Weird potentials

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Bronx Bomber03
    Banned
    • Mar 2013
    • 240

    #106
    Originally posted by CKW11
    A bit off topic but where is this video that shows the 40 man rosters?
    I looked it up on YouTube. sorry if this doesn't help.

    Sent via Tapatalk

    Comment

    • yanksdaniel99
      MVP
      • Jun 2011
      • 1185

      #107
      Re: Weird potentials

      Originally posted by CKW11
      A bit off topic but where is this video that shows the 40 man rosters?

      Comment

      • CKW11
        MVP
        • Mar 2009
        • 1540

        #108
        Re: Weird potentials

        Originally posted by yanksdaniel99
        Sweet thanks!

        Comment

        • yanksdaniel99
          MVP
          • Jun 2011
          • 1185

          #109
          Re: Weird potentials

          Originally posted by JayD
          As a Braves fan I must say that seeing Simmons rated as a B made me have that WTF moment
          Yes, I understand. It's odd considering his defensive skills already grade him out as a A, so i dont quite understand why he's a B potential.

          Comment

          • tylerh
            Banned
            • Jan 2011
            • 207

            #110
            Re: Weird potentials

            Eric O'Flaherty at a C potential again is disappointing to say the least. He's been one of the best in the league for a while now.

            Comment

            • timmuh1515
              Pro
              • Aug 2009
              • 546

              #111
              Re: Weird potentials

              I love the Show...but lets be honest. It isn't about screwing up the future franchise...that's reaching way too much.

              They want some control so you have reason to buy next year's game. With Knight's rosters and the ability to edit potential...they're just afraid you won't have a need to drop $60 next year.

              It sucks...but at the end of the day they need to make money

              Comment

              • Cavicchi
                MVP
                • Mar 2004
                • 2841

                #112
                Re: Weird potentials

                Originally posted by yanksdaniel99
                Looking at that makes seeing the OVL more important. Scutaro (37) and Vogelsong (35) are A potential but their OVL is 85 and 86. Thus, it tells us they are declining because of age, as someone said peak years are now 28-31, which doesn't look good for Beltre rated 96. I guess he is going to have a very bad year.

                Comment

                • TheNumber35
                  Just Bad at Everything
                  • Jan 2012
                  • 2708

                  #113
                  Re: Weird potentials

                  Originally posted by Cavicchi
                  Looking at that makes seeing the OVL more important. Scutaro (37) and Vogelsong (35) are A potential but their OVL is 85 and 86. Thus, it tells us they are declining because of age, as someone said peak years are now 28-31, which doesn't look good for Beltre rated 96. I guess he is going to have a very bad year.
                  In theory he should play to his ratings this first season, then decline a bit the next year and so on. Not to mention some people are getting way too caught up on the OVR rating, the ratings that matter most are the individual ratings. I mean, Beltre could drop 5 OVR points but play very similar to how he had previously if the appropriate ratings stay similar.
                  Check out my Houston Astros Dynasties:
                  Holdin' Onto Hope- Completed
                  Holdin' Onto Hope Part 2: Cranes, Trains, and Auto-Explosions- Completed

                  Comment

                  • BrianU
                    MVP
                    • Nov 2008
                    • 1565

                    #114
                    Re: Weird potentials

                    I hope we get a detailed franchise sim post where someone sims 5+ years and lists the ratings of various guys they track so we can see how it really plays out. There is much speculation going on here lets see how it plays out

                    Comment

                    • yanksdaniel99
                      MVP
                      • Jun 2011
                      • 1185

                      #115
                      Re: Weird potentials

                      Originally posted by timmuh1515
                      I love the Show...but lets be honest. It isn't about screwing up the future franchise...that's reaching way too much.

                      They want some control so you have reason to buy next year's game. With Knight's rosters and the ability to edit potential...they're just afraid you won't have a need to drop $60 next year.

                      It sucks...but at the end of the day they need to make money
                      Don't think it's that. The game lives on it's back of thee box features and reputation, a small switch like that is not gunna effect sales.

                      Comment

                      • yanksdaniel99
                        MVP
                        • Jun 2011
                        • 1185

                        #116
                        Re: Weird potentials

                        Originally posted by BrianU
                        I hope we get a detailed franchise sim post where someone sims 5+ years and lists the ratings of various guys they track so we can see how it really plays out. There is much speculation going on here lets see how it plays out
                        Once the game comes out I would expect a few.

                        Comment

                        • timmuh1515
                          Pro
                          • Aug 2009
                          • 546

                          #117
                          Re: Weird potentials

                          Originally posted by yanksdaniel99
                          Don't think it's that. The game lives on it's back of thee box features and reputation, a small switch like that is not gunna effect sales.
                          maybe...although i think it is a pretty big addition for a ton of people. I think you might be surprised at how many sales they lose the first few weeks if rosters were completely editable.

                          Comment

                          • hjgilber
                            Javier Baez Fan Club
                            • Mar 2012
                            • 263

                            #118
                            Re: Weird potentials

                            Originally posted by Cavicchi
                            Looking at that makes seeing the OVL more important. Scutaro (37) and Vogelsong (35) are A potential but their OVL is 85 and 86. Thus, it tells us they are declining because of age, as someone said peak years are now 28-31, which doesn't look good for Beltre rated 96. I guess he is going to have a very bad year.
                            Peak performance years for MLB players is actually 24/25-27/28.

                            Comment

                            • tabarnes19_SDS
                              Game Designer
                              • Feb 2003
                              • 3084

                              #119
                              Re: Weird potentials

                              Originally posted by hjgilber
                              Peak performance years for MLB players is actually 24/25-27/28.
                              This is in regards to potential growth. You should not see players still progressing after 31. Last year players would progress until they hit their potential no matter their age.

                              Comment

                              • hjgilber
                                Javier Baez Fan Club
                                • Mar 2012
                                • 263

                                #120
                                Re: Weird potentials

                                Originally posted by tabarnes19
                                This is in regards to potential growth. You should not see players still progressing after 31. Last year players would progress until they hit their potential no matter their age.
                                You really should see regression starting after 27/28....just being honest about factual analysis. The idea that 28-31 is peak is factually incorrect.

                                Player have their best seasons ages 24-28. After that, numbers regress.

                                ETA: Yeah, I am with you though, in the situation of late bloomers. I don't think ANY players should be going up after 30/31, and MOST players should already be regressing at age 29.
                                Last edited by hjgilber; 03-04-2013, 04:56 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...