Do people get too caught up in the CA/PA stars or numbers?

Do people get too caught up in the CA/PA stars or numbers?

I don't use any third party tools, and only look at what is in the game, so I can only comment on the star ratings that my scouts and coaches give me.

I do feel that people on these forums often get really hung up on the CA/PA ratings rather than focusing on the attributes. My own experience is that, on quite a few occasions, I've found players who are rated by my coaches or scouts as being pretty average players but, with a combination of the right attributes in the right places and a good mentality, these players can often be just as effective as the allegedly 'high CA' players. Equally, I've brought in a few players who are rated very highly and then found that they aren't actually performing as well as so-called 'lesser' players.

What are your experiences?

EDIT - just noticed a typo in my subject title. :o If a mod drops by, could they change it to 'too'! Thanks.

i only really use scouts to unmask attributes, everything i decide on a player is based on what i think the attributes tell me, if i can see a young 16year old with stats i think are looking good i will sign him, i do use my coaches at times so i can see what they think about progression but i tend to disagree with them a lot. Ratings are more important than attributes i think, i have Fraiser Fyvie at AC Milan, no where near as good as players i could get for that club but he plays about a 7.3 average every season and my team does well, so i dont see the need to change anything, whereas i could sign the best midfielder in the world to replace him and he might not fit in as well.

There are definitely far too many on this forum that focus on CA/PA crouch.

As for myself, much like you, I play the LLM way but even then there are times when I probably focus too much on stars. I think this is partially due to being a bit lazy/save time, easier to look at one set of stars then 10 odd attributes even when I have customised screens for each position.

In terms of good players playing poorly I think this is down to consistency (hidden attribute) mostly and I tend to be careful when buying players to go for those that have good average ratings on a regular basis.

EDIT

I have a real oddity at my club at the moment - I have a player who is a natural DR & accomplished MR, coaches rate him as 3* with a best position of DR although when you look at his attributes tackling, positioning & marking are very poor. His attributes show that he is much more suited to an MR/AMR position and yet after a season of playing in both positions he gets better ratings at DR.

I don't bother with the attributes much. I let my staff do most of the work.

Reasons: 1) "Realism" 2) Laziness

My eventual aim is to base selection of performance, the stars are only a guide to get things started.

Totally. You give someone a grade and that's what they look at first of all, not the feedback that follows it.

Same here. You give someone a number and people look straight at that number and not at the performances they give in the ME. A brief look at any of the 'big club' data threads will show this.

i only really use scouts to unmask attributes, everything i decide on a player is based on what i think the attributes tell me, if i can see a young 16year old with stats i think are looking good i will sign him, i do use my coaches at times so i can see what they think about progression but i tend to disagree with them a lot. Ratings are more important than attributes i think, i have Fraiser Fyvie at AC Milan, no where near as good as players i could get for that club but he plays about a 7.3 average every season and my team does well, so i dont see the need to change anything, whereas i could sign the best midfielder in the world to replace him and he might not fit in as well.

I agree. I definitely think it's important to focus on the actual attributes primarily when judging a player. The stars can just be a starting point.

There are definitely far too many on this forum that focus on CA/PA crouch.

As for myself, much like you, I play the LLM way but even then there are times when I probably focus too much on stars. I think this is partially due to being a bit lazy/save time, easier to look at one set of stars then 10 odd attributes even when I have customised screens for each position.

In terms of good players playing poorly I think this is down to consistency (hidden attribute) mostly and I tend to be careful when buying players to go for those that have good average ratings on a regular basis.

I have some filters set up, which I will occasionally use on my shortlist of scouted players to make things a bit easier. I've found, though, over time, that I have become particularly adept at scanning a player for vital attributes for his position and making a quick decision. Too much time spent on FM means that I can scan a player in seconds and judge his worth.

I don't bother with the attributes much. I let my staff do most of the work.

Reasons: 1) "Realism" 2) Laziness

My eventual aim is to base selection of performance, the stars are only a guide to get things started.

Important point there. The stars are just to get things started.

It's also worth noting that there might not be that much difference between a three star and a four star player, or a 'good' player and a 'leading' player. It's important to study the attributes carefully before making a decision.

I don't know if this is true but I also think the star ratings can sometimes be obscured by reputation and an error factor. On occasion, I've spotted a player and bought them despite a relatively low rating. All of a sudden, after a short time, I find that their rating according to my scouts has shot up and they are now rated as better players! For example, two youngish players (around 20 or 21) who I bought a few seasons back were both rated as 'good' players and that they had already reached their potential. After a small amount of time, I found that they had both shot up to leading players and they are now two world class stars in my side. So, you can't always trust your scouts.

