Player progression, or lack thereof.

[Gagnon39]

Why are my players, even when performing decent decent or well constantly down in ratings? I'm not taking about aging veterans either. Young players in their early to mid twenties. Constantly -1 here and -2 there.

I really don't understand player progression. Furthermore, it is my understanding that progression is based largely on performance. I think this is inherently flawed. Players don't get better because they bat .300 with 40 home runs. They bat .300 and hit 40 home runs because they get better.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[The Chef]

Re: Player progression, or lack thereof.

Yeah I can't figure out progression or regression. Mitch Haniger turned in a solid first season yet he hasn't improved in a single area even with the training feature playing a part in it, he literally hasn't moved the needle at all in any rating. Then Segura hit's over .300, sets a career high in steals, stays healthy but because his HR's were down and his potential is below his current rating he has been slowly regressing ever since early in season one and not just in power but across the board. Same with James Paxton, potential is below his current rating so he's had the dreaded red arrow down since early in season one, he's struck out 35 and only walked 3 in his first 35 IP of season 2 but it hasn't reversed the regression or even stopped it. Furthermore I believe Paxton is 29 and Segura is 28 so they aren't exactly old. I just deal with it at this point unfortunately.

[Gagnon39]

Re: Player progression, or lack thereof.

Rizzo won NL MVP for me in 2017... he's down two points overall. It's bizarre.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[gp005]

Re: Player progression, or lack thereof.

when i see players perform at a higher than avg pace, i raise ther potential ratings.. this allows them to possibly have highers increases in ratings

i feel this helps with progression, also when players begin to age in your franchise, especially good ones.. you HAVE to raise there potentail to 99 or there ratings will just nose dive..
it can be a little tedious but it works

[kric9132]

Re: Player progression, or lack thereof.

I think the game chooses who they progress. I had bench players progress so much

Sent from my SM-G930V using Operation Sports mobile app

[sydrogerdavid]

Re: Player progression, or lack thereof.

Over my four seasons in my A's carryover franchise, Jharel Cotton has barely progressed at all. He has A potential but is still in the high 60s overall. Lots of my guys would still be stuck down there if I didn't boost their attributes a little bit.

[Jr.]

Re: Player progression, or lack thereof.

Why are my players, even when performing decent decent or well constantly down in ratings? I'm not taking about aging veterans either. Young players in their early to mid twenties. Constantly -1 here and -2 there.

I really don't understand player progression. Furthermore, it is my understanding that progression is based largely on performance. I think this is inherently flawed. Players don't get better because they bat .300 with 40 home runs. They bat .300 and hit 40 home runs because they get better.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

Rizzo won NL MVP for me in 2017... he's down two points overall. It's bizarre.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

You're kind of making your own point here. Rizzo's attributes are decreasing even though he's playing well, which shows that progression/regression isn't really based on performance. Despite him winning the MVP, his skills are deteriorating, which is normal for an aging player.

Rizzo isn't getting better by winning the MVP, he won the MVP because of his skills and now they're slowly deteriorating.


I don't really have a problem with progression/regression. Sometimes it seems like it's performance related, but I still think there's quite a bit of relative randomness to it, which I like.

[TheWarmWind]

Re: Player progression, or lack thereof.

I actually really like the variance in progression I've seen in my carry over. It makes me think there is another layer to progression that we just don't see.

I've seen guys just have "off" years, where despite having great potential and performing well, they actually regress. These guys might come back and have a great year of progression the next year.

I've seen guys that make very little progression for a long time, then suddenly burst forward in ratings one year.

I've seen longshots progress to MLB quality and I've seen near MLB quality languish for years in the minors.

I've seen late bloomers (think like Josh Donaldson) and I've even seen prospects just not pan out at all.

I do wish there was more rhyme or reason to it (I talk about that in the wishlist thread) but overall I'm actually pretty happy with the results. Now regression on the other hand, that pisses me off. Way to consistent and uniform, should be more performance based.

[Gagnon39]

Re: Player progression, or lack thereof.

You're kind of making your own point here. Rizzo's attributes are decreasing even though he's playing well, which shows that progression/regression isn't really based on performance. Despite him winning the MVP, his skills are deteriorating, which is normal for an aging player.

Rizzo isn't getting better by winning the MVP, he won the MVP because of his skills and now they're slowly deteriorating.


I don't really have a problem with progression/regression. Sometimes it seems like it's performance related, but I still think there's quite a bit of relative randomness to it, which I like.

Rizzo's 28.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[RogueHominid]

Re: Player progression, or lack thereof.

I actually really like the variance in progression I've seen in my carry over. It makes me think there is another layer to progression that we just don't see.

I've seen guys just have "off" years, where despite having great potential and performing well, they actually regress. These guys might come back and have a great year of progression the next year.

I've seen guys that make very little progression for a long time, then suddenly burst forward in ratings one year.

I've seen longshots progress to MLB quality and I've seen near MLB quality languish for years in the minors.

I've seen late bloomers (think like Josh Donaldson) and I've even seen prospects just not pan out at all.

I do wish there was more rhyme or reason to it (I talk about that in the wishlist thread) but overall I'm actually pretty happy with the results. Now regression on the other hand, that pisses me off. Way to consistent and uniform, should be more performance based.

Ditto. There are lots of different career arcs in the game. I've seen guys progress significantly from role players to borderline All Stars in their early 30, guys progress quickly and flame out, and guys take a really long time to get major-league ready, despite having POT and age on their side.

I've also seen the "off year" phenomenon where a guy will regress one year but have a bounce-back year and progress.

Within the scope of a season, there are ups and downs, too. I've seen guys lose a few points in a category after the first update and then recoup at least some of those points later in the season due to individual and team performance.

I'm pretty happy with it. The only thing I don't like is P stamina. After 5 years of simming, you have SP on many teams with high-60s stamina because nobody's stamina progresses. That's untenable, so I fix that with an annual pre-season adjustment for players under 25. Other than that, I like the sysetm.

[Jr.]

Re: Player progression, or lack thereof.

Rizzo's 28.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

I know. Maybe his prime was earlier? The game is just providing some variation. Besides, if he's producing, what does it matter? You could always just focus on stats instead of looking at attributes.

[Comduklakis]

Re: Player progression, or lack thereof.

there may be some variation in progression for players in their 20s, but once guys hit 27/28 they regress FAR too fast. And it's almost universal in my experience.

[canes21]

Re: Player progression, or lack thereof.

there may be some variation in progression for players in their 20s, but once guys hit 27/28 they regress FAR too fast. And it's almost universal in my experience.

I have 5 players over 28 on my MLB roster in my franchise. All are progressing at the moment including guys that are 33+. In my experience in 4 seasons the season has provided great variety in.

[Jr.]

Re: Player progression, or lack thereof.

I have 5 players over 28 on my MLB roster in my franchise. All are progressing at the moment including guys that are 33+. In my experience in 4 seasons the season has provided great variety in.

Yeah I think they did progression/regression pretty well overall. The only issue I have is stamina ratings for pitchers only going down

[NimitsTexan]

Re: Player progression, or lack thereof.

Stamina for sure . . . speed as well.

It actually strikes me as quite unrealistic that those two only go down. Since you can see 18 year-olds in the minors, it is conceivable that they could get slightly faster for the first year or two . . . and definitely, they should not be losing speed so quickly.

The stamina thing I really do not get. Pitchers do get switched form relievers to starters later in their career, and pitchers definitely can get stronger and learn to use their arms more efficiently once they get in the league, leading to longer outings. It does not make sense stamina only goes down.