Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffR
Just to clarify why this happens: in 1974, the NHL, worried about the WHA signing underage players, allowed under-20 players to be drafted in the first two rounds. The next year, they reverted back to a 20-year-old draft. The game can't vary age requirements by round, though. So if I set the minimum age in 1974 as 20, a lot of the key guys who were taken historically (Trottier, Larouche, Paiement, Tremblay, etc.) won't be eligible for another year or two.
Instead, I made it 19 for the whole draft; unfortunately, if you have generate at 17 on, that means the teams clean out the entire 1955-born draft pool aside from a small handful of the worst players, who become free agents after passing through the draft once. That leaves nobody available for the real 1975 draft. Turning generate at 17 off avoids that by not creating the 1975 draftees until that year, so there's no opportunity for them to be taken in 1974.
|
I see. That's actually rather neat how the history of the game, especially in the '70s, make simulating it rather hard. I think leaving "17" off is a perfectly sensible workaround. I prefer to have fewer drafts with an over- and under-abundance of talent. It makes it easier and more reasonable to plan to use DPs. OTOH, picks in some years really are worth more than other years.
As an aside, I've noticed (and Duranium pointed out) that Chico Resch develops into a 7.5 goalie. But he starts with a 6.0 potential. How common is this is the game? IOW, when we are drafting, is it safe to assume that once a player's real potential is established that is his max (save for perhaps a handful of hardcoded outliers like Resch)? Or is this possible with any player in theory? I've seen players I've drafted have their potential go down (
) but I don't recall seeing it go up except in this case.