I think the PA is slightly different when dealing with a very young player. I tend to rely on that slightly more because you're dealing with an unknown factor and so you need your scouts to tell you if they think a player will be a star or not.

Do people get too caught up in the CA/PA stars or numbers?

I don't use any third party tools, and only look at what is in the game, so I can only comment on the star ratings that my scouts and coaches give me.

I do feel that people on these forums often get really hung up on the CA/PA ratings rather than focusing on the attributes. My own experience is that, on quite a few occasions, I've found players who are rated by my coaches or scouts as being pretty average players but, with a combination of the right attributes in the right places and a good mentality, these players can often be just as effective as the allegedly 'high CA' players. Equally, I've brought in a few players who are rated very highly and then found that they aren't actually performing as well as so-called 'lesser' players.

What are your experiences?

EDIT - just noticed a typo in my subject title. :o If a mod drops by, could they change it to 'too'! Thanks.

Not all high PA players are good. Many are though. Many lower PA players will be better than the high PA ones because of how stat distribution works.

It's easy to get seduced by the numbers, but they do have a large bearing on it all in fairness.

i have wondered how that works, i have a German Regen, worth £34m but his stats are not great, BUT he is natural with both feet, does that take away from his attributes going up? Incidentally he plays very very well.

I Agree with the OP. But, CA & PA is a good pointer.

Some people care too much about CA and PA...

It doesn't matter if a player as a CA of 140 and a PA of 180 when his attributes are distributed in an uneven way, or are "wasted" on secondary skills, or he's a lazy, unprofessional and inconsistent performer...

An average 130-130 guy with adequate attributes and with solid work ethic will most likely be a better and more useful player than the erratic "hot prospect who'll never make it".

In the past I've made extensive use of Scouts programs, and over time I've learnt it wasn't really worth it, as more often than not plenty of youngsters with high PA ended up having such horrible mental traits (or low starting skills) they wouldn't ever been able to fulfill their potential or to go near it.

To be honest the in-game scouts are quite helpful once you understand how to really read between the lines...

When you get a report about a 17yo player who "could become a good Premier Division striker", but he has only 1/2* as current ability (or even Silver Stars...), he's reported to be an inconsistent performer and his skills are mediocre (or not really fitting his position), he's one of those "never-will"s who'll often settle down for a career in lower leagues, high potential or not.

i have wondered how that works, i have a German Regen, worth £34m but his stats are not great, BUT he is natural with both feet, does that take away from his attributes going up? Incidentally he plays very very well.

The simple answer is yes.

Being two footed takes up CA points or rather having a stronger "weak" foot takes up CA points the same as attributes.

If he is an attacking player, AMC, winger or striker I've always worked on the basis that being two footed is worth around +3 on your relevant attributes.

Not all high PA players are good. Many are though. Many lower PA players will be better than the high PA ones because of how stat distribution works.

It's easy to get seduced by the numbers, but they do have a large bearing on it all in fairness.

What do you mean by the part in bold above?

i have wondered how that works, i have a German Regen, worth £34m but his stats are not great, BUT he is natural with both feet, does that take away from his attributes going up? Incidentally he plays very very well.

Yes, footedness does take up CA points. I know this due to being an FM researcher.

Edit - what Cougar2010 said.

The simple answer is yes.

Being two footed takes up CA points or rather having a stronger "weak" foot takes up CA points the same as attributes.

If he is an attacking player, AMC, winger or striker I've always worked on the basis that being two footed is worth around +3 on your relevant attributes.

i just never understood why this guy was worth so much money, ill post a screen shot of him later and compare him to another striker worth the same, the difference is huge and the only thing i can really see thats different is he can use both feet very well, BUT he has scored more goals than games for Germany 25 in 23 games or something close.

Yes, footedness does take up CA points. I know this due to being an FM researcher.

is it a lot of points?

One my all time best performing players on FM only had 169 CA & far outplayed players of 180 CA + From that point I realised that the attributes in the right places mattered far more

is it a lot of points?

Difficult to say really as it's weighted so I can't put a number on it.

In my experience of playing the game, it can have the effect of making a player who is really rated by your coaches look a bit average, while a player who your coaches tell you looks average can end up looking really good in terms of attributes. Footedness does make a difference in the game though and does give a player an advantage (especially wingers, central midfielders and forwards).

The simple answer is yes.

Being two footed takes up CA points or rather having a stronger "weak" foot takes up CA points the same as attributes.

If he is an attacking player, AMC, winger or striker I've always worked on the basis that being two footed is worth around +3 on your relevant attributes.

this is exactly how i work. though i also add central mids to that thinking

Ratings are more important, but CA and PA are by far the simplest general gauge.

