1974/75: Nino's Rosters - Mario Lemieux as an 8 year old

[batdad]

I posted this just because I thought it was interesting…it’s not really to try and “compare” in the sense of trying to make the 1974 db "the same"…IMO in the 1970s (and 1980s) there was a bigger talent gap between the stars and the average player, and in the mid 1970s there were a lot of very young promising stars who blossomed in the late 1970s / early 1980s, and I think the Drafts will help the overall talent level improve in the first few years, which I think is very realistic!

Very very true. There were fewer top level guys, fewer mid level guys and more plugs. The only reason it was more difficult to play pro hockey in the 70s (especially when your db is set) is there were fewer jobs available. Everything else nowadays is more difficult. Players are better in all aspects of the game. Even the plugs....thinking of a guy like Aaron Rome would have been better than the plugs of the 70s...because even though they are average at best today...they are better skaters BY FAR than the bottom of the lineup back in the day.

Yes training is better, resources are greater etc etc..to make players better. But you want this to be a realistic db from what you have said, not one that makes the 70s players like those today. Bobby Orr for example is the same player as say Duncan Keith (but more physical than Keith) ...and the weakness of the opponent was more exploitable for a player like Orr back in the day, than the limited weaknesses of Keith's opponents.

Now...Orr is still one of the top dmen to ever play the game. He, Coffey, Ray Bourque and Lidstrom. Orr changed the game more than anyone. So please no one go off on me saying I am slagging Orr.

[nino33]

But you want this to be a realistic db from what you have said

Honestly I think I'm just using what I think is common sense...like right now, I'm going through the Aggression Attribute and I'm making adjustments based on my notes/research about EHM (that roughly 10-12 equals an average of 1PM per GP) + I've decided myself the "range" is roughly 16-19 for fighters/13-15 for tough non-fighters, and 6/7 for floaters...and then I'm using my own knowledge to make edits as I go down the list in excel (and I'm using the site dropyourgloves to help refresh my memory)

THEN when I'm done I'll compare it to the Manimal/UUDB databases out of interest/curiosity, and to ensure if it is different it "makes sense" that it is different....

I thought it was interesting that Manimal's DB has a higher average CA than the UUDB, but the percentage of players with a Consistency of 15+ is much lower than the UUDB....it was a little like a sign to me to that "differences are OK" and that I should just continue to use common sense and a littler planning (determine ranges/reasoning) and let it come out naturally as it does! i.e. try to treat the editing task more organically and less like an exercise in mathematics! HaHa

What I do suspect will happen regardless though is the game will return to whatever its natural equilibrium is as the years pass and regens enter the mix...

ALSO I myself never really compare eras "straight up" - star players like Orr and others, with modern nutrition/coaching/equipment/etc IMO would be "just as good" (i.e. I do think Orr is head and shoulders better than any D in the game today...have you not watched a highlights film lately? HaHa no one else in the hockey world did what Orr did in his era or since...maybe Coffey, but that's pretty much it IMO...FYI Lidstrom's another version of Denis Potvin to me)...and the flip side of the point is many players of today would not be anywhere near as good without the same modern nutrition/coaching/equipment/etc...IMO

I would love if IRL goaltender equipment size returned to the 1970s sizes!


P.S. Changed my avatar again...that's Orr down to block the shot

[Manimal]

One thing I've noticed when poking around in the db, is that the created youngsters have their attributes set almost as they would be when fully grown stars. Ray Bourque is one example to look at. At 14 years old in the db, he already has eleven 18-19 ratings. Most of them will likely become 20s perhaps even before he makes it to the NHL. I can see how the non-changing mental attributes should be like that but the technical and physical atts should be lowered, IMO.

Will you look at the non-NHLers, too, when looking through the attributes?

[nino33]

One thing I've noticed when poking around in the db, is that the created youngsters have their attributes set almost as they would be when fully grown stars

You'll notice this on some youngsters because they were adults in Pens66 1979-80 database (which is what I started with two years ago!)...I think it's been over a year since I looked at these players! At the time I reduced age, height/weight and CA but I was under the impression then that EHM adjusted Attributes based on CA at start-up (which it clearly doesn't)

Will you look at the non-NHLers, too, when looking through the attributes?

Ideally yes, but I am running out of gas, and I go back to work when September starts and so in whatever state the database is in then is what it will be - I'm taking a break and doing other things for awhile (i.e. once released I'd be surprised if there was an update to the 1974 database before 2013)....

