Quote:
Originally Posted by 4maddux_cy's
Thank you for the assist. Can this also prevent a player from falling off a cliff since they have real data left? Like could Dale Murphy have continued being an All Star type player or a Grady Sizemore from falling off like he did?
|
Possibly. A 3- or 5-year Recalc should smooth out Murphy's descent (and his ascent), but could dilute some of his top-producing seasons.
Development on and set to a high number would be unpredictable (by definition). Recalc would bring him back to ratings based upon each new season; recalc off would take him in whatever direction the game decides: Murphy could take off or crash n burn. Or both at varying times.
If you're looking for Murphy to remain an all-star for a year or two longer, and not have a such a precipitous dropoff, then a 3- or 5-year recalc will likely accomplish that. Keep in mind, though, that not only are down years smoothed about by the great ones, but great ones are smoothed out by the down ones...
If, OTOH, you are looking for Murphy to remain an all-star well into his late-30's, then your best bet is to have development turned off and to edit his ratings. Development on and recalc off *might* accomplish this, but it would be just as likely to send him in the other direction.
I'd suggest you run a few tests and see if you like the results. Start with something like 3-year recalc, double weight of current stats, development set to 50. Devel at 50 will cause some players to deviate from their real-life performance, but not to shocking degrees. The 3-year recalc with double-weight will then bring players' ratings in line with the next season, but any real-life drop-offs or explosions should be smoothed out a bit, but not a lot.
Finally, I'll note that there others on this board who know this stuff better than I do. You might get some replies with more info or some different answers, from those who have tinkered with this stuff more than I have...
Good luck!