EHM The Blue Line

dabo wrote:
These curves have nothing to do with the quality of players. Two players peaking at 18 could be completely different, one could be NHL-ready while the other could be useless and never amount to anything. This is just to estimate player career curves.

I have tweaked the peak percentages to the following:

1 (Extremely rare, 0.1%)
2 - 3 (Very rare, 2%)
4 - 5 (Rare, 7%)
6 - 8 (Somewhat common, 15.9%)
9 - 12 (Very common, 50%)
13 - 15 (Somewhat common, 15.9%)
16 - 17 (Rare, 7%)
18 - 19 (Very rare, 2%)
20 (Extremely rare, 0.1%)

I tweaked all the combinations of atrophy percentages too.

Here's what I would use

Peaked at
1: 1%
2 - 3: 5%
4 - 5: 10%
6 - 8: 20%
9 - 12: 39.5%
13 - 15: 14%
16 - 17: 8%
18 - 19: 2%
20: .5%

Regression starts

1: 4% (about 75% of players should have peaked by now which is 25 yo)
2 - 3: 5% (about 90% of players peaked by now at 28 yo)
4 - 5: 10% (about 98% of players should have peaked by now at 30 yo)
6 - 8: 13% (about 99.5% of players should have peaked by now at 32yo)
9 - 12: 46% (all players should have peaked by now at 34yo)
13 - 15: 14%
16 - 17: 5%
18 - 19: 2%
20: 1%

The main problem with your curves, IMO is they do not have enough spread. This may be too much spread but I'd prefer that.

Also, I will note that it is very important that regression and progression is not CONSTANT. Not simply all attributes get better by 2 then peak, then each year regression happens all attributes get worse by 2. SImplistic example obviously, but you get the idea. For example look at Steve Yzerman. He peaked in the late 80's/early 90's, then came down from that peak but played solid for alot of years, then became a role player for several years. I would love to see career paths like that. Or Todd Bertuzzi who bounced around as a 3rd liner/2nd liner for alot of years before all at once progressing into a 1st liner all-star at 28/29 all at once. And his later career path also follows that as he regressed all at once, but now has solidied into solid 3rd liner again for several years.

Thanks for your input, I will go with what I have now and tweak more later; I don't expect it to be much of a problem.

I don't know whether to put this in the development or scouting threads, but it might be useful for this or any other project.

Thanks to morbid curiosity and utter boredom, I decided to do a little research on the overall disparity of draft picks in the NHL (2009/10 season) vs. the EHM universe (Lidas 2.3 db simmed to 2030/31). Keep in mind that this doesn't take into effect a player's role on a team. The only prerequisite I had for this was that the player had to have a "significant impact" on a team' season (minimum 40 games played for skaters, 20 games for goalies. If player was traded to another team, number of games played must be at or over 40). Here's what I found:

Lidas 2.3 Database (2030/31 season):
TOTALS (Out of 597 Players)

1st Round - 297/597 = 49.7%
2nd Round - 129/597 = 21.6%
3rd Round - 83/597 = 13.9%
4th Round - 51/597 = 8.5%
5th Round - 15/597 = 2.5%
6th Round - 12/597 = 2%
7th Round - 6/597 = 1%
Undrafted - 4/597 = .67%

NHL 2009/10 Season
TOTALS (Out of 637 Players)

1st Round - 215/637 = 33.7%
2nd Round - 88/637 = 13.8%
3rd Round - 59/637 = 9.3%
4th Round - 47/637 = 7.4%
5th Round - 31/637 = 4.9%
6th Round - 39/637 = 6.1%
7th Round - 36/637 = 5.7%
Other* - 46/637 = 7.2%
Undrafted - 76/637 = 11.9%

* Consisting of players drafted in the 8th round or later

The big problem with the EHM universe is obvious: The draft is way too top heavy, with one out of every two regulars in the NHL being first rounders and over one out of five being second rounders (i.e. 85% of players in the league can be found in the first three rounds, almost 95% if fourth is counted). In comparison, only around 47% of NHL regulars in the 2009/10 season came from the first two rounds of the draft, one out of three regulars from the first round (57% if third round is counted).

The biggest discrepancy, however, is in undrafted players. In the EHM universe: only four players were undrafted. two fringe players (a 7th d-man and grinder), a bottom pairing defenseman and a complimentary second line winger. In the NHL, surprisingly (IMO), over ten percent of the league consists of undrafted talent. However, if one were to apply current NHL drafting protocol (seven rounds) to past drafts (and presume all NHL regulars from the "Other" category went undrafted), the number of undrafted regulars would stand at 122/637 players (19.2%); meaning that there would be more undrafted regulars than regulars drafted in the second round.

If I were to take a stab at overall percentages of draft selection and NHL regulars, it would be this:

1st Round - 33% (+/- 2-3%)
2nd Round - 14% (+/- 1-2%)
3rd Round - 10% (+/- 1%)
4th Round - 7% (+/- .5%)
5th Round - 6% (+/- .5%)
6th Round - 7% (+/- .5%)
7th Round - 7% (+/- .5%)
Undrafted - 16% (+/- 1-2%)

Once again, keep in mind that this doesn't take into consideration a player's role on a team (that's another subject).

I've also noticed that the EHM draft tends to be really predictable in terms of drafting patterns:

- Canadian Major Junior scouting is near-pinpoint (no use drafting them after the first 20 picks. Chances are very strong that they will not become NHL regulars).
- European and College-bound players are rarely selected in the top 15 (in comparison to major junior players)
- An influx of European players are selected starting in the very late first round (about pick 25 to the end of round three)
- The "diamonds in the rough" (i.e. best talent unranked by ISS) is usually snagged up by the end of the third round.
- An influx of goaltenders are selected in the fourth round.

It's become something like this in the EHM universe:

1st Round - Major Junior players with a sprinkle of collegiate and European players
2nd Round - European players with a sprinkle of collegiate and Major Junior players
3rd Round - European and collegiate players with some Major Junior players
4th Round - Mostly Goaltenders from all leagues
5th Round - Scraps with the very rare NHL regular
6th Round - Scraps with a lesser chance of an NHL regular
7th Round - Scraps with an even lesser chance of an NHL regular
Undrafted - Organizational fodder, at best

Otherwise, hope I put this in the right place/is relevant.

Thanks, I am sure that could come in handy.