[nino33]

the non-changing mental attributes

Which Attributes are these? Thanks...

[Manimal]

the non-changing mental attributes

Which Attributes are these? Thanks...

Aggression, anticipation, bravery, vision, flair, consistency, decision, dirtyness, important games, pass tendency

I have seen these change, but only slightly;

Determination, team work, work rate, influence

I don't think versatility, agitation, injury proneness or any of the staff attributes change either

[nino33]

Thanks Manimal...


A general statement (not a specific message to anyone!) - I'll do the best I can regarding getting to the NHL player Attribute editing...I have to say that long ago I took the time to manually prepare a spreadsheet with every NHL player and every Attribute that was completed in the spring of 2011 (yes, 2011) and I looked for "help" from a number of people throughout last year and at the start of this year with no luck - just saying this is not a new issue, or an unknown issue, but I'm only one guy and it takes an enormous amount of time to do the actual reviewing/editing...

I really wish I’d received this type of specific feedback in March or June of this year when I was last working on NHL rosters, instead of 10 days before release….oh well


Regards

[nino33]

Aggression, anticipation, bravery, vision, flair, consistency, decision, dirtyness, important games, pass tendency
I have seen these change, but only slightly;
Determination, team work, work rate, influence
I don't think versatility, agitation, injury proneness or any of the staff attributes change either

Using the EHM Updater I'm right now going through and making all Attributes not listed above as "0" for the teenage/preteen minor hockey players (like Bourque).
The only Attribute I'm unsure of is "Natural Fitness" - does it change?

Once this is done (hopefully tonight) I'll return to editing NHL Attributes, and hopefully I'll get a chance to come back to these players and give age appropriate good ratings for some of the Attributes for at least the star players...

[Manimal]

Aggression, anticipation, bravery, vision, flair, consistency, decision, dirtyness, important games, pass tendency
I have seen these change, but only slightly;
Determination, team work, work rate, influence
I don't think versatility, agitation, injury proneness or any of the staff attributes change either

Using the EHM Updater I'm right now going through and making all Attributes not listed above as "0" for the teenage/preteen minor hockey players (like Bourque).
The only Attribute I'm unsure of is "Natural Fitness" - does it change?

Once this is done (hopefully tonight) I'll return to editing NHL Attributes, and hopefully I'll get a chance to come back to these players and give age appropriate good ratings for some of the Attributes for at least the star players...

I think you've missed my point. It isn't the mental atts that bothered me. It is the physical and technical atts that are being too high for teenagers

[nino33]

I think you've missed my point. It isn't the mental atts that bothered me. It is the physical and technical atts that are being too high for teenagers

I'm not sure why you think I missed your point - I changed all mental/technical atts to "0"
Soesn't it make sense to also try to set the "unchanging atts" for teenage/preteen players?

SO I'm also looking at the mental atts briefly (i.e. a youngster who actually made the NHL shouldn’t have a Determination of 2)...remember these were "similar style/CA" players that were overwritten, not a team of people researching/reviewing/editing every individual Attribute for the actual player, so some things might be noticeable "off" in some cases - but using excel such large variances can be quickly determined/corrected.

In my past I was the warranty administrator for a company connected to Caterpillar, and I ran the warranty department for a $125 million a year company for 18 months using excel spreadsheets! I'm quite comfortable sorting/comparing in excel...

AND I'm going in an adding some "age appropriate" technical atts, at least for some players (as much as I have time for); I'm using the "Average Technical Attribute Calculator" to determine the appropriate attribute low/mid/high range for a given CA

So for the teenage/preteen minor hockey players ALL Attributes that can "change/develop" are now either "0" or I've given them an "age appropriate rating" based on their already given age appropriate CA.

I did a lot on this last night ...for example, here's the technical atts 14 year old Ray Bourque now has

Acceleration 10
Balance 13
Pace 10
Checking 10
Deking 7
Movement 13
Passing 13
Pokecheck 10
Slapshot 10
Stickhandling 10
Wristshot 7


Regards


P.S. Does anyone know about "Natural Fitness"? Sound like it's an "unchanging" Attribute to me...the idea of "natural" fitness

[bruins72]

As far as I know, Natural Fitness doesn't change. It's a hidden attribute, so I can't say for certain. The only thing I could see changing something like that (if at all) is a major injury.

