very importent for new stat-makers.
Credit to GoonerLover66
Now this is the saddening post, this a post about the stats that most stat-makers tend to overlook. Some of them are only for specific areas, but there are also many stats that are completely overlooked for pretty dismal reasons. It saddens me that you see players who are given random values in certain areas simply because they are generic to what Konami gave them, or simply because don't watch that specific area of the player and go for a random judgement. So here we go, the forgotten stats
Possibly the MOST overlooked stat of them all, and it's such a shame because it's probably one of the most integral! In this area the overlooked values tend to be either generic or due to "Top Team Bias".
When I mean generic, I mean that people give low values in Response to players simply because others have and this is agreed to be the norm, and that's not right. The Response stat tends to be universally overlooked with full-backs and wide-midfielders. So basically, the flanks. Just have a look at some values given by stat-makers to players; Lahm 79, Rafael Da Silva 70 etc. Those are some darn harsh values especially with Lahm, a full-back whose sharp reactions and timing are very important to his play. Sometimes, I do wonder whether this is also due to a misunderstanding about what "type of stat it is. By that I mean "Physical", "Technical or "Mental" and people argue about what category it should be placed in (i.e. Balance to Physical, Attack to Technical etc.)
The thing is, Response is a mixture of both Technical and Physical and it gives off effects in PES that match both categories. So why should it be given so low. Is Da Silva lackadasical and slow to react? Not at all, but it's because players like Maldini have been given high Response values (and rightly so, he reacts like no other) that some people interpret it as being a completely Technical attribute. And it's not.
Now when I talk about "Top Team Bias" I'm talking about when stat-makers give players lower values in Response because of the big-teams. Err....when was Wayne Rooney ever super-sharp at reacting? So why should the likes of Dave Kitson and Robbie Keane, who are fabulous poachers, be valued so much lower? This attitude is the complete opposite of what we as stat-makers set out to do! We took up the mantle of being stat-makers BECAUSE Konami give ridiculous values for small teams due to such a bias. And yet there are so many that are acting in the exact same way. A solution to the problem? I don't think so! Response should be rated, like every stat, on the quality of the player itself and not on the prestige of the team!
Now this tends to be rated low with most players, bar goalkeepers and dribblers. People need to realise that Agility is an essential physical stat, and it rates how quickly a player can turn. But I think people believe that, because a player doesn't dribble, he can't possibly showcase it and must therefore be un-agile. Not so at all. Just look at when C. Ronaldo or Aaron Lennon comes up against a full-back like Gael Clichy or Nicky Shorey, does the defending full-back take ages to turn when Ronaldo or Lennon makes a move? Not really, in fact with a lot of full-backs, they can keep up with his movements (although not actually winning the ball). Nonetheless, it's un-just that players are given such criminally low values! Just because a player is a centre-back, it doesn't mean he can't turn quickly! Why do you think PLF gave Gonzalo Rodriguez a yellow value for Agility?
Short Pass Speed/Long Pass Speed
This is, alongside Response, another chronically underrated area. You can see so many defenders being given values in the low 60's for these stats. Do defenders lack the speed in their passes? No, they aren't like goalkeepers, and players like Kolo Toure and Rio Ferdinand are prime examples of how defenders can easily pass the ball as quickly as other players. So why exactly should Martin Laursen be rated so much lower than Stewart Downing in this area?
The odd thing about this value, is that it can go the other way. People can get muddled up with the accuracy stats when trying to explain this. I'll give you an example; a while back there was a discussion on PSD about Ashley Young's LPA. A contingent, myself included, argued that he should have a value in the high 80's. His crosses were superbly accurate over the last season, he produced loads of assists through his superbly accurate crosses and was one of the better players in Europe with them. A just reason, right? Well according to some users, it wasn't. They said that with such a high value, it'd make him do 60-yard passes. Erm...no? If you don't give Ashley Young a high Long Pass or Short Pass Speed, the COM won't attempt to do those sort of passes as they know they'll lack any distance whatsoever, all you have to do is give him a value in the low 80's to give him the height and power that his crosses normally have. After all, there is a reason why the likes of Deco and Lampard have high Passing Speed values, there's a reason why they put so much power in their passes and that's simply to get distance!
Now this a depressing one. If a player doesn't take a free-kick or score a chip shot, it seems that he gets given a low value. And I can't see why. Normal players can curl a ball well, and you don't need to be a glorified free-kick taker to show that. Anything in the low 60 values makes a pass or a shot dead-straight, but we can with quite a lot of players that they can put a decent amount of curl on such things. Just look at Kenny Miller's goal for Rangers recently, but how many stat-makers have given him a high Curling value?
Oddly, this is rated lowest amongst forwards. And again, you notice that it tends to be rated lower in forwards that aren't playing for "Top 4" teams. Not that I want to scrutinise anyone here, but look at pkg's stats for Fabio Zamblera. He's your average young striker, if anything, he makes too many attacking runs when the team are actually starting to go back to defend. So what has he been given? A 78! There are midfielders with similar values! And can you see any logical arguement in strikers, who aren't in the Top 4, being given low values for Aggression! Does it mean that if a player is a poacher and doesn't play for, say, Chelsea, he must be given a low value in this area? No, it's just not that sort of stat. Aggression is in now way a technical stat, if anything it's Mental, and it's not exactly an area that comes with experience!
This tends to be rated low due to either the prestige of the club or the ranking of the league according to UEFA. Why? Mentality is clearly a "Mental" attribute, it's a value that doesn't change according to league. If anything, it's showcased more if you look down at the lower quality leagues! The Championship is a prime example of immense work-ethic and it shows it more so than the Premier League. Yet there are many stat-makers that have the notion that "If it's not in a major league, it can't be too high". Why? Do Polish players not work as hard as Italian players? Are Turkish players more work-shy than the French? It's an attribute that makes my blood boil when I see it unfairly underrated. And it only seems to be like that because of the whole "Viewing Capability scenario". People don't have the capability to watch, say, the Romanian League but they can definitely watch the Premier League (or more specifically, the Top 4), and then they set a precedence based on what they see. This is why you see Steven Gerrard rated so much higher than Nick Bailey, despite the fact that in this department, they are equals!
This was my final advice post, I'll probably go back and do more later on, but I'm going to stick to stat-making for a while now. It'd be lovely to have some feedback on what people thought of these posts, and I'd be ever so grateful!