Young Players Declining

[Mackrel829]

I'm playing as the Phillies and I was checking out Bobby Dalbec as a possible trade target. I'm not sure what OVR he started at but he has the red arrow next to it indicating that his OVR has gone down. He is also down 2-3 points for basically every one of his ratings.

Put simply, what exactly does this mean?

His stats this season aren't horrible (13HRs, low 720ish OPS iirc) so it seems strange to put it down to performance. His potential is a C so I guess his potential could be lower than his overall and he's regressing towards it. He's only a 74 OVR though (iirc) and I wouldn't imagine bus potential is lower than that. I didn't think to check out games played so could it be that he's just sitting too much?

Then secondly, what's likely to happen if I trade for him? Is he going to continue losing rating points now that the process has begun? If I play him more and he plays well, will he bounce back and regain some ratings?

Basically is it worth trading for a young player who is declining or is that a massive red flag?

[JoshC1977]

Re: Young Players Declining

I'm playing as the Phillies and I was checking out Bobby Dalbec as a possible trade target. I'm not sure what OVR he started at but he has the red arrow next to it indicating that his OVR has gone down. He is also down 2-3 points for basically every one of his ratings.

Put simply, what exactly does this mean?

His stats this season aren't horrible (13HRs, low 720ish OPS iirc) so it seems strange to put it down to performance. His potential is a C so I guess his potential could be lower than his overall and he's regressing towards it. He's only a 74 OVR though (iirc) and I wouldn't imagine bus potential is lower than that. I didn't think to check out games played so could it be that he's just sitting too much?

Then secondly, what's likely to happen if I trade for him? Is he going to continue losing rating points now that the process has begun? If I play him more and he plays well, will he bounce back and regain some ratings?

Basically is it worth trading for a young player who is declining or is that a massive red flag?

A .720 OPS is slightly below average and combine that with C potential; it's definitely reasonable - Age 26/27 is a pretty typical career 'peak' year for many players so he isn't exactly a young pup. From a real life perspective, we may very well look back at his 2021 numbers (he has certainly struggled in 2022).

Can you turn it around with him? Sure. You start to rake with him, absolutely he can rebound and re-gain those ratings losses and possibly raise his potential which could extend his career. He might be worth a flier; but I would treat him like a Quad-A guy in negotiating a deal, not like a prospect.

[Mackrel829]

Re: Young Players Declining

A .720 OPS is slightly below average and combine that with C potential; it's definitely reasonable - Age 26/27 is a pretty typical career 'peak' year for many players so he isn't exactly a young pup. From a real life perspective, we may very well look back at his 2021 numbers (he has certainly struggled in 2022).

Can you turn it around with him? Sure. You start to rake with him, absolutely he can rebound and re-gain those ratings losses and possibly raise his potential which could extend his career. He might be worth a flier; but I would treat him like a Quad-A guy in negotiating a deal, not like a prospect.

Appreciate it!

I was looking at pretty much a straight swap for Alec Bohm. Both change of scenery candidates and Bohm is doing nothing for me.

[ty5oke]

Re: Young Players Declining

Sounds like a pretty even deal to me.

[GoBlue81188]

Re: Young Players Declining

While certainly not perfect, I do like the fact that these things happen even with A/B "prospect" types. It gives a nice mix of breakouts and "busts". It wouldn't be very fun if every A/B prospect had a perfect upward trajectory.

With that said, performance definitely will help slow a decline or speed up an ascending player.

I'm seeing my young staff in Detroit excel (Mize, Skubal in MLB, Jobe in the minors), they are all ascending very quickly. On the other hand, Torkelson who has been at the mendoza line all year isn't gaining attributes nearly as quickly.

[jack1535]

Re: Young Players Declining

The regression is not done well in this. Players will start going down even with extremely good seasons once they hit some arbitrary service time they have programmed. Vlad Jr is regressing for me despite having a 1.100+ OPS in the ywar 2025

It’s been something so many franchise creators on YouTube and just franchise players have complained about.

You can edit ratings back up but you’ll have to continuously keep doing it all year

[Mackrel829]

Re: Young Players Declining

While certainly not perfect, I do like the fact that these things happen even with A/B "prospect" types. It gives a nice mix of breakouts and "busts". It wouldn't be very fun if every A/B prospect had a perfect upward trajectory.

With that said, performance definitely will help slow a decline or speed up an ascending player.

I'm seeing my young staff in Detroit excel (Mize, Skubal in MLB, Jobe in the minors), they are all ascending very quickly. On the other hand, Torkelson who has been at the mendoza line all year isn't gaining attributes nearly as quickly.

I'd personally like it if there was a lot more fluctuation in development and regression. You're definitely right about the upward trajectories. It's boring knowing that your 71 OVR, A POT draft pick is guaranteed to be a stud. It doesn't work that way whatsoever in real life.

