I think that this is one of the real benefits to my proposed system. It really allows a player to casually evaluate his roster and do it in a more realistic and even more effective manner to fit his style while allowing a large amount of in depth detail to be brought in for the hardcore users.
The evolution to a head coach style system style system will allow for a more effective overall rating to be used by the casual gamer or by the cpu allowing them to more accurately chose the best player to fit their system with just a quick glance.
Also, with the seperate areas, Speed (an athleticism overall containing speed, acceleration, agility, etc), Strength (similar to the speed area but containing all strength ratings), intangebles(contains things like accuracy ratings, catching ratings, moves ratings, and route running ratings), mental(contains awareness, vision, play recognition, and hopefully more added mental ratings), size(a rating based on height/weight for the position and philosophy), learning(based off of playbook learning hopefully if added and also if added a skill learning rating), and production(based off of stats accumulated as opposed to average stats for a starter in the position) would really help with casual to moderate roster users. A quick scanning of these few overalls will allow slightly more info to be taken in than just the regular overall allowing you to know your players better and make better decisions but without having to truly delve into the ratings.
For the hardcore users first off there needs to be a lot more ratings added to really allow them to lose themselves in all the ratings and ways of differentiate these players giving them that constant search for those players who perfectly fit their system. The advancements I proposed to scouting and adding ambiguity could really also add a lot for them bringing some of that realistic unknown into the game.