I'm not speaking for Manimal but I think his point was that the Mental attributes don't really change so they should be set to whatever the player's career projection is, not set to zero. When mental attributes are set to zero, you get players that should be good NHLers but fail because of a couple terrible mental attributes caused by the "0" randomness. I think the only mental attributes that I've seen grow over the course of a player's development are Anticipation and Teamwork. His concern was with some of the physical and technical attributes for younger players. For example, I'm looking at the first draft and I see a few players that might be a bit more skilled at this age than they should be. I was going to mention that Bossy looked like a superstar already but I looked at his career stats and he pretty much was a star from his first season in the NHL. So I guess that one I can't argue that one much. But then I looked at some of the names that looked familiar. A couple goalies stood out. Pete Peeters. Loved him as a Bruins but but should he really have all of those 17, 18, and 19's in technical attributes as a 17 year old? He'll be one of the top goalies in the NHL as an 18 year old once he's been drafted. Glen Hanlon and Greg Millen to a lesser extent. Look at Doug Wilson. He seems to be the heir apparent to Bobby Orr. His physical, mental, and technical attributes are insane for a 17 year old. Barry Beck is a player I'm unfamiliar with but he's ranked #2 in the draft. Lots of Green and Yellow attributes there too. Just looking at random players near the top of that first draft I'm seeing a lot of players that just look too good too soon.

[nino33]

I have to admit I'm a little frustrated...

I WAS TOLD CA WOULD MITIGATE ATTS!
If I had not been told this I would have dealt with this long ago.

I think his point was that the Mental attributes don't really change so they should be set to whatever the player's career projection is, not set to zero

these remember these were "similar style/CA" players that were overwritten, not a team of people researching/reviewing/editing every individual Attribute for the actual player, so some things might be noticeable "off" in some cases - but using excel such large variances can be quickly determined/corrected.

IMO it's you and Manimal that don't understand - you want me to fix a few things, I figure since I'm there I'll look at more than just what you two are referring to
Did you guys notice the 1974 database had HUNDREDS of players who had a "0" for Mental/Staff Atts?
Did you notice that the Manimal 4.2 has less than a dozen players with a "0" in each of these atts, not hundreds?
I've fixed this " temporarily" by changing zeros to a selected minimum, so now the 1974 database no longer has hundreds of players with a "0" for the Mental/Staff Attributes!

I've explained many times that most of the NHL players individual atts are based on what Pens66 gave them for his 1979-80 database (if they retired between 1974-79 IRL then I created them)...i.e. in 1979-80 IRL Pete Peeters was 29-5-5 in the regular season and then led the Flyers (with help from Myre) to the Finals! So his high atts make sense for 1979-80 - again, I was told CA would mitigate atts!

I'm frustrated because people are talking about it like I don't understand...this is exactly why I haven’t released a version already..it hasn’t been ready in my opinion! Now it's being pointed out just how not ready it is...and I already kinda wanted to also edit AHL/CHL players more, create AHL/CHL Staff and Major Junior Staff, create teenage/preteen European/Russian Leagues and more! before a release
IMO this database is spectacular...but it's clearly not ready

I go back to work next Thursday, and thought after the Labour Day weekend I'd release the database, but I've changed my mind - it's simply not up to the level I want it to be at for a release...

The release of the 1974 database has been put on hold, with no defined release date (maybe in a couple months? maybe by Christmas?)...


Regards

P.S. Barry Beck was a 6'3" 215 lbs D whose rookie goal scoring record stood until 1989 (when Brian Leetch broke it)...injuries hurt Beck, but he was a stud coming up (I saw him when he played for New Westminster in the WHL!)

[Manimal]

I think you've missed my point. It isn't the mental atts that bothered me. It is the physical and technical atts that are being too high for teenagers

I'm not sure why you think I missed your point - I changed all mental/technical atts to "0"

Sorry. I somehow thought you were doing it the other way around. Now that I've read your post again It is crystal clear that you're doing it right!

[batdad]

Yeah nino is bang on with Barry Beck. Guy was a total stud til he got injured. Would have been one of the best dmen ever. He did everything.

Nino--I hope you dont put this on hold too long, no matter what you do....(and I think you are taking B72, me and Manimal too harshly....they are only trying to help out a bit.

I too thought the CA settings would mitigate the attributes....maybe they don't? I dunno.

This is such an exciting and awesome project I would hate to see it go on hold. No matter what you put out it is awesome. Guys can then play with it til there heart is content once it is out, and then we could have like 20000 different databases once you get it out.

You took on a ton, and it is awesome. everything I see in your work is amazing. I know the frustration and annoyance feeling...been there many times.

