2021 Roster for The Show 2020

[ninertravel]

Re: 2021 Roster for The Show 2020

I gave up trying to get it accurate because of stuffing up Ohtani. By making him a position. Player now you can’t make him a pitcher, sick of them fit 3 years not getting that right.

[Bushido]

Re: 2021 Roster for The Show 2020

How will you handle Corey Kluber? You can’t remove face hair in mlb 20.

I’m not deleting a legit face scan player just to remove a beard. People with beards usually grow them back when they shave it off anyways.

[LADodgerMan]

Re: 2021 Roster for The Show 2020

I’m not deleting a legit face scan player just to remove a beard. People with beards usually grow them back when they shave it off anyways.

Not Yankees.

[Bushido]

Re: 2021 Roster for The Show 2020

Not Yankees.

True, but I prefer not to put a CAP over a face scan.

But you guys are more than free to do so.

[Bushido]

Re: 2021 Roster for The Show 2020

Well, bad news..

My dog (Belgian Malinois) went Velociraptor on my PS4 power cord, which also yanked the PS4 off of a floating entertainment center, crashing down onto a tile floor.

In short, I have to buy another PS4.

Good news, this allows me to collect more data from spring training and implement it into the roster till I go buy a new one this week.

Also, for the few who read/reply this thread. What's your overall stance on potentials? Do you think there's too many A potential prospects in most rosters? What do you think should qualify a prospect as an A potential player?

Another thing, I was thinking of increasing the OV on prospects that are considered teams top prospects, just to get them to The Show quicker. So that they aren't getting called up 2023, when in reality they will come up in 2021 or 2022. Thoughts?

[Funkycorm]

Re: 2021 Roster for The Show 2020

Well, bad news..

My dog (Belgian Malinois) went Velociraptor on my PS4 power cord, which also yanked the PS4 off of a floating entertainment center, crashing down onto a tile floor.

In short, I have to buy another PS4.

Good news, this allows me to collect more data from spring training and implement it into the roster till I go buy a new one this week.

Also, for the few who read/reply this thread. What's your overall stance on potentials? Do you think there's too many A potential prospects in most rosters? What do you think should qualify a prospect as an A potential player?

Another thing, I was thinking of increasing the OV on prospects that are considered teams top prospects, just to get them to The Show quicker. So that they aren't getting called up 2023, when in reality they will come up in 2021 or 2022. Thoughts?

My opinions on this differ from most, but I wanted to share.

Every custom real life roster suffers from the same problem. Potentials are too high. What happens is in 4-5 years you have bottom dwellers that still have multiple 90+ overall players on them and veterans around 30 years old at 86 or so overall sit untouched in free agency. And I do mean every roster that is a real life current roster.

For prospect potentials in game we have to consider a few things:

1. The average rating of a player in game should be around 76. This is from a dev a few years back that said 62 is the average rating in any given attribute outside of durability and stamina.

2. With that number, you can compare that a 76 potential in game compares to a prospect grade of 50.

3. Looking at prospect grades, a grade of 70, 75, or 80 would be considered, elite to perennial MVP. a grade of 65 would be an all-star.

4. When I do and did once on here previously is base potentials off of this. Long story not so short, the highest potential grade in the top 100 prospects is 65.

5. This 65 would equal around an 87 potential. There is not a single A potential prospect in the prospects, and yes that includes Franco.

6. What I did to counter the lack of A potential, is take the top 8 prospects and give them a potential of 90-91 so there would be some A potential prospects.

7. The grading scale does differ slightly for players and pitchers. This is just a general synopsis of what I do.


I know that was long winded but I have spent countless hours in the last 3 years studying progression and regression in this game along with morale impacts and have come to this conclusion over the course of simming close to 75 seasons by now. In future seasons I plan on playing, I spend hours editing each "draft class" at the end of the offseason to help balance the league out long term.

What people want is that 99 overall player prospect like Mike Trout. But that's not how the MLB is. Every team is made up more of average players that come and do their job. That's the hard thing about rosters. We have to embrace the league average but it is hard to do.

[Bushido]

Re: 2021 Roster for The Show 2020

My opinions on this differ from most, but I wanted to share.

Every custom real life roster suffers from the same problem. Potentials are too high. What happens is in 4-5 years you have bottom dwellers that still have multiple 90+ overall players on them and veterans around 30 years old at 86 or so overall sit untouched in free agency. And I do mean every roster that is a real life current roster.

For prospect potentials in game we have to consider a few things:

1. The average rating of a player in game should be around 76. This is from a dev a few years back that said 62 is the average rating in any given attribute outside of durability and stamina.

2. With that number, you can compare that a 76 potential in game compares to a prospect grade of 50.

3. Looking at prospect grades, a grade of 70, 75, or 80 would be considered, elite to perennial MVP. a grade of 65 would be an all-star.

4. When I do and did once on here previously is base potentials off of this. Long story not so short, the highest potential grade in the top 100 prospects is 65.

5. This 65 would equal around an 87 potential. There is not a single A potential prospect in the prospects, and yes that includes Franco.

6. What I did to counter the lack of A potential, is take the top 8 prospects and give them a potential of 90-91 so there would be some A potential prospects.

