I think...

[Polar]

We should go back to the way things used to be with predictable paths for ratings based on a player's initial rating when entering the league. I think the structure now is good and well thought of, but it has lead to less trades, free agent acquisitions and even harder for new coaches to figure out the game. I think in the end it might be better to go back to how things used to be.

Thoughts?

One thing I'd add is initial atts would need to be tweaked so that when guys plane out, not everyone is AP overall again.

[millman]

I totally agree, the lack of certainty as to a players maximum ratings has in my opinion contributed to the lack of trades, interest in free agency and perhaps the number of owners in the league.

The potential system while good in theory I don't think has worked as we all hoped it would. I think the scouting of attributes has been a major improvement but the lack of certainty of maximum ratings has been to the detriment of the game in my opinion.

[ldonaldson]

I have to agree with Polar and Millman. I would like to maintain the scouting aspect of the game but revert to players improving a certain number of rating from initial. This will simplify the game as already suggested and increase trades. Another way we could increase trading is through a similar set up to the live draft. We could have a scheduled trade day where everyone would meet in chat room to trade and discuss player movements. This could take place on the eve of the season for those who want to be involved.

[commish]

We could discuss giving you the exact potential, rather than a range... But I would hate to switch back and let every player go up 8 spots in every attribute. At least with the current setup you have more variety in the players at the end rather than AP+, AP+, etc...

Thoughts?

[Polar]

We could discuss giving you the exact potential, rather than a range... But I would hate to switch back and let every player go up 8 spots in every attribute. At least with the current setup you have more variety in the players at the end rather than AP+, AP+, etc...

Thoughts?

I'm not sure I understand, could you please provide an example?

[nomar]

I think it's cool that you don't know what you've got until it maxes out.

[commish]

Right now when you scout you get a range of what they could max out at. We can give you the actual "max out" when you scout which of course is subject to training.

I'd probably be willing to add another 5 scouting pts to deluxe package members if that helps.

Both of those are relatively easy changes.

I'm not willing to massively change the system as we get ready to transition to another commissioner.

[Polar]

Right now when you scout you get a range of what they could max out at. We can give you the actual "max out" when you scout which of course is subject to training.

I'd probably be willing to add another 5 scouting pts to deluxe package members if that helps.

Both of those are relatively easy changes.

I'm not willing to massively change the system as we get ready to transition to another commissioner.

Although the system we have is a 'smart' system, I just think the variables associated with it has slowed things down.

I would suggest two things:

1) What you suggested here you scout and actual max out

2) You scout players, not attributes. So you can scout say 10 players (and you get all of their attributes))

[nomar]

So, for example, a guy might have an initial G rating but if you scouted him you'd know that he has Below potential and will max out at E+.

I think that's OK.

Polar, why would you prefer scouting players rather than attributes?

[millman]

My preference would be to have a bit more certainty about what players max out at, and this could be done by adjusting the initial attributes to avoid everyone ending up as AP overall. Then players could go up a certain number of attributes (maybe less than they used to) so that if you pick up a player and know their initial attributes you know what they can max out at. This would help with trading because if you haven't scouted a certain player you aren't going to know their max and therefore less trades get done.

However, as a compromise I think removing the range when you scout would be a good start.

[Polar]

My preference would be to have a bit more certainty about what players max out at, and this could be done by adjusting the initial attributes to avoid everyone ending up as AP overall. Then players could go up a certain number of attributes (maybe less than they used to) so that if you pick up a player and know their initial attributes you know what they can max out at. This would help with trading because if you haven't scouted a certain player you aren't going to know their max and therefore less trades get done.

However, as a compromise I think removing the range when you scout would be a good start.

I agree with Millman's original thought. Go back to how it used to be, but adjust the initial attributes of guys.

Nomar... I just think scouting a player is more realistic. What team scouts a guy's Defense and don't notice is ball handling, shooting, rebounding, etc.