[bruins72]

Ditto what Batdad said. I'm sorry you're getting frustrated. I was just giving my observations, not putting down your hard work.

[nino33]

FYI

I'm putting "the release" on hold...my work on the database continues! Immediately after posting I just carried on with my work - BUT I also went for a bike ride with my wife (just got back!), which I probably wouldn't have done if I was aiming for a release soon

I wanted to finish editing the historical AHL/CHL players too anyway...this was important to me, so I'm happy that it will now be done before a release (it means that a few hundred more players will be contracted to NHL teams, providing real depth, and making the managing of you minor league affiliate relevant! I like to manage my affiliates

And I wanted to finish adding OHL/WHL players too (because this gives NHL teams drafted unsigned prospects, which was also important to me)

And I wanted to add historical AHL/CHL Staff and historical Major Junior Staff too, and I wanted to maybe "plant" some extra young staff too (with a low CA but high PA)

Sorry. I somehow thought you were doing it the other way around. Now that I've read your post again It is crystal clear that you're doing it right!

OK...

I too thought the CA settings would mitigate the attributes....maybe they don't? I dunno.

You're not the only one that thought it! AND it just might, no one has actually tested it to my knowledge (i.e. edit Bourque's age to 18, put him on like the Seals or Rockies and see how he does with his 65 CA and 17-19 Atts)

Maybe CA does mitigate Atts, but shining a light on this issue made me want to fix it, and "do it right" - it'll be an IMMENSE improvement in my opinion, so I'm glad...but it is for sure "more work"


Regards

[archibalduk]

I too thought the CA settings would mitigate the attributes....maybe they don't? I dunno.

You're not the only one that thought it! AND it just might, no one has actually tested it to my knowledge (i.e. edit Bourque's age to 18, put him on like the Seals or Rockies and see how he does with his 65 CA and 17-19 Atts)

Maybe CA does mitigate Atts, but shining a light on this issue made me want to fix it, and "do it right" - it'll be an IMMENSE improvement in my opinion, so I'm glad...but it is for sure "more work"

I think it does mitigate things, but it's never really been something I've tested much. However, if you try creating a player with all 20s and a CA of something like 120, you should see that his technical attributes won't appear as 20s in game. As I understand it (but I haven't tested other than noticing that some attributes can be affected when I have modified CAs), EHM moderates an average of the technical attributes based upon the CA of the player. However it does allow quite a wide range of attributes for even low CAs - e.g. a player with 120 CA can, as I understand it, have a rating of anything between 4 and 16 for his various technical attributes (I think the proviso is that his technical attributes must average 10). I think I may have shared my calculation sheets these, but in case I haven't: http://sdrv.ms/R82l41

If you take a look at the Average Technical Attribute Calculator, you'll see what I mean in relation to the range and average attribute ratings a player with different CAs can have.

Thus I think although the game may moderate technical attributes, I think it gives them quite a wide berth and you can end up with some pretty spiky profiles (i.e. players have a mixture of low and high technical attributes because EHM will stop moderating the attributes one it achieves the correct average and attributes are within the accepted range).

This is all a bit of a semi-educated guess however.

Like Batdad says, we all know this database is going to be awesome regardless of whether it is released now or in several months time.

[nino33]

If you take a look at the Average Technical Attribute Calculator

I'm using the Average Technical Attribute Calculator!

it does allow quite a wide range of attributes for even low CAs - e.g. a player with 120 CA can, as I understand it, have a rating of anything between 4 and 16

A CA of 65 (like 14 year old Ray Bourque's) gives a range of 1-13 with an average technical attribute rating of 7...

Eric Lindros is in the database (at age 1) with a CA of 5, which has a range of 1-10 and an average technical attribute rating of 4




I think the problem we're trying to avoid might come back after 5-10 years of in-game play anyhow...I suspect EHM wasn't programmed to handle development over a longer timeframe...how long before a 1 year old Eric Lindros reaches high teens in his Attributes...however many years is the likely true limitation on a retro database for EHM 2007.


I'm pretty sure that 13-14 year olds will be OK, not sure when we get to the 12 and under crowd...Given this, I'm likely to finish editing sooner rather than later with the kids (leaving the non-stars to have mostly "0" at start-up) until I can determine if it's even worth editing them!


But I'm gonna for sure finish the NHL Attribute editing too, and I'll edit the Major Junior Attributes, as well as the further editing of AHL/CHL players and the adding/editing of OHL and WHL players - all of this is bare minimum necessary to a good release IMO.


