Player progression, or lack thereof.

[Other Guy]

Re: Player progression, or lack thereof.

I see that may people in this thread like the randomness of the progression system. In a way, I do too. It mimics the randomness of real baseball almost perfectly. My only gripe is that if progression is going to be random, then why have potential ratings? Isn't the purpose of the potential ratings to determine how the player will progress? I would suggest that players progress according to their potential rating, or just scrap the ratings and let it be random.

Also, has anyone found a good workaround for speed loss? I can understand players losing some speed as they age, but I just had a 24 year old lose 6 points in a single season.

[canes21]

Re: Player progression, or lack thereof.

I see that may people in this thread like the randomness of the progression system. In a way, I do too. It mimics the randomness of real baseball almost perfectly. My only gripe is that if progression is going to be random, then why have potential ratings? Isn't the purpose of the potential ratings to determine how the player will progress? I would suggest that players progress according to their potential rating, or just scrap the ratings and let it be random.

Also, has anyone found a good workaround for speed loss? I can understand players losing some speed as they age, but I just had a 24 year old lose 6 points in a single season.

Because in real life scouts give players a ceiling all of the time that is more or less a potential rating. It gives you an idea of has a chance to put it together to become an everyday player, superstar, etc. much like in real life we value different prospects independently because each one has a different ceiling.

If we had no potential rating in this you'd be building a team completely blind which takes away from the realism.A better way in my opinion to attack your issue with potential is to move to the 20-80 scale for every player and not just the players you are currently scouting. That way instead of seeing A potential or B potential you see a guy has a 75/80 ceiling in certain categories and you can read that just like real life as the guy having the ability to become elite in whatever skill it is if he pans out perfectly.

I like the current system, I would prefer to move to a 20-80 scale for everything, but as of right now seeing A potential to me doesn't bother me that much and I also like how I can have 5 A potential guys in my system and in 5 years I can see 1 guy reach that ceiling, I can see all of them, only 3, etc. The randomness is great, the initial ratings out of the draft are the biggest issue in my opinion. The actual growth year to year seems to be done well to me, it's the skill level and ages out of the draft that are off.

[bspring3]

Player progression, or lack thereof.

To those people asking for huge jumps, they do happen. I had a drafted player start at 58 overall with 88 potential and was 18 years old. After one season at AA he was up to 69 overall. After one season at AAA, he was up to 78 overall. Next season he started at MLB level and is up to 86 overall as a 20 year old at the end of the season.

Now this isn't quite the Judge/Bellinger model but it is very large jumps year to year in ability.

I also had a RP who was 60 overall with 74 potential make similar but smaller jumps and was at his potential in two years.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[bigd51]

Re: Player progression, or lack thereof.

Before I start, I want to make it clear that I'm a sim-first franchise player; meaning I usually start a franchise and simulate the majority of each season while playing some games in between because I prefer to watch my drafted players careers play out more than the real-life players already in the game. And I generally go through at least 6 different franchises, 8 or so seasons deep in each. So 48 seasons worth of simulating/playing. This gives me a basic idea of how things work/play out during the season/offseason.

Here's the thing... you can easily look at pitcher progression and see the flaw in the system. Position players have that "random" progression/regression... but only to a certain extent, meaning if they have C or B potential ratings. But if they have A potentials and haven't met them yet, they are always very slow and gradual across the attribute board. If they've met their A potential rating, they'll usually hover around that rating throughout their career or regress. Rarely do they ever progress past their "ceiling"

Ender Enciarte always hits his 89 potential mark rapidly. Yasiel Puig will almost always progress rapidly. On the other hand, Anthony Rizzo will almost always regress in overall and potential. Freddie Freeman almost always regresses in overall and potential. Corey Seager can average 30+ HR's batting .280+ and almost always regress in potential and overall. Very rarely do these players go past or even stay around their ceiling unless the poorly executed morale system boosts them above it.

Meanwhile, pitchers are on an island of steady increase throughout their entire careers. C's and B's progress faster than A's, but stats never matter when it comes to them, and I'll give you the most clear-cut example I've ever seen in Lucas Giolito with the White Sox.

I'm in year 2025 in my current franchise, okay. This guy has been a full-time starter for the Sox for the last 7 years and his career stats are as follows:

50 wins, 111 losses (3-21 is his career worst!)
ERA - 5.07 (7.49 career worst!)
WHIP - 1.52
Games started - 233
Quality starts - 89

And he's only 30. Care to guess what his overall and potential ratings are now?

95 overall and potential... and just got a 6 year deal from the Yankees for $28 mil average per.

Relief pitchers rise/fall just as fast as position players, though. Mauricio Cabrera (Braves) for example, went from C potential to B potential back to C potential and again to B potential over the course of one steady 2.40 ERA season, but only after he initially reached his potential mark.

Same for Closers. Steady progress until they reach their potential, then random up and downs.

And don't even get me started on the countless number of all pitchers who see steady increase in ratings past 32-35 years of age...

Just like it takes many games to figure out sliders, it also takes many seasons to figure out player progression, and I'm telling you from experience, player progression isn't as "random" as many people believe it to be. And in the case of Lucas Giolito and pitchers alike, it does matter when it comes to contract time because contracts and now morale are based solely on overall ratings and potentials. You simply can't have teams paying career 5 ERA guys $28 mil per year into their late 30's just because a broken overall rating system tells them to regardless of performance.