Wouldn't know about CA/PA in my game as i consider viewing that as cheating (my personal view, not wanting to cause an argument).

I do look at what my coaches/scouts have to say regarding a players current/potential ability though before buying a new player but only use that as a rough guide. I look at key stats in certain areas before getting a new player in.

As has been said in this forum, it is not a simple as a youngster with a high PA abilty going on to become world class, it's about players being strong in key areas as well have having decent mental attributes.

Some people care too much about CA and PA...

It doesn't matter if a player as a CA of 140 and a PA of 180 when his attributes are distributed in an uneven way, or are "wasted" on secondary skills, or he's a lazy, unprofessional and inconsistent performer...

An average 130-130 guy with adequate attributes and with solid work ethic will most likely be a better and more useful player than the erratic "hot prospect who'll never make it".

In the past I've made extensive use of Scouts programs, and over time I've learnt it wasn't really worth it, as more often than not plenty of youngsters with high PA ended up having such horrible mental traits (or low starting skills) they wouldn't ever been able to fulfill their potential or to go near it.

To be honest the in-game scouts are quite helpful once you understand how to really read between the lines...

When you get a report about a 17yo player who "could become a good Premier Division striker", but he has only 1/2* as current ability (or even Silver Stars...), he's reported to be an inconsistent performer and his skills are mediocre (or not really fitting his position), he's one of those "never-will"s who'll often settle down for a career in lower leagues, high potential or not.

Agree. Not used a scouting program since FM08 and in that game i had many a player with 190+ PA that simply didn't fulfill that potential, yet my best player had a PA/CA of around 165 and was amazing.

I don't bother with the attributes much. I let my staff do most of the work.

Reasons: 1) "Realism" 2) Laziness

My eventual aim is to base selection of performance, the stars are only a guide to get things started.

10 characters

Difficult to say really as it's weighted so I can't put a number on it.

In my experience of playing the game, it can have the effect of making a player who is really rated by your coaches look a bit average, while a player who your coaches tell you looks average can end up looking really good in terms of attributes. Footedness does make a difference in the game though and does give a player an advantage (especially wingers, central midfielders and forwards).

the whole two footedness thing i find really annoying to be honest, as an experiment i used FMRTE to make rooney and van persie one footed, within two weeks (game time) their stats had shot up and their description was "world class striker" which i have never seen either player described as before (normally van persie becomes a "cultured" striker and rooney just stays as a "striker" for me)

as for the original topic, i tend to ignore the star ratings from my scouts as unless the scouts watch the player over a season they are just educated guesses imho, i.e. how can a scout judge a players consistency/temprament after watching them in one game (normaly a reserve/u18's game as well if the player is younger) to get a proper feel for the player you need to watch them over the course of a season, although thats just my opinion

A PA of around 150-160 (or -8) is plenty for a player with well-distributed stats and the right personality, imo. The only possible exceptions to this are box-to-box CM's and wingbacks, who need to be more rounded.

In summary: Stat distribution > CA/PA.

I have looked at PA and CA for some players myself, but its definitely not a definitive guide and a player's attributes/ratings is better for judging them. My best player on FM10 had a PA of 146, but he outperformed players with CA of 170+ throughout his career.

I go by attributes and sometimes what the coaches say. For me doesn't matter what CA/PA they have, its all apart of the game finding the talent and making mistakes in signing players. Knowing the PA from using third party sources will just make the game easy knowing you will never make a bad signing.

I go by attributes and sometimes what the coaches say. For me doesn't matter what CA/PA they have, its all apart of the game finding the talent and making mistakes in signing players. Knowing the PA from using third party sources will just make the game easy knowing you will never make a bad signing.

Sums it up nicely. +1.

dont ever use CA/PA, i work by attributes and repeated scouting over a season, as well as coach reports

I go by attributes and sometimes what the coaches say. For me doesn't matter what CA/PA they have, its all apart of the game finding the talent and making mistakes in signing players. Knowing the PA from using third party sources will just make the game easy knowing you will never make a bad signing.

Very true. I played against Real Madrid on my FM10 save the other week and noticed a monster of a striker they had up front against me aged around 21. I recognised the name and when i checked his history it was a player i had released on a free a few seasons before! My ass man told me he was not good enough for my squad and here he was now worth £30m listed as a wonder kid..

That kind of stuff just doesn't happen if you know players PA.

Very true. I played against Real Madrid on my FM10 save the other week and noticed a monster of a striker they had up front against me aged around 21. I recognised the name and when i checked his history it was a player i had released on a free a few seasons before! My ass man told me he was not good enough for my squad and here he was now worth £30m listed as a wonder kid..