Perhaps ultimately I'll be deleting some of the youngsters in the 1974 db, once it's determined "how young" can a player reasonably be at start-up and have the player develop in the manner gameplay intended...



Back to work!

[nino33]

Working on NHL player Attributes, spent a couple days solid looking at Aggression-Agitation-Dirtiness-Fighting attributes...decided to work on skating

Looking at Acceleration-Agility-Balance-Speed together and WOW some good NHL players in the current 1974 database have horrific skating atts!...players like Bobby Hull, Phil Esposito, Gordie Howe, Keith Magnuson, Syl Apps, Dave Keon and others are pylons! And they shouldn’t be! And it seems at first glance that there's some really good/great skaters who are only "good" and need a slight bump...


P.S. New avatar's Tretiak

[nino33]

Looking at Acceleration-Agility-Balance-Speed together

I'm looking at Speed (pace), and after doing a bunch of editing I took a look at the Default and Manimal 4.2 databases as a comparison and...were the start-up NHL D considered to slow on average in the Default db?

Looking only at D that are "playing for" their NHL club at start-up, and looking at "straight line top speed" (Speed/Pace) and
- looked at 245 D in the Manimal 4.2 and 244 D in the Default db
- average Speed (Pace) rating was 13.7 in Manimal 4.2, and 13.3 in the Default db
- 41.6% in Manimal 4.2 are rated 15-19, while only 31.1% are rated 15-19 in the Default db
- 41.6% in Manimal 4.2 are rated 12-14, while 52.0% are rated 12-14 in the Default db
- 16.7% are rated under 12 in the Manimal 4.2 db, 16.8% are rated below 12 in the Default db

It seems that more D now have better "pure speed" than when EHM was released...the 1974 database will not be like this, as there simply weren’t as many D back then who could be reasonably rated 17-19 (the Default db has 17 such D and Manimal 4.2 has 28...I suspect the 1974 db will have less than 10 at start-up, maybe less than 5!)

FYI Currently the 1974 db Speed/Pace editing is in-progress, with the 1974 db NHL D all currently rated between 12-16 (average 13.1)

[nino33]

Looking only at D that are "playing for" their NHL club at start-up, and looking at "straight line top speed" (Speed/Pace) and
- looked at 245 D in the Manimal 4.2 and 244 D in the Default db
- average Speed (Pace) rating was 13.7 in Manimal 4.2, and 13.3 in the Default db
- 41.6% in Manimal 4.2 are rated 15-19, while only 31.1% are rated 15-19 in the Default db
- 41.6% in Manimal 4.2 are rated 12-14, while 52.0% are rated 12-14 in the Default db
- 16.7% are rated under 12 in the Manimal 4.2 db, 16.8% are rated below 12 in the Default db

It seems that more D now have better "pure speed" than when EHM was released...

FYI Seems the same with Acceleration (length of time to reach top speed) too
- 38.4% in Manimal 4.2 are rated 15-19, while only 26.6% are rated 15-19 in the Default db
- 40.8% in Manimal 4.2 are rated 12-14, while 54.1% are rated 12-14 in the Default db
- 20.4% are rated under 12 in the Manimal 4.2 db, 19.3% are rated below 12 in the Default db

[nino33]

Great joy! The editing is going very, very well!


The reality is I hadn't planned on doing the Attribute review/editing now, and hadn't really looked at editing the Attributes using Archi's EHM Updater (that he created/released this summer) until now…and so I had no idea before I started how hard it would be or how quickly it would go...but now that I'm doing it, it's going pretty quickly, as working in excel (for me) really really helps!

And it’s kinda fun…at least the NHL player editing!

Many of the NHL player Attributes were previously horribly wrong! Just horribly wrong!
Those that have/seen and played it before won’t recognize the NHL players! They’ve had a total overhaul!

So a complete review/edit of the NHL player Attributes is well underway…
And the overhaul of teenage/preteen minor hockey player Attributes is well underway…
And I’ve begun work on Major Junior player Attributes too!

The filter function in excel helps a lot!
I’m entering an actual rating for “permanent/unchanging” Attributes.
For Skating Attributes I’m using the average rating (as per the CA) +3
For Technical Attributes I’m using the average rating
And then I’m tweaking the final ratings for some players, but I’m only tweaking a couple/few attributes and never beyond the max (as per CA)

In this way young players all start with AGE APPROPRIATE RATINGS in Hitting, Checking, Deflections, Deking, Passing, Pokecheck, Positioning, Slapshot, Stickhandling and Wristshot – this applies to Major Junior players as well as the “minor hockey” players the 1974 db is “stocked” with

THANK YOU to Manimal and Bruins72 for the feedback that caused all this to get looked at and fixed!
I was (obviously) a little overwhelmed…the EHM Updater (working “in mass” in excel) helped a lot.
And now the database is so much better, with real development occurring as it should! Cool!

