Understanding CA and PA - Confusing

  • Thread starter Thread starter gi9
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 18
  • Views Views 2K
G

gi9

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2011
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I've been on my Spurs save for 20 years, my best player by far was a striker with only 183 PA. He broke all records for me and when down as a record - with a career spanning over 15 years.

I don't recruit youngsters via genie scout but I check it one in a while to see just how good my eye is for spotting a talent.

Does anyone else find that some players rated with a ridiculous CA or PA aren't that good?And conversely, players with CA/PA's in the range of 170-185 can be absolute beasts.

Doesn't make sense. Also I find it hard hitting the higher elcheons of players potential when they are rated as 190+. I bought a 16 year old English striker who I checked had 200 PA (after  buying). I loaned him out at 18 and at 19 have been playing him regularly in my team. He's 20 now and only 130 CA, his dribbling is 10 and technique 12, I just don't see how he would become the best striker in the world... Weird. I think it's dangerous to read too heavily into CA/PA as most won't even reach their potential and you'll find that players who are rated far less than some actually turn out to be the best ones.
 
Attribute spread is x100 more important than whatever PA/CA a player has.

You need to also take into account whether a player is one-footed or can use Either. That makes a difference in how attributes 'appear'.
 
08MulvW.png


My 179 rated midfielder, how is he rated so low?

Sidenote; he's a beast isn't he? For 2.5 million.
 
3RyLNCO.png


My 200 PA rated striker, feel pressured to play him due to that fact... But truth is, his attributes are pretty **** and he doesn't perform properly.

Maybe I'm writing him off way too early ... But 10 dribbling in a formation where I want a complete forward isn't great
 
gi9 said:
3RyLNCO.png


My 200 PA rated striker, feel pressured to play him due to that fact... But truth is, his attributes are pretty **** and he doesn't perform properly.

Maybe I'm writing him off way too early ... But 10 dribbling in a formation where I want a complete forward isn't great
Click to expand...
He's a perfect poacher until you can develop him more.
 
In response to the comment on my midfielder:

I meant in terms of his potential ability, I am just trying to understand what potential ability means... As for me Bocanegra is one of the best all round midfielders I've had on this game. Trying to see what makes him rated the same as say, Tom Cleverly's potential at the start of the game.
 
gi9 said:
In response to the comment on my midfielder:

I meant in terms of his potential ability, I am just trying to understand what potential ability means... As for me Bocanegra is one of the best all round midfielders I've had on this game. Trying to see what makes him rated the same as say, Tom Cleverly's potential at the start of the game.
Click to expand...
Stop looking at PA numbers. Bocanegra has very good attributes and he's two-footed. You can't ask for more.
 
WJ said:
Stop looking at PA numbers. Bocanegra has very good attributes and he's two-footed. You can't ask for more.
Click to expand...
I agree and like I said I ignore them by and large when choosing who plays and who doesn't... Seems to work far better by just using your own intuition to gauge who is good and has a good spread of attributes.

My original post is purely trying to ascertain what it means potential wise, as 179 is a pretty bog standard rating. I'm trying to see where he falls short to not have a higher ceiling potential (out of interest)
 
Players PA also depends on the personality, a driven or ambitious player will want to improve or move to bigger clubs to improve, this will affect how well they train and things also.

I just noticed the other day a player I let go who at like 22 odd had never looked like being that good as a striker for my Man Utd squad (Adam Watson I think his name was). He had decent potential but never looked too great.

Played vs him now (at 28 odd) and I recognized his name, he had improved a massive amount and actually looked very very good
 
gi9 said:
3RyLNCO.png


My 200 PA rated striker, feel pressured to play him due to that fact... But truth is, his attributes are pretty **** and he doesn't perform properly.

Maybe I'm writing him off way too early ... But 10 dribbling in a formation where I want a complete forward isn't great
Click to expand...

Most don't stop improving till they're like 24 so he has plenty of time. Also your complaining about his dribbling when his best role is a poacher. Poachers arent meant to be great dribblers, they do most their work in the box. He has fantastic finishing and good off the ball already. He has decent pace. Maybe work on his composure and positioning etc a bit, play him in a way to utilise his strengths and he could score bucket loads.

But if your tactic doesn't suit then maybe best to just develop him further and sell on for a profit.
 