That kind of stuff just doesn't happen if you know players PA.

ouch. but much prefer it that way

Very true. I played against Real Madrid on my FM10 save the other week and noticed a monster of a striker they had up front against me aged around 21. I recognised the name and when i checked his history it was a player i had released on a free a few seasons before! My ass man told me he was not good enough for my squad and here he was now worth £30m listed as a wonder kid..

That kind of stuff just doesn't happen if you know players PA.

Very true things likes this make the game for me even though as happened to you, you can easily miss judge and let go of a world class player.

Very true. I played against Real Madrid on my FM10 save the other week and noticed a monster of a striker they had up front against me aged around 21. I recognised the name and when i checked his history it was a player i had released on a free a few seasons before! My ass man told me he was not good enough for my squad and here he was now worth £30m listed as a wonder kid..

That kind of stuff just doesn't happen if you know players PA.

I've made that mistake, so now I don't let anyone go (except the really crap youngsters) without a 25-50% of future fee clause, even if it means I get less up-front.

Attributes and distribution of them can be a substitute for CA but there is no substitute for PA. If I see a young player/regen that a scout rates highly star wise in potential and doesn't have completely hopeless attributes (even considering position changes), I'll almost definitely try to sign them. But, I do sign younger players who don't have high potential but have good attribute distribution already. If they can play well for me now, then I don't have to worry about potential.

stat distribution and personality i look at as more important than PA/CA but you need a certain amount to get by though in the first place. good training can turn thay wayward prospect into a world beater too.

Personality comes first. I stick to those with leader, model professional, resolute, etc. For an exceptional player I will consider "ambitious" but they really have to be exceptional.

There is no shortage of good buys in FM. Buying is a lot easier then selling (has been the case for me in EVERY SI FM/CM version). The key to long term succes is not to OVER buy and wind up with too many players.

I normally create tactics with very specific roles so i couldn't possibly rely only on CA/PA so i naturally look at attributes and personality first.

When i want to sign a player i usually will have a scout watch him for 3 matches and get a more detailed report.

I only really use the stars when looking at young players with potential - and then I'm only looking at the difference between the current and potential stars they have (e.g. how much progress they may be able to make). Otherwise it's all down to attributes and personality!!

i use both attributes to look at the surface stars to get an idea of the hidden attributes.

on a side note i just did the treble with port vale - bagged fa cup while typing this! i proved all the doubters - my brother and cousin who said my team wouldn't be able to win the league let alone win it and both domestic cups - wrong!

How do people pick up regens without checking their PA Stars?

With players over 19 I go on stats, with players under 19 I go on stars...

Thing is, when I get about 5 seasons in, I want to bleed through my young talent so end up basing it all on stars. Annoying

It's pretty obvious that you need to be caught up in a player's PA if you're at all interested in developing someone. There's no other accurate way to tell if he's going to be worth long term investment.

As for CA.. it's not the be all and end all of whether a player is good or not. I used to have a striker with perfect stats for a poacher, and even though he wasn't considered good enough for the league I was in (according to my assistant with 20 jpa), he rattled in goal after goal with the good service he was given from the rest of my team.

However, if you have too many players that aren't up to the standard of the league you're in, you will tend to suffer, regardless of stats. The match engine seems weighted towards the other team if you are too weak in CA overall.

100% correct. I also dont use any 3rd party tool but a friend i play online with does. I signed a young kid, his stats were ok and he was rating about 7.6 at his current club, i picked him up and was palying him etc and he was doing great. He used a scout tool and said that this players CA was 110 and PA was 120.

He went on to win player of the year, i think alot of people using the tool would not have even looked at him.

I'm trying something this year to get a more realistic feel to my transfers and whatnot, I've started looking more at the players form in conjunction with the stars. My big example so far is when my Liverpool squad was in need of a backup striker I found Frazier Campbell was having a really solid season for Sunderland. Picked him up for around 4 million and he was great for three years as a backup, scoring 12-15 goals in all competitions per year. I then moved him to Hull for 9.5 million. A great return on a player who my assistant only rated a two and a half stars.

There is no point in getting caught up in someones PA if his CA is extremely low. He will probably never reach his potential if you're in one of the top leagues.

Secondly, I tend to look for good distribution of stats rather than good CA/PA. My best example would probably be Henrique from Cruziero. Amazing DMC with incredible distribution of stats. I'd bring him to any club I could despite his CA / PA not being all that great.

What's a low CA then in terms of stars? Below 1.5 stars?