Player Progression in MyGm and MyLeague and the effect of performance

[mco301301]

After having searched around quite bit, it seems that player progression in MyGm and MyLeague is tied only to the potential(also peak age, etc..) of a player and the training, and not affected whatsoever by player performance.

Does anyone know anything more about this? Does a players performance have any impact on their ability to reach their potential? Does it affect growth at all?




My personal Anecdote: Had Yogi Farrell win ROTY, he was averaging around 20 pts/8 assists a game. Despite his potential being an 84 and his rating being a 76, he only increased +1 to a 77 after the season. All the while Wiggins was injured most of the year and went up +3. This seems extremely unrealistic to me and has really hurt my enthusiasm for these game modes.

[TGsoGood]

Why does the rating matter if the player is putting up good stats?

Sent from my LGLS775 using Tapatalk

[vtcha]

Yeah I don't like it as well.

I mean this pretty much rules out potential gems drafted outside of the lottery whom may initially have a lower potential.

For example, compare the potential rating of players like Draymond Green, Isaiah Thomas, Nikola Jokic when they were first drafted to now. At most their overall rating would've been capped at 80. Whereas the Anthony Randolphs' of the world become studs in a few years.

[mco301301]

Quote: Originally Posted by vtcha

Yeah I don't like it as well. I mean this pretty much rules out potential gems drafted outside of the lottery whom may initially have a lower potential. For example, compare the potential rating of players like Draymond Green, Isaiah Thomas, Nikola Jokic when they were first drafted to now. At most their overall rating would've been capped at 80. Whereas the Anthony Randolphs' of the world become studs in a few years.

I would actually be ok with it if it just meant a player would reach their potential quicker with good performance, even if it was still low. But to not have an effect at all..just whats the point? So yeah if your not picking top 10 there is little to no chance of the pick ever being good. Your examples show exactly why this is not an accurate system.

Madden does this one part very well. Players that have great seasons get a bunch of growth and their potential will actually increase. IMO this is the one aspect 2k completely misses on.

[LorenzoDC]

Quote: Originally Posted by mco301301

I would actually be ok with it if it just meant a player would reach their potential quicker with good performance, even if it was still low. But to not have an effect at all..just whats the point? So yeah if your not picking top 10 there is little to no chance of the pick ever being good. Your examples show exactly why this is not an accurate system. Madden does this one part very well. Players that have great seasons get a bunch of growth and their potential will actually increase. IMO this is the one aspect 2k completely misses on.

I'm not sure about performance, but playing time does matter to progression.

If you have identical players and high potential, but one plays a season with 25 minutes per game, and the other gets 7 minutes per game, the one with more playing time will advance more before the next season, even if you have them trained by equally rated trainers and the same training plans.

It's possible performance is a factor there, I can't tell. What I can say at least is playing time matters for high potential young players for them to possibly achieve their max potential, barring injuries.

[mco301301]

So I have tried to run some experiments to test this, and from what I can gather @lorenzoDC is correct that minutes matter, however performance did not have any effect on growth. Thats just crazy to me and really ruins the experience. Such a shame because all the other aspects of MYGM are so good.

[OGKing]

I wish their recruiting was just like maddens....

[itsmb8]

One guy made a formula to manually change potential every year based on PER, which is a good formula... Its just that after you know exactly what every guys potential is. Like i want performance to matter AND have it still not be exactly clear what the guys potential is. They should really have a 3 or 5 star system, because the grades right now are a little too precise. Like B- means 80-82 or 83 which isnt a lot of difference.....

Moral of the story, what I really want is like, a scout giving each player a grade A-F so that you can sort of tell but its still not certain. Then performance and training and PT and injuries and potential itself all have an affect on actual growth, and for the scouted potential grades to constantly change. So at the start of this year Jabari might have a B or B- or even C+. Then around December he might jump up to B+, and now he's back at a B- because of the injury.