Natural/Accomplished Players

I've noted in here in the past that "Natural" Players are supposed to be better than "Accomplished" Players.

But what if stats for "Accomplished" Player are better than the player playing in "Natural" Position. :confused:

Also if stats are more important than "stars" why does Ass man pick the the team in Friendlies on stars. :confused:

The difference between a natural and accomplished is that a natural player is used to playing on that position, whereas the Accomplished player has been trained to play in that position. If the player is natural in MC and accomplished in ML, he will act and think like a MC, not like a ML. He might be used to play ML by then, but it doesn`t mean he`s a 'true' ML, so he`ll always be a bit worse than anyone with the same stats who is natural there.

But I don`t see your problem. You pick the player you believe is best for the position, don`t you? So if you don`t trust the stats, just let them play a match and see which one you prefer.

I have an accomplished striker who shouldn`t be worth a dime, but he performs a whole lot better than my natural striker who should be my top player Sometimes stats just don`t say all and it`s up to the manager to determine which one should be playing.

Although I trust stats I see your point & my natural ML is better than the accomplished

Did you see additional item on the post?

Although I trust stats I see your point & my natural ML is better than the accomplished

Did you see additional item on the post?

About the stats and stars. The stars are the rating that the assistant or other staff member thinks of them. The assistant should pick based on the stars as they are his ratings based on the player's stats just like you rate a player in your head based on the player's stats.

slightly off the main topic. Does anyone know if asst. managers/couches are privy to the hidden stats (assuming they have a high enough stat judging ability) when they calculate the star ratings? I already use the ratings to aid in tough decisions but don't really know how they are calculated.

Like my MLS team has 2 keepers of good quality, you look at there stats and they are very even but in different areas. They both look worth playing but the one with better jumping, aerial, communication, command, and reflexes, is rated lower. He's got a 3 star rating while the guy that's lower in those areas, but higher everywhere else, is rated with 3 1/2 stars, which is basically a top star by the games MLS standards. I've played them both equally and there is only a 0.10 avg rating difference with good performances... and that's with a back line that, while good, has been very inconsistent.So I'm wondering if it's the stuff I don't see that's making the guy with the lower prime goal stats get a better star rating.

Since the player reports are so sparse on info.... btw, how about leaving a scouts initial report available if you sign a player. I'm sick of actually losing info when I sign someone... the star ratings seem like a useful bit of feedback, just wondering how in depth they are.

slightly off the main topic. Does anyone know if asst. managers/couches are privy to the hidden stats (assuming they have a high enough stat judging ability) when they calculate the star ratings? I already use the ratings to aid in tough decisions but don't really know how they are calculated.

Like my MLS team has 2 keepers of good quality, you look at there stats and they are very even but in different areas. They both look worth playing but the one with better jumping, aerial, communication, command, and reflexes, is rated lower. He's got a 3 star rating while the guy that's lower in those areas, but higher everywhere else, is rated with 3 1/2 stars, which is basically a top star by the games MLS standards. I've played them both equally and there is only a 0.10 avg rating difference with good performances... and that's with a back line that, while good, has been very inconsistent.So I'm wondering if it's the stuff I don't see that's making the guy with the lower prime goal stats get a better star rating.

Since the player reports are so sparse on info.... btw, how about leaving a scouts initial report available if you sign a player. I'm sick of actually losing info when I sign someone... the star ratings seem like a useful bit of feedback, just wondering how in depth they are.

Regarding the stars, from my experience, you can't trust a scout with less then 18 at jpa. Less then that and they will misjudge the rating by at least half a star, sometimes more. Because of that, I always have a scout with jpa20 (so I can see accurate reports of players I'm thinking of signing) and a coach with jpa20. (so I can see accurate reports of my own players)

Like my MLS team has 2 keepers of good quality, you look at there stats and they are very even but in different areas. They both look worth playing but the one with better jumping, aerial, communication, command, and reflexes, is rated lower. He's got a 3 star rating while the guy that's lower in those areas, but higher everywhere else, is rated with 3 1/2 stars, which is basically a top star by the games MLS standards. I've played them both equally and there is only a 0.10 avg rating difference with good performances... and that's with a back line that, while good, has been very inconsistent.So I'm wondering if it's the stuff I don't see that's making the guy with the lower prime goal stats get a better star rating.

He might have a better star rating simply because he has i.e. better positioning, or a good anticipation where the ball is going to be. Determination and concentration are also important stats, just like the physical of the keeper. You don`t want a keeper to be outmuscled in the air or something, so you want him to be good in jumping and strength as well. Agility should also be important considering he has to stretch and jump in all kind of awkward positions to keep the ball out.

slightly off the main topic. Does anyone know if asst. managers/couches are privy to the hidden stats (assuming they have a high enough stat judging ability) when they calculate the star ratings? I already use the ratings to aid in tough decisions but don't really know how they are calculated.

Like my MLS team has 2 keepers of good quality, you look at there stats and they are very even but in different areas. They both look worth playing but the one with better jumping, aerial, communication, command, and reflexes, is rated lower. He's got a 3 star rating while the guy that's lower in those areas, but higher everywhere else, is rated with 3 1/2 stars, which is basically a top star by the games MLS standards. I've played them both equally and there is only a 0.10 avg rating difference with good performances... and that's with a back line that, while good, has been very inconsistent.So I'm wondering if it's the stuff I don't see that's making the guy with the lower prime goal stats get a better star rating.

Since the player reports are so sparse on info.... btw, how about leaving a scouts initial report available if you sign a player. I'm sick of actually losing info when I sign someone... the star ratings seem like a useful bit of feedback, just wondering how in depth they are.

you get a coach report instead which is more accurate as it is based on training as well, to be honest with you, there are not a huge amount of 'stuff you dont see' when it comes to actual phycal attributes, its more on the mental side of things.