Donnelly1 said:
Most don't stop improving till they're like 24 so he has plenty of time. Also your complaining about his dribbling when his best role is a poacher. Poachers arent meant to be great dribblers, they do most their work in the box. He has fantastic finishing and good off the ball already. He has decent pace. Maybe work on his composure and positioning etc a bit, play him in a way to utilise his strengths and he could score bucket loads.

But if your tactic doesn't suit then maybe best to just develop him further and sell on for a profit.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I play with two inside forwards and a complete forward, so he's pretty useless in the system - which is a shame!

Just another example of a low CA/PA of 175 but look at this beast....


http://i.imgur.com/OLmShdw.png?1
 
gi9 said:
I'm trying to see where he falls short to not have a higher ceiling potential (out of interest)
Click to expand...
Might just be me, but I don't understand this sentence. When the player was created, he was given a 179 PA. It is and will always be 179, unless he suffers a very, very bad injury. It can never go higher than 179. It's his potential. By definition, that's the best that he can become.
 
WJ said:
Might just be me, but I don't understand this sentence. When the player was created, he was given a 179 PA. It is and will always be 179, unless he suffers a very, very bad injury. I can never go higher than 179. It's his potential. By definition, that's the best that he can become.
Click to expand...
There's no downside to his game - at least in a realistic sense (obviously he could be 20 across the board).

I'm asking what gives him such a lowly potential ability rating in relation to his great attributes and hidden ones.

Like I said, it's purely out of interest as you'd expect those set of stats from one of the best in the world.
 
gi9 said:
08MulvW.png


My 179 rated midfielder, how is he rated so low?

Sidenote; he's a beast isn't he? For 2.5 million.
Click to expand...

179 is not 'so low' as you put it. That's ****** world class CA right there!
To put that into perspective, look at this list (Note, I've put it in spoiler tags since I'm showing editor values for CA)
CA: 171 - Marco Reus, Sergio Ramos, Thibaut Courtois, Thomas Muller,
CA: 172- Carlos Tevez, Juan Mata, Thiago Silva
CA: 173 - Philipp Lahm
CA: 174 - Edinson Cavani, David Silva,
CA: 175 - Franck Ribery, Andres Iniesta, Eden Hazard.
CA: 176 - Robert Lewandowski, Arturo Vidal, Neymar, Toni Kroos.

I think I've made my point. Anything north of 170 has the potential to be world class but this potential has to be managed. You need to make sure his development is steered towards his strengths.
 
Last edited:
Brendn said:
179CA is not 'so low' as you put it. That's ****** world class CA right there!
To put that into perspective, look at this list (Note, I've put it in spoiler tags since I'm showing editor values for CA)
CA: 171 - Marco Reus, Sergio Ramos, Thibaut Courtois, Thomas Muller,
CA: 172- Carlos Tevez, Juan Mata, Thiago Silva
CA: 173 - Philipp Lahm
CA: 174 - Edinson Cavani, David Silva,
CA: 175 - Franck Ribery, Andres Iniesta, Eden Hazard.
CA: 176 - Robert Lewandowski, Arturo Vidal, Neymar, Toni Kroos.

I think I've made my point. Anything north of 170 has the potential to be world class but this potential has to be managed. You need to make sure his development is steered towards his strengths.
Click to expand...
I must be misinformed then.

They seem incredibly low CA's for those players - my bad.

Further reinforces my point then about misunderstanding them. It must be based on far more than just raw attributes, more so the effectiveness of those attributes to a specific role etc.

Cheers for that
 
gi9 said:
I must be misinformed then.

They seem incredibly low CA's for those players - my bad.

Further reinforces my point then about misunderstanding them. It must be based on far more than just raw attributes, more so the effectiveness of those attributes to a specific role etc.

Cheers for that
Click to expand...
the attribute gain between CA 0 and CA 50 is absolutely massive compared to the gain between CA 150 - CA 190.
It's a scalar ratio where attribute increases cost more the higher the CA of a player. And when you factor in that different attributes have different CA point values (Tackling uses more CA than dribbling in a CB) you can see ho, if a player isn't developed to their strengths, they effectively waste their potential.



Assuming you've a player with the right personality, the best facilities, playing in every match with good ratings, this graphs shows the development of players.

View attachment 237367
 
PA is not something you need to worry about, its the attributes that make or break the player. 150 PA can be world class with right set of starting attributes and good development. Similarily, 200 PA player can be uselessif attributes are all out of whack. So what you really need to look for in a youngster is having high enough starting critical attributes for his role>good potential>good personality. In that order.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

FMBase

Beta

Resources

Back
Top