NHL 16 Project Realism Roster Spreadsheet

[SENS_AK27]

I posted in MattG's Ultimate Roster thread but I wanted to make it official with my own thread.

I'm going to be working with PrometheusX and any others willing to help to come up with a shareable spreadsheet with complete and edited roster attributes.

The idea is without roster sharing the best way to help others is to allow them to at least see a spreadsheet that has the edited player ratings should they undertake a more realistic roster for their BaGM's.

My goal is to work on the teams week by week so it would be a long project but something that will benefit the community.

I hope to have a link to my drop box file later today starting with Anaheim.

[AdamJones113]

Looks good! How about a gdoc? I'd definitely be interested in helping.

[SENS_AK27]

I'd like to set a precedent for our ratings system. So perhaps we can discuss that beforehand. I'm not the best person for actually deciding on the player adjustments as I feel others would have a better perspective but I will maintain the spreadsheet and make it available for others to download and use.

My initial thoughts on a player classification is:

FORWARDS
Generational: 96+
Franchise: 91-95
Elite: 88-90
Top 6: 84-87
Top 9: 80-83
Bot 6: 77-79
AHL: 75-76

DEFENSE
Generational: 96+
Franchise: 91-95
Elite: 88-90
Top 4: 84-87
Top 6: 80-83
7th D: 77-79
AHL: 75-76

GOALIE
Generational: 96+
Franchise: 91-95
Elite: 88-90
Starter: 84-87
Fringe Starter: 80-83
Backup: 77-79
AHL: 75-76

[SENS_AK27]

I've started the spreadsheet and wanted to show where I'm at.

I have Anaheim tab completed and ready for player adjustments.

If you have some insight please post below and I will edit.

Full credit to Petr Puck's website as he has the active rosters of all the NHL teams in Google Docs. I'm only expanding on this to show what EA has recorded for the player attributes.

If there is anything that is missing or you would like added let me know (not doing equipment at this time).

I will also recreate my template for either Google Docs or Drop Box so if anyone else would like to help by taking on a team let me know.

[Steven547]

Here's my initial impression on the new ratings. I think you need more separation between the classes. Your bottom 6 and elite are only 11 points off. I assume those are OVRs, but I still think there needs to be more distance.

When rating players, it seems everyone gets worried that certain players should be an 80+ overall. In the long run, you have to look at how the player will perform rated against other players, not what his OVR "should" be.

Example: You might want a player like Duncan Keith to be a 88+ rated OVR player, but it's his DEF ratings that need to be high. The other OFF ratings will probably be lower and his overall might be low 80's. But he'll still perform as a top defenseman because his D ratings will be high.

The one (of many) problems with EA's rosters is that the ratings, even a 10 point difference, are still too close to notice any difference in game play. Over or under exaggerating ratings is not a bad thing.

Just some thoughts.

[AussieGiantsFan]

Quote: Originally Posted by Steven547

Here's my initial impression on the new ratings. I think you need more separation between the classes. Your bottom 6 and elite are only 11 points off. I assume those are OVRs, but I still think there needs to be more distance. When rating players, it seems everyone gets worried that certain players should be an 80+ overall. In the long run, you have to look at how the player will perform rated against other players, not what his OVR "should" be. Example: You might want a player like Duncan Keith to be a 88+ rated OVR player, but it's his DEF ratings that need to be high. The other OFF ratings will probably be lower and his overall might be low 80's. But he'll still perform as a top defenseman because his D ratings will be high. The one (of many) problems with EA's rosters is that the ratings, even a 10 point difference, are still too close to notice any difference in game play. Over or under exaggerating ratings is not a bad thing. Just some thoughts.

Exactly my thoughts.

Which makes it tough because then if you get deep in BeAGM mode, the regens will be so much better than they should be....

[Prometheus_X]

Stevens is right, but what Aussie mentions will also play a factor because for all your hard work you'll enjoy 2-3 good seasons and then the Rookies and Regens will throw everything off.

The progression system is also more intuitive this year from what I heard where rookies develop to 90+ Ovr.

[speels]

Quote: Originally Posted by Prometheus_X

Stevens is right, but what Aussie mentions will also play a factor because for all your hard work you'll enjoy 2-3 good seasons and then the Rookies and Regens will throw everything off. The progression system is also more intuitive this year from what I heard where rookies develop to 90+ Ovr.

I may be wrong, but are we not able to edit attributes in this mode. If that is an option you can always edit the attributes every year in this mode to keep it going. Now I get that it would be different for everyone because you would basically be making players how you feel they should be as opposed to the original group ratings.