From CA to PA

[RaySunshine]

Hi all!

I'm starting a save based around the 'Moneyball' strategy in the Bristol City save you may have read online. The major premise is not buying players over the age of 25 or under the age of 20 as far as possible and develop the players you have.

Now I know that the system won't be this simple and won't work in all cases but I'm after a rough 'rule-of-thumb'. If I have bought a player who has a PA of let's say 4 stars, how many stars do they need to have at 20, 21, 22, 23 and 24 to be roughly on track to hit their 4 star rating at their peak. I know it won't work the same in all cases and each player will develop differently but it would just help me know how to track progress and who's hitting their goals and who isn't.

Thanks all for any help you can give!

 

[wkdsoul]

Stars aren't a goon indication tbh. They are only compared to those in your squad for rating. PA is the absolute maximum a player can get too, in most cases they wont get that close anyway.

The training/development graphs will be a better indicator.

 

[wkdsoul]

There are a few moneyball stories on here and SI. have a PM with the writers. (Guido Merry and Cleon also worth a google for good guides on development.)

 

[RaySunshine]

I'm going to 'fess up here and admit that I use the stars for almost everything... team selection, what positions in the team need improvement and most definitely who my high potential players are.

I'm guessing I'm going to be told that this doesn't really work...

 

[wkdsoul]

It can if you are just assesing your own team, but for future/development long term saves not ideal.

If you say, start with a 3 star average winger in the first, and get a 5 start regen. All good, but as soon as you replace the 3 star with someone else, the regens star will automatically fall inline with that, ie if you bought Messi instead, that 5 star is now a 1 star compared to him.

 

[RaySunshine]

Ah I see - I thought it would be more in line with the clubs overall objectives. So what gives you a sense of a wonderkid from a dud?

 

[Bigpapa42]

As an aside on the topic of moneyball.... The label always frustrates me a bit because the "Moneyball" approach in baseball wasn't merely about finding undervalued players. It was about a fundamental change in how players were assessed and scouted, moving away from the standard statistical measures that had been used for a century but didn't necessarily tell the whole story, and finding advanced metrics that provide alternate ways to assess. You cannot really do that in FM. Clubs are struggling to do that in the sport. What you can do in FM is essentially what Southampton and have done and continue to try to do.

As for the topic proper.... As wkdsoul points out, stars can be misleading. They are assessing against your players, so if you are weak in an area, a youngster with pretty mediocre potential might look like a 4 star player. Without peaking under the hood to see PA, you cannot be ABSOLUTELY SURE on a player. But you can get the best scouts you possibly can and scout the player multiple times. The more in line the assessments are, the more likely they are going to be fairly accurate. If they vary wildly, there is some risk. But look at what the scout reports actually tells you, not just the rating.

Go beyond the potential, though. Look at what the player is now and what you want/need them to be. Its easy to get bamboozled by potential and overlook serious flaws. You can end up buying players that don't fit tactically with you at all. Even if the long term goal is to sell them on, you need to develop them, and that doesn't happen as much if you don't play them. Personality is key to them developing (the combo of Determination, Ambition, and Professionalism) and while you can use mentoring to change their personality, a good starting personality gives that player a head start. But also try to see what they can/will be. You will end up passing up 5 star players who just don't fit - I rarely make use of small, quick, creative strikers, for example. I will quite often retrain such players, which can help fill gaps and create unique players.

Star ratings a guide, not an absolute. So to use them for everything is going to leave yourself open to problems. One of the worst things you can do is set your tactic's roles to what the game tells you that your players do best. That's not having a tactical system - that's literally just telling your individual players to individually go do whatever they do best on the pitch.

 

[RaySunshine]

Thanks for all the advice so far!

When you say look at what the scouts tell you. Do you mean refer to the 'likely to be a ... player in the future' comment?

 

[Bigpapa42]

Thanks for all the advice so far!

When you say look at what the scouts tell you. Do you mean refer to the 'likely to be a ... player in the future' comment?

That for sure. If you have one scout saying a player could develop into a good Championship player and another saying a leading Premier League player, there is a pretty notable discrepancy there. But if one is saying good PL player and the other leading, that's less of a discrepancy and you can be more confident that he is going to fall somewhere in that range.

They give you far more than that, though. Look at all their comments. They will point out some obvious stuff - "great First Touch". Awesome - I can see that by looking. But they will hint at hidden attributes. Consistency is one I look for more and more. They will hint at personality stuff you can't see as well. The hidden stuff has a pretty big impact. When people post on forums about why their striker with great attributes can't score, it can come down to Consistency or Adaptability.

And don't ignore the scouts themselves. Someone who has better Judging Potential is going to be, shockingly, better at judging potential.