[Therebelyell626]

Re: Young Players Declining

The regression is not done well in this. Players will start going down even with extremely good seasons once they hit some arbitrary service time they have programmed. Vlad Jr is regressing for me despite having a 1.100+ OPS in the ywar 2025

It’s been something so many franchise creators on YouTube and just franchise players have complained about.

You can edit ratings back up but you’ll have to continuously keep doing it all year

Except it is not arbitrary at all. Even though potential shows as a letter grade in the roster menu, every player has an actual numerical value tied to their potential as such:

D potential: 50-69
C potential: 70-79
B potential: 80-89
A potential: 90-99

This is important because potential essentially works as an overall cap for players. So if a player reaches their max potential value as their overall, they will decrease in attributes to accommodate increases in others. For example if your player reaches their max overall of 90 and their potential is 90. If they are raking they will probably increase in hitting attributes such as contact, power, vision and discipline (if they are hitting for average and not striking out a ton), but most likely decrease in fielding or speed attributes to accommodate these improvements.

The good news is that potential seems to be more dynamic this year. I have seen potential increases and decrease from one season to a next outside of the usual in season increases we have gotten in years past. You know that little green or red arrow you get in season showing their potential going up and down.

With the switch to production based progression we got a few good changes, but also a few negatives. The good: progression is not linear. Yeah have seen attribute increases of up to 12-20 in any given category based on how a player performs. The bad: training is basically useless and only really helps players in A ball.

All in all this year has been the best I have seen for progression/regression in a long time as potential seems to be more dynamic

[jcar0725]

Re: Young Players Declining

I really think people have to not pay attention to a players rating and if some attributes are rising or falling. If this was just all done under the hood then you would base player decisions on performance alone and maybe age.

But we get caught up looking at those ratings and attributes and it ruins part of the fun.

Sent from my thoughts

[Mackrel829]

Re: Young Players Declining

Except it is not arbitrary at all. Even though potential shows as a letter grade in the roster menu, every player has an actual numerical value tied to their potential as such:

D potential: 50-69
C potential: 70-79
B potential: 80-89
A potential: 90-99

This is important because potential essentially works as an overall cap for players. So if a player reaches their max potential value as their overall, they will decrease in attributes to accommodate increases in others. For example if your player reaches their max overall of 90 and their potential is 90. If they are raking they will probably increase in hitting attributes such as contact, power, vision and discipline (if they are hitting for average and not striking out a ton), but most likely decrease in fielding or speed attributes to accommodate these improvements.

The good news is that potential seems to be more dynamic this year. I have seen potential increases and decrease from one season to a next outside of the usual in season increases we have gotten in years past. You know that little green or red arrow you get in season showing their potential going up and down.

With the switch to production based progression we got a few good changes, but also a few negatives. The good: progression is not linear. Yeah have seen attribute increases of up to 12-20 in any given category based on how a player performs. The bad: training is basically useless and only really helps players in A ball.

All in all this year has been the best I have seen for progression/regression in a long time as potential seems to be more dynamic

I always thought the red and green arrows were indicating a decrease or increase in overall. Is that not the case?

I really think people have to not pay attention to a players rating and if some attributes are rising or falling. If this was just all done under the hood then you would base player decisions on performance alone and maybe age.

But we get caught up looking at those ratings and attributes and it ruins part of the fun.

Sent from my thoughts

I agree to some extent but the ratings give me the best picture of how I can expect to perform with the player when I use them. In this case, since he's not in my team, looking at stats only tells me how the player is performing in simulated games. This might be reflective of his ratings but it might not.

[JoshC1977]

Re: Young Players Declining

I really think people have to not pay attention to a players rating and if some attributes are rising or falling. If this was just all done under the hood then you would base player decisions on performance alone and maybe age.

But we get caught up looking at those ratings and attributes and it ruins part of the fun.

I 100% agree with this. A couple of ratings points here and there have such a minor impact on performance. It's obsessing over minutiae. To me, a lot of those little rating drops are more like wear-and-tear, not true regression. REAL regression is when guys start dropping ratings in chunks; a -1 or -2 is not.

People get too caught up in the "video game mechanics" of how things work vs evaluating things on a more 'real life' basis. It's no small wonder that so many people complain about 'lack of immersion' when their entire mindset is built around how the game works.

[Therebelyell626]

Re: Young Players Declining

I always thought the red and green arrows were indicating a decrease or increase in overall. Is that not the case?
not.

Yes, you will see the same arrows next to potential in the rare case it goes up or down in season. Overall increases are more likely to happen so you will more than likely see them next to overall more commonly

[Mackrel829]

Re: Young Players Declining

Yes, you will see the same arrows next to potential in the rare case it goes up or down in season. Overall increases are more likely to happen so you will more than likely see them next to overall more commonly

Ah I see. Appreciate the info!