Your guys thoughts on rookies entering a franchise (rating wise)

[jsou4646]

I personally think that rookies that are coming into a franchise are rated to high esspecially with certain individual attributes. In real life kids that are drafted progress to the Majors for at least 1 to five or six years before they’re ready to compete in the majors. Some guys I’ll beit not a lot are rated in the 60s 70s upper 50s in certain attributes which to me seems somewhat unrealistic. I’m not saying two or three guys could be that way, but not multiple guys in the draft class. For me I wish they came in anywhere from upper 30s, mid 40s, to mid-50s at the most. I wish they had to work their way up through the minors For at least two or three years like real players do. What do you guys think, do you like it the way it is or should the players be rated lower then progress at more of a natural realistic rate.

[JoshC1977]

Re: Your guys thoughts on rookies entering a franchise (rating wise)

An older high-end college player could very well have some ratings at draft-time in the 50s/60s (with a number of them a fair bit lower). The younger guys should be a fair bit lower in general.

Things like raw power and speed could very well be fairly high, but mitigated by lower ratings in areas like Discipline, Vision, SB Ability which diminish the in-game utility of those other ratings.

I haven't dug enough into whether or not The Show reflects this well, so I can't really answer your general question....just speaking more in hypotheticals....

[livinitup921]

Re: Your guys thoughts on rookies entering a franchise (rating wise)

You also have to think bout that they don't include all the minor leagues. They don't have short A and Long A ball and such so they could be a little higher rating cuz they have to skip over the time they would spend in those leagues.

twitch.com/livinitup921

[jsou4646]

Re: Your guys thoughts on rookies entering a franchise (rating wise)

You also have to think bout that they don't include all the minor leagues. They don't have short A and Long A ball and such so they could be a little higher rating cuz they have to skip over the time they would spend in those leagues.

twitch.com/livinitup921

True, but I’ve seen a lot of 18yr olds with ratings in the 50s and 60s. I don’t think it’s horrible, i just hate seeing so many studs in the first few years that it negates the mid level vets in the game. I know real life baseball is trending this way but guys still have to get some seasoning before the entering the show.

[jsou4646]

Re: Your guys thoughts on rookies entering a franchise (rating wise)

To me it’s more of a problem that guys get called up at 20-21. This is rare irl but it happens a lot in the game.

I think if you “rated” real life players the way we do in game, you’d see a lot of prospects in the minors with higher ovr ratings than some MLB guys. But irl we debut guys according to their own personal development scale and not some arbitrary ovr rating.

You’d also see a lot of ageing vets irl with high contact and/or power numbers that didn’t actually translate to good performance like they do in The Show.

To make the prospect path more realistic they need 125 man rosters, the ability to have 16 and 17 y/olds, and the ratings need an overhaul.

Scrap the potential slider and have potential just be a calculated display like overall is now. So the actual size of the slider bar can be edited between 20 and 80 (80-20 scale). The bigger the slider, the more potential a player has in that exact rating.

Then the actual slider can fill up as much as the slider allows. If it allows 60 and your player is at 60 then you know he isn’t getting any better at that specific trait.

Ovr, potential, and % of potential met are all calculated displayed that cannot be changed.























Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

Good points. Having guys being mlb ready and called up so quickly really kills of the mid range free agent players. Kind of like real life this year i guess.

[wellred]

Re: Your guys thoughts on rookies entering a franchise (rating wise)

I never make too much of a big deal on the OVR in sports games. I know that's what a lot of people do and look at exclusively, but in today's game of baseball especially, it goes against the analytic grain and also the conventional wisdom. I'm always looking for value where it's cheap. Like durability. The more a guy is durable, the more he's going to have opportunities in my franchise both due to being on the field more and me valuing him as a player. There's no point in having an A potential prospect stud if he has a durability rating of 1. Unless you leave him in A ball for awhile to bump that up he's never gonna be on the field for long. I would trade a player like that ASAP regardless of his age and OVR.

As far as how rookies are graded in the game, it probably could be refined and improved some but it's not a nagging issue for me. Guys get called up when they get called up. What bothers me more is too many experienced players retiring early when they could clearly still be an asset to a team.

I guess you could say the former leads to the latter but I don't really think that's the issue. Guys just shouldn't be purged from the FA list every year due to "poor free agent market" while 30 year old never has been's never will be's get to stay in double A for 3 more years. Those are the guys who should be retiring to clear roster spots for vets, even if it's just minor league depth.