Hardwood - Discussion Forum: Good potential awful progression

Forum >> Discussions >> Good potential awful progression

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date

#22659	11/19/2025 1:19:42 pm	Oct 17th, 2048
2099000 Joined: 08/27/2021 Posts: 6 UAB Blazers IV.7	https://onlinecollegebasketball.org/player/220189/A Not really too worried about this but my play has 12 potential which is fairly above average. When I got him he was a 115 SI and yet after three years of college training he has only progressed and amazing 11 SI. To be fair he lost 5 with the strength drop but just think it’s funny how little he has progressed. Curious if anyone else has had players like this or if there is a reason behind it or just luck.

#22660	11/19/2025 5:11:30 pm	Oct 17th, 2048
ABCplayer Joined: 10/07/2025 Posts: 22 Albany Great Danes III.1	I’m still fairly new to this game, so I might not get it right, but potential is just one gauge of measuring how much the player’s SI would grow. Although most players with 13 potential would grow quicker than ones with 10 potential, there are some outliers. For example, one of my players’s SI (https://onlinecollegebasketball.org/player/221126) that has only 10 potential grew by 21. On the other hand, one of my newest recruits, Adrian Watson, only grew by 10 despite having 13 potential. So yeah, there are some outliers, and I saw one person on the forum saying that it’s important to look at how much the player’s SI grew during their high school years. Apologies for the messy sentences—but hope it helps!

#22667	11/21/2025 9:53:28 pm	Oct 24th, 2048
Blackbeard Joined: 03/17/2019 Posts: 604 St. Johns Red Storm V.4	I've been in the game for awhile and there are a couple of things that really stick out like a sore thumb as to why this guys progression has been so slow. And yes, his growth is really bad but there is a reason. Number 1: He played NO games in his red shirt season meaning he could have played 5 games and it wouldn't have hurt his red shirt possibility. Because he didn't play the 5 allowed games I'm going to assume that he sat on the bench the entire season and didn't even play in any of the 3 exhibition games or the end of season invitationals. a possible 11 to 12 games this guy could have played in but didn't and the result is that he only gained 1 point during the RS season instead of a possible 10 to maybe 12 points for a 12 POT guy, depending on minutes of course. Number 2 is a big one and that concerns number of minutes played because thats key. The more minutes a player is actually in a game playing translates in to the amount of training he gets. Play a lot of minutes, get a lot of training or don't play very many minutes and he gets not much training and very few points in growth. He's a junior right now and if you add up the average minutes played each season you get 0, 2.9, 4.6 and 14.7. Average all that up and it tells me that his average minutes played so far is 5.6 minutes per game. That right there is a prescription for very little SI growth. Thats why this guy has only gained 11 points in his entire 3 and a tenth seasons in college. He's a career back up when he should have been a 3 season starter. If this guy was on my team he would be a solid 150 to 160 SI guy right now and with all 4 of the 3 point shooting attributes he would have been one of the best 3 point shooters in the game. He's got good possibilities for OS, Range, and Good IQ and fantastic speed. That right there is the formula for a darn good 3 point shooter if set to take 3 pointers as a PG, SG or SF. He has 11 stamina and could easily play for 30 minutes per game or more and not get fatigued. Thats what I see. Sorry. Maybe forget about this one and move on. It is sad but it is what it is, a mistake was made and I wouldn't expect an inexperienced manager to realize any of this. Don't be afraid to ask questions I'll offer to help you, just ask if you want to. I answer all mails and am on every day. I'm not an expert but have picked up quite a bit along the way. Good luck. Updated Saturday, November 22 2025 @ 2:02:26 pm PST

#22770	12/21/2025 6:47:13 am	Feb 4th, 2049
2099000 Joined: 08/27/2021 Posts: 6 UAB Blazers IV.7	Thank you blackbeard. I almost see what your saying, except that all my other players have done just fine, particularly the guys playing above him. My two guards right now, who are both seniors, are both much better and have progressed way better. The first, Jamie Beam was a 5 star that came in as a 133 and after his redshirt year, has pretty much started most of his career since, and is now in the 170s. The other one, Geoffrey Chao, came in as a 106, played a total of 0 games his redshirt year and jumped to a 123 before his freshman season. He then played all of four games his freshman year and jumped to a 137 that season. He is now a 174, won conference player of the year last season and is averaging better number this year, while we are number one in the conference and projected to make the tourney. Bothe these guys have 15+ stamina and are playing many minutes. Helm has never been anywhere near good enough to get serious minutes on my team, so I am curious where you would see him fit. As I started my original message I’m not too worried about him, but I don’t think you would’ve made him this amazing player you are talking about. Updated Sunday, December 21 2025 @ 6:48:25 am PST

#22773	12/21/2025 9:12:39 pm	Feb 6th, 2049
branhd123 Joined: 03/21/2022 Posts: 2 Assumption Greyhounds II.1	Helm had bad dev in HS which is more often than not a predictor for college dev. A benchmark I use to determine if a player will have great college dev is if they developed >= 30 SI from their HSFR -> HSJR year. Helm only developed 22 SI in that time frame, very subpar, which is why his lack of college dev is not surprising to me (although his lack of playing time compounded that). Beam's HS dev from HSFR -> HSJR was only 24 SI and his college dev, outside of his first year, has also been bad. Chao, on the other hand, had dev'd 36 SI which is amazing and it shows in his college dev.