I am back to planning a release real soon! i.e. early days of September…

Pinned to the wall next to me on the wall is a list of “things I’m working on” currently, like further editing of AHL/CHL players, and adding additional OHL/WHL players, and adding Minor Pro/Major Junior Staff, and the reality is…the reality is I was willing wanting to release the database "as is" with these things still "in-progress" before anything about Attributes came up - and the reality is I didn’t lose interest, and the Attribute editing is going spectacularly well...


Sorry for the drama…but at least it’s good news – 1974 db soon to be released!

Regards

[archibalduk]

EXCELLENT NEWS!!!

This will be the icing on an already spectacular cake.

Btw, I have gotten to the stage of testing out my British EIHL re-rating work (for the Manimal Rosters, that is). Now that I have completed rating the CA's of all defencemen and forwards in Excel (like you, I work much better in Excel), I have been using the EHM Updater to import the new ratings into the database. At this stage I'm looking to ensure that the top defencemen in real life achieve the top Average Ratings in EHM for the 2011/12 season. Similarly, I'm looking for the top forwards in real life to achieve the top Pts in EHM. I haven't re-rated the goaltenders quite yet, but I'll do this soon.

Anyway, the reason I mention this is because I found that modifying the CA alone didn't really work. For the defencemen, it worked to a fair extent. But for the forwards, it really didn't seem to work at all. So I have now mass edited the Defensive Role and Checking attributes for defencemen and the Offensive Role and Stickhandling attributes for forwards. I have set these ratings in a similar fashion to the CAs (i.e. the player with the highest CA gets the highest attribute ratings and the player with the lowest CA get the lowest ratings). This has made a huge improvement in terms of the realism of the player performances. It's still not 100% there, but it's a very promising start. Thus it seems that if you edit the Def/Off Role attributes in addition to the CAs, it can give really put things in the right direction.

[nino33]

FYI (to anyone interested) – How I’m currently editing Attributes

Using excel’s filtering functionality I can easily see and select the different Attribute amounts – For the "unchanging" Attributes I usually start by selecting 0, 1, 2, 3,4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 and making them all 10. Now I have a range of 10-20…..I start at the top and work my way down – I do one Attribute at a time, and make a judgement call on whether to raise/lower/maintain the Attribute rating based on either #1 general/common knowledge about the player (at least to CeeBee, Batdad and I..HaHa) OR #2 statistical reference OR #3 an “I think he fits here, at/near the bottom” decision for lesser known players OR #4 it fits within a range I've predetermined (i.e the lower Adaptability and higher Loyalty I'm giving start-up players to try and better simulate the IRL mid 1970s hockey world)

Because the younger players I’m editing at the least “made the NHL” in most cases a lower range Attribute is not appropriate…and editing this way for me is the only feasible/realistic way of doing so to avoid getting bogged down editing even greater detail into a few players (and only to make some players even more “less than average” than others)


When possible I’m using “statistical reference” to help me determine ratings…I find the site “dropyourgloves” helpful, as I get average Points per Game (useful when determining the Decisions Attribute as well as Vision/Creativity Attribute) and average PIMs per Game (useful when determining Aggression Attribute) and average Goals per Game (useful when determining Pass Tendency and helpful when determining Wristshot) and Assists per Game (useful when determining Vision/Creativity and Decisions) and Play-Off Points per Game (helpful when determining the Important Matches Attribute) and even total number of Fights (helpful when determining Fighting Attribute).

I also use statistical reference and common/general knowledge of the time period when editing Technical Attributes…when editing the NHL players editing efforts are more exact (and closer to maximums in some cases)…when editing Major Junior or teenage/preteen minor hockey players the Technical Attributes are initially all set as the age applicable average, and then a few are lowered/raised as appropriate (sometimes based on position, such as defenseman being given a bump to the Pokecheck Attribute…and sometimes based on player, such as Mike Bossy receiving the maximum “allowable” for Wristshot)



Regards

P.S. I'm aware that some Attributes don't use the 1-20 scale in the usual way (like the Pass Tendency Attribute), and I edit accordingly

[Manimal]

Great!