 30-33 years of age cant see improvements in TC but the chances are reduced because of lower potential as the player ages, and as potential drops. I have noticed that after the age of 30-31 decline begins to happen. For example a player might be A rated at Inside and that rating remains at A for awhile but he is declining in inside you just cant see it until ratings drop enough to effect the letter rating.

5. When it comes to the draft we have seen a decent amount of players with low potential (scouted not real.) become solid players and improve enough in TC's (not taking camps into fact just TC's.) reason is scouted potential isnt true potential so say player has C scouted potential its possible his true potential is A rated so he will have the benefits of #2 above. Since we started showing TRUE potential for rookies at the draft we have seen a decline in this happening because we know real potential.

Now getting back to the ratings above we could decide not to go with 81-100 rating 1, and 1A and just put all A rated players at 95 for example, but I think we should at least for guys like Jordan, Lebron, Kobe, Bird, Magic have them higher than other A guys in the game.

[John1974]

I also would like to submit that nobody for ratings other than potential will start with A's. I think at most B+ will be out A. and thats how we should go about doing the draft classes.

[Pepe Silvia]

Mar 7, 2012 9:23:31 GMT -6 John1974 said:

I am posting this because I would like to come up with a draft class edit rubic that will be posted for us to refer to when doing draft class edits.

So hear are some starting thoughts on potential.

NBA star
To have an A potential in the game a player must have a rating between 81-100.

1. I think anyone who was a NBA great IE Jordan, Magic, Bird, etc... should be 91-100 rated.
1A. Anyone who was a star but not on the level of the greats should be 81-90

To have a B rating in the game a player potential rating will range from 61-80.
2. B level players who are solid players who had decent careers, and did contribute should have potentials 71-80

2A. B level players who came off the bench did some good things but never got to be the guy or big part of a team should have potential 61-70.

Now what I have noticed in the game over the years when it comes to the players true potential.

1. A players true potential will begin to drop with every TC. Some players potential drop quicker than others this seems to be more random by the game.

2. Players with 90 or higher potential almost always developes because he has more chances to develope with TC's thanks to high potential. If they start with high potential it takes longer for that potential to drop to a level where the player wont have a chance at developing in TC. Example a Player has 95 potential after TC it drops to 91, 2nd TC it drops to 86, Next TC drops to 79, still sold TC as you can see so it can be a few TC's where the guy can still develope. Basically a player with very high potential has more chances to improve in TC because of his high rated true potential.

3. As you can see from #2 above a guy with a potential of 80 MIGHT have less TC's to improve when compared to a guy with 90 basically because his potential will drop to a lower level before a guy with higher potential.

4. 1-3 doesnt mean a guy who is 30-33 years of age cant see improvements in TC but the chances are reduced because of lower potential as the player ages, and as potential drops. I have noticed that after the age of 30-31 decline begins to happen. For example a player might be A rated at Inside and that rating remains at A for awhile but he is declining in inside you just cant see it until ratings drop enough to effect the letter rating.

5. When it comes to the draft we have seen a decent amount of players with low potential (scouted not real.) become solid players and improve enough in TC's (not taking camps into fact just TC's.) reason is scouted potential isnt true potential so say player has C scouted potential its possible his true potential is A rated so he will have the benefits of #2 above. Since we started showing TRUE potential for rookies at the draft we have seen a decline in this happening because we know real potential.

Now getting back to the ratings above we could decide not to go with 81-100 rating 1, and 1A and just put all A rated players at 95 for example, but I think we should at least for guys like Jordan, Lebron, Kobe, Bird, Magic have them higher than other A guys in the game.

I know this is old, so idk how much it's abided by currently, but just offering my $.02. I feel like potential should be at least somewhat based on the players potential when entering the NBA, that way you could see some guys who busted IRL turn into good sim players and vice versa. Basing potential strictly on how guys turned out irl is kinda lame imo.

[jupee]

If you put huge potential on everyone who could-have-been good player - thats quick way to inflation

With current drafts, it still turns out quite randomly.

[Pepe Silvia]

Dec 15, 2023 12:01:34 GMT -6 jupee said:

If you put huge potential on everyone who could-have-been good player - thats quick way to inflation

With current drafts, it still turns out quite randomly.

I mean thats not what I said at all. There are plenty of players who were drafted in the top 5 irl who were gigantic busts, who with the right situation etc. could have been stars. An alternate reality exists were Darko Milicic was a stud and Chris Bosh or D. Wade or Melo or Lebron turned out to be trash.

[jupee]

Dec 15, 2023 12:08:53 GMT -6 Pepe Silvia said:

Dec 15, 2023 12:01:34 GMT -6 jupee said:

If you put huge potential on everyone who could-have-been good player - thats quick way to inflation

With current drafts, it still turns out quite randomly.

I mean thats not what I said at all. There are plenty of players who were drafted in the top 5 irl who were gigantic busts, who with the right situation etc. could have been stars. An alternate reality exists were Darko Milicic was a stud and Chris Bosh or D. Wade or Melo or Lebron turned out to be trash.

