FWIW, I've always been under the impression that the scout profiles impacted the scout's "overall" rating (ie STARZ) of the player's ability to play rather than the individual ratings themselves. For instance, a scout who favors ABILITIES would give more STARZ to a player who is further along in bat development and already has a decent position rating (ie more likely to reach potential), whereas a TOOLZ scout might focus more on the bat potential only (even if the current is low) and what the player's range says about their potential ability to play the position. So if you focused on the scout's OVERALL grade only, the TOOLZ guy would favor a high potential HS prospect and the ABILITY guy would favor more fully developed college guys who are less likely to bust. Again, I don't think this impacts the individual ratings current/potential, but the OVERALL grade the scout gives.
Since we have a mixed age draft class of college/HS players, it complicates the development rate issue and I pretty much just make all these evaluations ma'self (ie I prefer ABILITY because I typically take a lower potential developed player over a higher potential HS player). Douglass favors TOOLZ
FWIW, the OOTP community forum seems to prefer scouts who favor TOOLZ based on the SUPERSTAR FINDING description, but I honestly don't think it matters unless you're grading players by the STARZ, which I don't do.
Since we have a mixed age draft class of college/HS players, it complicates the development rate issue and I pretty much just make all these evaluations ma'self (ie I prefer ABILITY because I typically take a lower potential developed player over a higher potential HS player). Douglass favors TOOLZ
FWIW, the OOTP community forum seems to prefer scouts who favor TOOLZ based on the SUPERSTAR FINDING description, but I honestly don't think it matters unless you're grading players by the STARZ, which I don't do.
