EHM The Blue Line

This question may have been answered before, but I couldn't find it so ...

To what extent are prospect players predestined to turn into good players or not? I like the idea of finding a diamond in the rough and through proper development making them a good 1st or 2nd liner. Like is it possible to turn a 4th or 5th rounder into a star? Or will they always just be trade bait? How much control over development do we really have?

I seem to have a better ability to ruin top prospects than I do turning the longshot into a star...

timmy_t wrote:I seem to have a better ability to ruin top prospects than I do turning the longshot into a star...

Iam in my third season now, and I just signed some of my drafted players in the 2006 draft!!! Hope it turns out OK!!!

Basically, players have a hidden current ability and potential ability rating. Both ratings are set between 1 and 200. Obviously someone with a 200 rating is going to be like Gretzky and someone with a 50 rating will never play in the NHL.

With the potential rating, however, it can also be set to a minus number. This sets the potential rating to a range of numbers (e.g. a potential of -9 will set the potential within a range between 150-180). A full list posted by E5150_ca can be found here. A player with such a potential may turn out a good player or a fantastic player, depending on how he is trained, played and whether he suffers serious injuries. Therefore, most players' potentials are not exactly predetermined.

Thanks Archi, that's good to know. I like knowing that as a GM, given the perfect situation of coachs and development, that most potential good prospects have a chance to become regular NHL players. I was reading on the SI forums a discussion of the gem/bust factor in the later game where you know almost right away whether a player will be a good NHL player or not based on the scouting reports. And I guess there is really no easy fix from a programming stand-point other than making scouts more fallible. But as long as there is still a degree of potential for say a 4th or 5th round pick to develop into a decent player, I'm happy. Though it would be cool to be able to find a hidden gem like a Martin St. Louis type player.

The other thing that makes it all not so set in stone is how the player is used beside how he is developed. Like in real life, who their linemates are, their playing time and if they are being used in a role suited to their skills cange drastically change the results that player attains.

Another factor is that coaching and not to be overlooked, team leadership have a big impact too.

archibalduk wrote: With the potential rating, however, it can also be set to a minus number. This sets the potential rating to a range of numbers (e.g. a potential of -9 will set the potential within a range between 150-180). A full list posted by E5150_ca can be found here. A player with such a potential may turn out a good player or a fantastic player, depending on how he is trained, played and whether he suffers serious injuries. Therefore, most players' potentials are not exactly predetermined.

I actually think you're wrong here. If a player has - potential he will get a different potential every single game, it doesn't matter how you train him or such because when the new game is created he is set to a potential between 150-180. This doesn't change, the potential is created in the start of the game. Even if you have superb training, he's playing great and rarely suffer injuries the potential is still what is was at the start of the game.

i.e. Thornton has -9 in potential. I start a new game - he gets 165 in potential. I play a little and then starting a new game, voilá Thornton's potential is changed to 176.

The training, injury et cetera does however determain if the player will reach his potential.

Eh is kind of hard to explain but I think you get my point

Actually I had a question.

My scout told me "Player X is a more talented version of Joe Thornton" and "First line-potential". Does that mean that he will - if trained right, no serious injuries and good player souronding him - become a better version of Joe Thornton or is it just bullocks?

Kris wrote:My scout told me "Player X is a more talented version of Joe Thornton" and "First line-potential". Does that mean that he will - if trained right, no serious injuries and good player souronding him - become a better version of Joe Thornton or is it just bullocks?

It might be. For instance, that Colton Yellow Horn, who's always highly ranked for the 2006 Draft, is more often thatn not jugded to be a future top-liner, right? His PA is actually -5, which means he might just become a fringe player.