gillispie1
Game Rating: Hall of Famer
Forum Rating: Pro

Posts: 2985 (1)

*Posted by obituaryconc on 3/3/2014 12:26:00 PM (view original):*

*Posted by hughesjr on 5/27/2012 4:39:00 AM (view original):*

What I do with potentials is this:

Low 0, Medium 10, High 25 ....

then this:

PG:

(A+A_P)*0.11+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.14+(REB+REB_P)*0+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0+(LP+LP_P)*0.01+(PE+PE_P)*0.12+(BH+BH_P)*0.18+(P+P_P)*0.27+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

SG:

(A+A_P)*0.11+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.14+(REB+REB_P)*0+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0+(LP+LP_P)*0.03+(PE+PE_P)*0.24+(BH+BH_P)*0.13+(P+P_P)*0.18+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

SF:

(A+A_P)*0.14+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.10+(REB+REB_P)*0.07+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0.06+(LP+LP_P)*0.12+(PE+PE_P)*0.12+(BH+BH_P)*0.08+(P+P_P)*0.14+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

PF:

(A+A_P)*0.19+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.08+(REB+REB_P)*0.12+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0.08+(LP+LP_P)*0.14+(PE+PE_P)*0.09+(BH+BH_P)*0.05+(P+P_P)*0.08+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

C:

(A+A_P)*0.18+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.03+(REB+REB_P)*0.20+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0.15+(LP+LP_P)*0.22+(PE+PE_P)*0.01+(BH+BH_P)*0.00+(P+P_P)*0.04+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

I am finding huge struggles with this formula for potential. I am currently using it with 24 high, 12 medium and 2 low with the guys that I recruited this past season and what they came to me with to see if I had made the right choices on recruits. I found that one guy potential is 47.06 with this formula. To me this means that he will increase by about 47 points by the time he is in his senior year correct?

If I am wrong please correct me. The guy in question has already improved 41 just this season alone and that would mean that he has almost hit his peak in terms of how good he can be at the given position.

Can anyone help me with what I am doing incorrectly or if I am thinking about this all wrong.

Thanks

no, you are looking at this the wrong way. this formula is not about how much growth a player has. this is about how good the player is!

with yatzr's tool, and other tools others have made themselves, the advantage here is you can use a formula to sort players - instead of using crappy overall rating! basically, the approach people use is to weight the attributes, and then combine them with their ratings. those ratings can be current ratings, projected max ratings, or somewhere in between. this formula adds in their potential, and you can set the values for potential accordingly. for example, if you want a medium average cap, you use 13 - but hughes used 10 most likely because those last few points are really slow. its like, do you want to recruit the guy who will be best when he graduates? or the guy who will be best when hes a junior? or as a freshman, or what? you can use different numbers for each of these if you like. but regardless, this is all about ranking players, not projecting growth - projecting growth is just necessary to some degree to come up with half way decent ranking systems (most of us care much less about how good a freshman is now than how he is as a junior).

does that make sense?