Chat Advanced analytics or In too deep?

[tummidge22]

So, I've been trying to find an optimal way to judge the young players in my Cardiff Met Uni career using the AM2024 app, but seeking help to understand how and where the CA figure comes from.

Below is the attributes plus hidden  attributes, which I have used to chop and change my line up, but I'm finding these figures can contrast wildly with the CA in the AM app.

Key: Atts Hidden Atts Total Att CA PA

GK

Lemonheigh-Evans 220 170 390   120 130

Tootle 199 153 352   125 148

Fox 199 152 351        110 115

Knightbridge 192 149 341   128 128

O'Connor 180 152 332   118 118

Of the five keepers at the club Fox scores similar to a couple of others, but is listed way back in terms of CA.

DC 0  

Lonergan 205 203 408 123 145

Llewlyn 200 188 388 89 70

Murphy 222 163 385 132 133

Harriman 184 196 380 125 125

Here's the highest listed attributes for DCs and the subsequent CA/PA listing on AM 2024. Why is Llewelyn thought of as so much worse than the others. What am I missing?

 

[DanEnglish]

I have absolutely no idea how CA is calculated. Your data suggests that it's not entirely calculated on the visible & hidden attributes.

Two guesses which are theoretically possible

• it is possible that CA is based on 'weighted' attributes for the players' natural position - so for a DC, then aerial, tackling, positioning, strength will 'use up' more of the CA, while shooting uses less.
• alternatively it is possible that CA is based on 'weighted' attributes, no matter what the position (except for GKs) - so perhaps increasing decisions 'uses up' more CA, while increasing ... er ... crossing 'uses up; less CA.

Two experiments - ways you could test it:

• get a big data table of player attributes (inc. hidden) & CAs - then run analysis on it.
• or use the editor to edit a player to all '1s' (for every attribute, inc. hidden attributes), then one-by-one change each attribute to 20, an note the CA change from Assistant Manager tool. Then you'd see if different attributes have different weightings on CA.

Overall I don't know - am just sharing some ideas how someone may be able to figure it out.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PS. If you're interested, this is how I'd rate your GKs <wink> had some time free during a call! Thoughts?

[tummidge22]

Thanks, Dan. I will have a look at those options.

I do remember some folks mentioning that one of the prevalent reasons for hiring fitness coaches is that the physical attributes do not count towards a player's CA, so I am going to look at the figures with those removed and see if it makes a little more sense than it does currently. After that I'll look at the big data table and try to ascertain the weighting.

[rseven]

You toughed hard part of gmae database.

1. Technique skill attributes are linked with CA. Crossing, dribbling, shooting, passing,tackling.

2. Some mental attributes are lined CA. Creative, decision, movement, positioning. 

3. Personality are not linked with CA. 

4. Heading, jumheight, technique, aggressive, leadership, teamwork workrate, pace, strength, stamina, agility are not linked with CA. 

5. I would say CA is one attribute, not overall rating of attributes of player.

[DanEnglish]

@rseven that is a beautiful post - I was hoping you would reply, but didn’t want to tag you!

Brilliant 👏 

[MegaBoi]

1 hour ago, rseven said:

You toughed hard part of gmae database.

1. Technique skill attributes are linked with CA. Crossing, dribbling, shooting, passing,tackling.

2. Some mental attributes are lined CA. Creative, decision, movement, positioning. 

3. Personality are not linked with CA. 

4. Heading, jumheight, technique, aggressive, leadership, teamwork workrate, pace, strength, stamina, agility are not linked with CA. 

5. I would say CA is one attribute, not overall rating of attributes of player.

It means the Attributes you mentioned in 4th section doesn't take a Players CA if they gets improvement in those areas?

[rseven]

40 minutes ago, MegaBoi said:

It means the Attributes you mentioned in 4th section doesn't take a Players CA if they gets improvement in those areas?

No, these attributes will not take CA. But when CA reach PA, player will not improve much. So train focus on physical attributes first when player is young.

[tummidge22]

On 08/07/2025 at 11:56, rseven said:

You toughed hard part of gmae database.

1. Technique skill attributes are linked with CA. Crossing, dribbling, shooting, passing,tackling.

2. Some mental attributes are lined CA. Creative, decision, movement, positioning. 

3. Personality are not linked with CA. 

4. Heading, jumheight, technique, aggressive, leadership, teamwork workrate, pace, strength, stamina, agility are not linked with CA. 

5. I would say CA is one attribute, not overall rating of attributes of player.

Thanks @rseven @DanEnglish

My playing around with attributes showed that the physical ones do contribute to CA and informed me why Llewelyn could have desirable DC attributes such as aerial and pace for which we have years worth of evidence of being vital to a sound defence, but have a low CA/PA.

I'm still planning to delve into a big data table to see if that can show me differences between positions, which I'm convinced there must be as midfielders routinely have higher overall attribute scores than strikers/wingers and defenders.

From the initial analysis changing 1s to 20s, Decisions, Tackling, Shooting, and Movement appear the most heavily weighted attributes the central defender I used.

While it might not crack the code it could give a list of attributes to prioritise especially for a player like myself who has mostly prioritised pace throughout my teams.

[isaiassc28]

Hello everyone! Where can I find this app? AM2024?  

[Petertr]

Bump.  Faced with this dilemna at the moment where I have a set of CBs with PA over 170, and then I have one who's CA/PA is 135 but has amazing skills, green across the board for everything I care about in a centre back - much better than all those others.

So which is the better player, the £5m 135PA/AC, or the £200 150CA/170PC with slightly worst attributes?

[tummidge22]

22 hours ago, isaiassc28 said:

Hello everyone! Where can I find this app? AM2024?  

 

[tummidge22]

11 minutes ago, Petertr said:

Bump.  Faced with this dilemna at the moment where I have a set of CBs with PA over 170, and then I have one who's CA/PA is 135 but has amazing skills, green across the board for everything I care about in a centre back - much better than all those others.

So which is the better player, the £5m 135PA/AC, or the £200 150CA/170PC with slightly worst attributes?

I, personally, would probably rely on the guy with a better personality and the green across the board. There is potential for the other guy to match up to his full board of attributes, but I guess where we are coming down is that CA/PA is itself an attribute rather than the full player picture.

The attributes that don't count towards the CA/PA still have an affect on how your players and team perform within the match engine, so there is clearly something more to the equation than this, but it is still a good basis for how a player will develop, it could just be a matter of honing in on those with positive/normal personalities as these effect your gradings in the Dynamics section of the Team Report.