Need advice for developing Players

[3c10yn2rqqxo]

To develop players with Elite/Top 6 potential  I usually:

1. Leave them the minors to develop sometimes

2. Use the AHL

3. Put top players on 1st line in the AHL

4. Make sure they have 70+ point seasons or better

5. Often win the Calder Cup

6. Get A rated head coach with decent teaching, other coaches with A rated coaching.

Despite all this, most of the players I want to develop do not. Many of the x-factor prospects fizzle out and never reach their potential.

What am I doing wrong? Because it seems completely random.

Is development actually possible? Is it all predetermined?

Case study: My prospect Atu Raty was an Elite low, late 1st round pick. He had maxed x-factor abilities, and I was so excited to try developing him and thought this would be the star to build my franchse around. He was on the 1st line of the AHL every year, 80 point or more seasons every year, just killing it. He is now 26, a 77 overall, and rated as a Bottom 6 potential. 

I have had the same problems with Elite med x-factor goalies; they just never develop beyond an 82. 

5 seasons in, I realized that the best way to predict a players growth is to play with fog of war off and check what other teams see their value is in the trade screen. It feels like cheating, and at the same time that I have no agency in trying to develop them. 

Any help would be appreciated, thanks in advance.

[johum2886]

@3c10yn2rqqxo pretty sure you need to play them in their role position for them to develop. i.e.; if they're a minor scr forward, they would be a top 6 player in the AHL, minor chk forward would be middle/bottom 6 in AHL, and other fwd would be a 4th liner

It sucks because prospects do not progress as quickly as they do in real life, which is usually a year or two at most in the AHL, not 4-5

[kyl_35]

I too frequently have trouble with this. It seems the attributes that get developed are random. I think the potential rating impacts how many/how frequently the attributes get developed.

I have a player T6 Low potential. Put up great points in junior and in the AHL. 

I’ve got him up to a 77 overall, but his Offensive and Defensive Awareness just will not improve. If I call him up to the NHL I can get him to put up good stats in the 5-10 games I play, but he won’t do crap in the 72-77 games I sim. Useless. 

I think there’s only so far you get develop a player in the minors. If you haven’t pulled them up to the nhl by the time they’re 22/23, you should let them go. 

[heavydutyrammer]

---

@johum2886 wrote:
@3c10yn2rqqxopretty sure you need to play them in their role position for them to develop. i.e.; if they're a minor scr forward, they would be a top 6 player in the AHL, minor chk forward would be middle/bottom 6 in AHL, and other fwd would be a 4th liner

It sucks because prospects do not progress as quickly as they do in real life, which is usually a year or two at most in the AHL, not 4-5

---

@johum2886 It would be nice to get a confirmation on theories like this.. and why developing prospects is so frustrating because so often they never pan out despite putting up great numbers.. and why their overalls plateau at 77-82 @EA_Blueberry 

For example… 20yo Med Elite RW TWF 77OVR..

His role position says 4th line or 3rd line SCR.. 

is there some type of development algorithm that means he would better develop/reach his potential if he played 8:00-10:00 TOI a night, scoring 10-20pts in the NHL?

or if he played top minutes on 1st line in AHL, 19:00+, scoring 80+pts? 
so often it seems that trying to develop and season the prospects in the AHL just forces them to plateau instead of get better… 

it would be nice to know if there is some kind of algorithm..

and yes we know that not every prospect will reach their potential as they have a “medium” chance of getting elite.. but high top 6fwd, high top 6 D, med elites, so many always seem like they plateau in the 77-82 range. Easily over 50% of them… I’d say only 1 out of 5 ever hit their potential even with the Med or high potentials.. 

[3c10yn2rqqxo]

---

@heavydutyrammer wrote:

@johum2886 It would be nice to get a confirmation on theories like this.. and why developing prospects is so frustrating because so often they never pan out despite putting up great numbers.. and why their overalls plateau at 77-82 @EA_Blueberry 

it would be nice to know if there is some kind of algorithm..

---

Good points. Is there an algorthm, formula? or is it precoded when a prospect is generated, regardless of their potential?

After researching this on reddit and elsewhere all I really have are more questions.

Other posts over the years claim the following:

1. Putting them on a line that fits their role is more important than minutes and morale.  

(see above posts) 

2. playing with morale skews the game and development

(Time to turn off morale? It seems it might affect development, especially playing on 3rd or 4th lines and they miss the icetime)

3. NHL minutes matter more than AHL minutes

(But why? Does playing them in the AHL cause them to be flagged by the game as not worthy of developing?)

