Prefer Ratings or No Ratings in Online Leagues?

[kq76]

If you wanted to join an online league and there were 2 that you liked the best and they were exactly the same in every conceivable way except A had all ratings while B had no ratings, which would you choose, and why? You may assume that for the sake of argument all A's ratings are on a 1-10 scale, but would your answer change if the rating scale was different?

EDIT: For clarification, I meant no ratings at all by "no ratings" not "just talent". I would think the arguments against current ratings (ability) would go just as well against potential ratings (talent). If for some reason you prefer just talent over all or nothing then perhaps you could say why.

[disposableheros]

im in 1 league that uses talent only (WHBL) and i like it a lot. it gives you an idea of what the potential of the player is without showing where he is at the moment. it takes more analysis and im an analysis freak.

going with no ratings at all leaves you thinking short-term (what's he doing now and whats he done in the past) compared to a talent only league in which you can still semi think long-term.

[jm47048]

I like ratings because in real life you would be able to see every aspect of a players current game, and knowing their potential does not mean they will ever reach that potential. A 5-Gold star player might tank while a 1-blue star prospect might make the hall of fame. You never really can tell. The ratings are relaible but they don't account for possible injuries, etc.