2k13 potential analysis (For roster and draft class makers)

The fact that players` ratings grow too fast in any of the 2k sires has been annoying for association players and draft class makers. So I run some tests to see how the ratings grow with different potentials. I know someone has done this for 2k12. However, the formula is clearly changed.
Below is what I found from the tests.
1, If a player have a potential lower than its rating, the potential will grow to the same value of its rating the next year.
i.e, a player with 60 potential and 80 rating will have 80 potential and 80 rating 1 season later.

2, The potential grows as the ratings grows, same as 2k12.
i.e, a player with 70 potential and 60 rating will have 73 potential and 64 rating 1 season later.

3, The driving force of rating growth is the difference between potential and rating,rating stops growing once the rating is equal to potential. (not same as in 2k12)
i.e, a player of age 18 with 85 potential and 85 rating will remains 85 rating without development or practice.
but a player of age 18 with 85 potential and 75 rating will grow into 96 ratings in 8 seasons.

4, Players with the same initial potential-rating difference will have similar amount of rating growth.
i.e, see sheet 5 of my exel file in Google drive.

5, The rating will stop growing sharply at the age of 26 and begins to decease at the age of 31. That is the peak period is between age 26 to age 31.
i.e, see sheet 2 of my exel file in Google drive.

6, A rookie older than 20 may have a decease in potential as its age approaches 26(i.e, 24,25) for unknown reasons, but the rating is still growing. This may be a result of injures, still remains to be checked
i.e, a rookie of age 24 with 95 potential and 75 rating will have 93 potential and 82 rating in 1 season and 91 potential and 86 rating in 2 seasons.

7, There will be a diminishing growth for both potential and rating as they are bigger than 95.
i.e, a player of age 18 with 70 potential and 60 rating will grow 20 into 80 rating in 8 seasons
but a player of age 18 with 95 potential and 85 rating will not grow 20 into 105 rating, but a 97 or 96 probably.

I did not check how rotation and position affect, but they are considered unrelated in 2k12, still seems so in 2k13. I will not look into how players rating deceases after age 31, unless you think that is necessary and important.

below is a suggestion for roster and draft class makers on player final growth(peak period) according to potential-rating differences with different player ages.
It is just an approximation and a quite rough one for there are not many samples. Anyone who are interested on this topic can look into my work,
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArEKdAwTxhhHdGxuSS1PZFFuTml0WU8wZzE3aThXWFE#gid=0
i.e a player of age 21 with 10 initial potential-rating difference will grow 14 ratings in 5 seasons, that is 60 rating to 74 rating or 70 rating to 84 rating.

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Great work a0078050!
Do you have also some data on ratings decrease after 30 years old, based on potential?

e.g.

Player A age 31, RT 80, potential 75 -> ?
Player B, age 31, RT 80, potential 80 -> ?

That would be really interesting to avoid too fast decrease of hard working stars.

About the rookies, just to briefly summarize, never set a potential < current rating apart from bench guys/role players, is this correct?

In your opinion, what should be the right potential for this categories when making a draft class (linking it to the spread between potential and player rating of course)?

SUPERSTAR
ALL STAR
STARTER
6th MAN/ STARTER BAD TEAM
ROLE PLAYER
BENCH WARMER

Thanks for your help!

Great work a0078050!
Do you have also some data on ratings decrease after 30 years old, based on potential?

e.g.

Player A age 31, RT 80, potential 75 -> ?
Player B, age 31, RT 80, potential 80 -> ?

That would be really interesting to avoid too fast decrease of hard working stars.

About the rookies, just to briefly summarize, never set a potential < current rating apart from bench guys/role players, is this correct?

In your opinion, what should be the right potential for this categories when making a draft class (linking it to the spread between potential and player rating of course)?

SUPERSTAR
ALL STAR
STARTER
6th MAN/ STARTER BAD TEAM
ROLE PLAYER
BENCH WARMER

Thanks for your help!

Hi, first rely...

"About the rookies, just to briefly summarize, never set a potential < current rating apart from bench guys/role players, is this correct?"

This is basically correct, unless you do not want the player to develop. but that does not necessarily mean that the player is not good. for example, for Magic Johnson, Chamberlain type of player, you can just give them a 90+ with the same value of potential. a potential lower than the rating is actually the same as a potential equal to the rating, as the potential will just rise to the same value the next year, whatever the age is.

"In your opinion, what should be the right potential for this categories when making a draft class"

For this part, there is no fix value, but you can control how much a player can improve by set certain amount of potential-rating difference and age .The key is the potential-rating difference, but not the potential. I have made my suggestion in the chart above. It is not perfectly accurate, as the development is sometimes kind of random and I don`t have enough samples. But I think the error should be with +-3. If you are interested you can look into my exel file in google drive.

"Do you have also some data on ratings decrease after 30 years old, based on potential?"

I will run some tests later to check that out, and also to make my suggestion more accurate, probably in the coming weekends.

FYI, because of mechanism of player development, you can make a draft class quite interesting.
e.g,
All time superstar RAT=POT =90+ (Duncan, Magic Johnson,Chamberlain )
All time all star RAT=POT =85 (Er, I have no examples)
Potential superstar RAT=POT-10=75 (Kobe, TMAC)
Potential all star. RAT=POT-5=75. (Joe Johnson)
Low rank talent RAT=POT-10 =65 (Rondo, Ginobili , Parker, G.Wallace)
Fake talent RAt=POT =75 (Kwame Brown, that might be too high, but anything lower than that won`t make him 1st pick)
For normal player whose ratings rises for about 10, a difference between 4~6 is appropriate. Any difference bigger than 10 will lead to more than 20 improvement in rating. But that is for 18 years old, for older rookies potential should be raised respective to ages. All in all, you can make approximations by checking my chart.

this is a great find! when I first read this.. I was like really?
so i tried experimenting too.. with 5 current teams (i did not limit myself to 18 yr olds)..
i want to know how players in all ages behave.. and so far you're right.. although not perfectly accurate because yr by yr ratings boost is also affected by minutes played, injuries (i think), morale, team chemistry (not sure) as what i have observed.. so what i did is turned off injuries, morale, chemistry
(i also refrain from using practices and training camps that can boost ratings).. so that i could measure a base rating development..
i'm not finished though and when i am done, i will share my findings here..
I would also try players with the same minutes in rotation afterwards.. 20mpg for all 12-man rotation.. see if minutes really affect ratings..

with more experiments and findings, we could possibly solve 2K's development formula.. and this could help roster makers and draft class makers make their best work yet.. keep it up..

So if I want to keep players locked at a certain rating, could i just lower their potential below their rating until i want them to start improving? say I want to keep Rookie MJ (rating 79) in the free agent pool indefinatly, if i set his potential to 78 for a couple years his ratings wont change?