But this is why we have league with Chris Bosh and Darko Milicic, and not with Arvydas Jordan and Charles O'Neal (if you know what I mean) - to have certain degree of real thing here

Btw, speaking about... go check how LeBron and Bosh turned out in our league

[Pepe Silvia]

Dec 15, 2023 12:27:13 GMT -6 jupee said:

Dec 15, 2023 12:08:53 GMT -6 Pepe Silvia said:

I mean thats not what I said at all. There are plenty of players who were drafted in the top 5 irl who were gigantic busts, who with the right situation etc. could have been stars. An alternate reality exists were Darko Milicic was a stud and Chris Bosh or D. Wade or Melo or Lebron turned out to be trash.

But this is why we have league with Chris Bosh and Darko Milicic, and not with Arvydas Jordan and Charles O'Neal (if you know what I mean) - to have certain degree of real thing here

Btw, speaking about... go check how LeBron and Bosh turned out in our league

Saying something like "Michael Olowakandi should have good potential" isn't some outlandish statement, when he was a draft prospect he had a ton of potential, hence him going 1st overall IRL. Saying a guy who entered the nba as a high draft pick has good potential is literally how it was in real life. Whether they pan out or not would be the sim part. Basing their potential on how their actual careers turned out is less "real" than basing it on how they were evaluated pre-draft.

[majic44]

I am on the side that says we should have potential reflect their draft status at the time and not be based on IRL NBA success.

I mean, at the end of the day TC will ultimately decide how good/great a player is. I see no issue in giving some additional guys higher potential. Some draft classes will end up being better than others, that’s how the league works IRL. It’s also why some draft classes are looked at with more excitement compared to others.

If the worst happens, only 1-2 more guys end up being better players than anticipated. In a 25+ team league that’s not the worst outcome.

[John1974]

We have lower grades to slow inflation, and we do have camps. I always try to give the players potential that matches their real life career.

[jupee]

Did they have good potential or were the scounts wrong tho? at no point of his life Bismack Biyombo had better potential to be an NBA star than Kawhi Leonard - he just got overlooked

[Pepe Silvia]

Dec 15, 2023 12:43:26 GMT -6 John1974 said:

We have lower grades to slow inflation, and we do have camps. I always try to give the players potential that matches their real life career.

This is what I'm talking about. Should it not match their IRL potential at time of drafting? 

[Pepe Silvia]

Dec 15, 2023 12:45:36 GMT -6 jupee said:

Did they have good potential or were the scounts wrong tho? at no point of his life Bismack Biyombo had better potential to be an NBA star than Kawhi Leonard - he just got overlooked

This is hindsight bias. 

[John1974]

I try to give high players good potential even if career didnt pan out. I just dont go high level potential for those players. Also scouted potential is crap because a player can show as A potential and have C or D, and vice versus. Never go by scouted potential in this game.

P/S the only time scouted potential is 100% accurate is for our draft class when edits are done.

[majic44]

Dec 15, 2023 12:45:36 GMT -6 jupee said:

Did they have good potential or were the scounts wrong tho? at no point of his life Bismack Biyombo had better potential to be an NBA star than Kawhi Leonard - he just got overlooked

This feels like you are moving the goalposts a bit but I’ll bite.

Team circumstances determine players career outcomes more often than not, at least in my opinion. This often times has no reflection on their true potential. 

Was Kawhi’s potential higher or did he get lucky and go to the perfect place to develop him? Had kawhi gone to charlotte, Orlando or Detroit where he had shit coaching and a terrible roster, would he have developed into a star? 

Had Bismack gone and played under a HOF legendary coach with 3 other HOF level players would he have had a better chance to succeed? 

Potential only speaks to what they could become, not what they will become. And again, circumstances for each of these players was vastly different after they entered the league. 

[jupee]

Dec 15, 2023 13:02:35 GMT -6 majic44 said:

Dec 15, 2023 12:45:36 GMT -6 jupee said:

Did they have good potential or were the scounts wrong tho? at no point of his life Bismack Biyombo had better potential to be an NBA star than Kawhi Leonard - he just got overlooked

This feels like you are moving the goalposts a bit but I’ll bite.

Team circumstances determine players career outcomes more often than not, at least in my opinion. This often times has no reflection on their true potential. 

Was Kawhi’s potential higher or did he get lucky and go to the perfect place to develop him? Had kawhi gone to charlotte, Orlando or Detroit where he had shit coaching and a terrible roster, would he have developed into a star? 

Had Bismack gone and played under a HOF legendary coach with 3 other HOF level players would he have had a better chance to succeed? 

Potential only speaks to what they could become, not what they will become. And again, circumstances for each of these players was vastly different after they entered the league. 

Work ethic, durability, matureness have also impact. Maybe more than a team. But all that are not in the FBB engine, so we put all those parameters as potential I guess

[New York Knicks]

It is the work ethic. And that should be part of their Potential.

Gilbert Arenas was a 2nd round pick on the trash Warriors. He outworked everybody and turned himself into a player.

If you fail to do that, that's on you. It's not the coaches fault. Even if it is initially. If you work you're gonna get your shot eventually. Trevor Ariza was in Larry Browns dog house in New York. He kept working. A few years later he was a champion with the Lakers.