4. X-factors always develop to their potential

(Not for me. x-factor abilities up their trade value but don't seem to predict if a prospect will develop no matter where they play)

5. NHL minutes are not enough, you need to put them on the top line.

(Does the sim engine focus on your top line as players worthy of development? ignoring the rest? That would really suck.) 

6. Top 10 in every draft have a higher chance of developing.

(Again, I have seen this fail and players not develop despite NHL minutes so the question remains)

7. Players stop developing after age 26.

(as @kyl_35 wrote above, in reality it seems closer to age 22-23 that we should let them go if nothing has happened by then.)

8. Not all players reach their potential.

(Indeed, but does what we do as managers have any effect on said development? Are we just stuck in the matrix?)

In my next franchise I will do some experimenting; more NHL time, etc. Thanks to all who replied, hope to hear from more of you.

EDIT: (April 22nd 2022) I have added more below:

9. Simmed games have a different effect on your player's development than games you play manually, even if point totals are similar

(I stumbled upon this recently, and I think it may really be a thing, sadly.)

10. Playing the games manually has a larger affect on development, espcially with high point totals

(Hard to say if this is true, but I guess it really makes sense if you are playing every game, and you try your best to have your player get points. If you play every game yourself, line chemistry won't matter as much then, but will if you end up simming as well)

11. Line chemistry should be high as possible for simmed games

(higher chemistry means more points in simmed games, so getting a +5 is desireable for their line and special teams, and +3 and +2 on your other lines as well)

12. Coaches matter

(An A rated coach won't matter if your star player hates them? Brutal if true. It seems a good idea to shop for a new coach that is B rated at least that fits well with your star player. But, even then, they may still dislike each other. Morale may play a role here as well, but it is unclear.)

13. Coaches teaching ability matters

(sigh..)

14. You signed a bust and your scouts did not notice

(I thought that revealing full potential and comparison meant you knew if your potential pick was a bust or not, but it seems that may not be true. Buyer beware)

15. Gems may only have a boost to stats from the start, and are not guarateed to develop into stars 

(Considering that most gems are Top 6s and rarely Elite med potentials it seems pointless to take them unless you really want them and they will get ice time)

16. The Gem identified by your scout was actually a bust.

(This is more Rumor than anything else, but I thought it worth mentioning here)

17. The sim engine will focus on your top players for stats for simming.

(Don't expect line 3 or line 4 players to develop unless you are playing manually and have high point totals)

18. It is all random, and even players left scratched for several seasons in the AHL may or may not grow.

[EA_Blueberry]

@3c10yn2rqqxo 

Great post!

Going to sticky this to the top so others can jump in with their advice on what helps in developing players. 

[Beauts90]

Franchise mode could desperately use a more involved development system where we have to interact more with our developing prospects and make actual decisions that could impact how they develop.

In my experience, having a player spend extra time in the AHL or juniors has never hurt their development and is usually better for them if they aren’t putting up many points. I’m pretty sure points is the biggest factor in growing players regardless of type, position or potential. It might actually be the only thing that creates any separation among players with the same potential.

I guess for this reason, this might be the biggest factor in the chemistry system as having that +3 or +5 could make a big difference when rated around 80. Of course, when it comes to simming, I’m not exactly sure what determines who produces and who doesn’t.

[Tobbish]

It does seem very random to me. I know it's not that simple, but also, it seems a lot harder than it should be to focus on developing specific players (in specific ways also, would be nice, depending on where they fall short).

They should benefit from getting chances to make the team and stuff.

But I often feel like when I try to develop players, it doesn't make much difference what I do. After a couple of seasons, some players are ready and some are not.

What I've done when I go for a rebuild is simply add some interesting prospects, and then simulate and some of them grow into something, and some don't. Also try to use the best possible coach, but I haven't really paid attention to wether or not this has really benefited particular players.

I guess that is "realistic" in a way, but also, it would be nice if it was easier to make an effort with players you want to develop faster and in a specific skill.

So much to experiment with...

[kyl_35]

I always try to get a generalist, forwards, defence, and goalie coach with as high of a teaching grade as possible for both NHL and AHL. I have no idea if it works. 

[3c10yn2rqqxo]

Thanks guys, I had forgotten about line chemistry and coaching. I did some digging around the internet again and found similar ideas, and added them to the list above. Cheers~