7. The grading scale does differ slightly for players and pitchers. This is just a general synopsis of what I do.


I know that was long winded but I have spent countless hours in the last 3 years studying progression and regression in this game along with morale impacts and have come to this conclusion over the course of simming close to 75 seasons by now. In future seasons I plan on playing, I spend hours editing each "draft class" at the end of the offseason to help balance the league out long term.

What people want is that 99 overall player prospect like Mike Trout. But that's not how the MLB is. Every team is made up more of average players that come and do their job. That's the hard thing about rosters. We have to embrace the league average but it is hard to do.

This was awesome. I will have some more questions for you when I get to my laptop tonight. Thanks for this post, it was definitely the discussion I wanted and you came out and knocked it out of the park right away.

In your fear sims, about how many 90+ overall players did you see 5-10 years later? How were the prospects progressing to reach their potential?

[Funkycorm]

Re: 2021 Roster for The Show 2020

I will go into more detail tomorrow but here is a breakdown of some numbers.

Number of players over 90(ignoring morale effects)

Default roster: 36
FM: 41

A few sims 8 years into the future with FM from three different files:

62
73
76

Now taking that same FM roster and making potential edits before I simmed 8 years:

59
49
51

----

As you can see, lowering potentials to a better scale which I can share if you would like lowers the high overall players. It is still more than default but you can lower this number to around 45 if you edit some current MLB players but there is no need. I also lowered potential of draft picks in the last 3 as well as well as a bunch of other draft class edits like age, etc.

------

As far as players reaching full potential. Most do come close because players will still grow in attributes until they are 28 years old.

-----
Another important thing to remember is that potential has zero effect on progression or regression.

-----

Now in my franchise I play, the number of 90+ overall players is 41. I am in the year 2027 with that one. I also made yearly adjustments to potential to MLB players across the league but since that is future edits I didn't include it in my base numbers.

----

I super enjoy this topic of building up teams so feel free to ask away.

-----

What I will say is that I have only tested the default rosters the last few years a couple of times and the numbers get more skewed.

-----

Since most people don't play years into the future they never see this issue. There probably aren't many like me that want to play with teams I had full control of rebuilding with other teams that look nothing like their present day counterparts.

[Bushido]

Re: 2021 Roster for The Show 2020

6. What I did to counter the lack of A potential, is take the top 8 prospects and give them a potential of 90-91 so there would be some A potential prospects.

When you say Top 8 prospects, are you referring to the Top 8 in the Top 100, or the Top 8 for each clubs Top 30?

Another important thing to remember is that potential has zero effect on progression or regression.

I thought it did? The higher the potential, the faster the player potentially progresses? I noticed during a few test sims, that A potential players would increase between 3-4 points each off-season, versus B and C players normally increasing by 1-3, with 2 being the most common.

But my issue with this is that the overall for a lot of prospects out the gate are too low, so 99% of them never come close to reaching their potential until 27-28. Then there's a log jam of 80+ overall players at their position with other players ( as you noted in your OP ) which isn't realistic. Like you said, every baseball team is compiled of a lot of average/above-average players that have their niche, and then there's 1-2 (in some rare cases 3-4) players who are All-Star caliber.

We're in an interesting era of baseball where young kids are able to contribute at a high level at an early age (Acuna, Soto, Tatis, Bichette, etc) so I kind of feel inclined to raise the overall to the prospects that are considered the cream of the crop, so that they have a realistic chance of making it to the 26 man roster by 21-22.

I also do what you do with draft classes. I'll take pictures of every pick in the draft summary with my phone, then go back and re-rate players/potentials based on their draft slot. I also change positions a lot, because the CPU has a tendency to draft 2-4 closing pitchers in the 1st round.

I do agree that there are too many A potential players in the rosters, but the average person who downloads a roster is going to be upset if their teams # 11 ranked prospect is a C potential.

What I have been doing was 1-5 (Teams Top 30) were definite A potential prospects. 6-15 were B potential prospects, with a few exceptions of there being an A or C. 16-30 were high C to low C.

But I am definitely intrigued now with toying around with the potentials more based on your first post and the scouting metric grading system in comparison to the potential rating.

[Funkycorm]

Re: 2021 Roster for The Show 2020

6. What I did to counter the lack of A potential, is take the top 8 prospects and give them a potential of 90-91 so there would be some A potential prospects.

When you say Top 8 prospects, are you referring to the Top 8 in the Top 100, or the Top 8 for each clubs Top 30?

Another important thing to remember is that potential has zero effect on progression or regression.

I thought it did? The higher the potential, the faster the player potentially progresses? I noticed during a few test sims, that A potential players would increase between 3-4 points each off-season, versus B and C players normally increasing by 1-3, with 2 being the most common.

But my issue with this is that the overall for a lot of prospects out the gate are too low, so 99% of them never come close to reaching their potential until 27-28. Then there's a log jam of 80+ overall players at their position with other players ( as you noted in your OP ) which isn't realistic. Like you said, every baseball team is compiled of a lot of average/above-average players that have their niche, and then there's 1-2 (in some rare cases 3-4) players who are All-Star caliber.

We're in an interesting era of baseball where young kids are able to contribute at a high level at an early age (Acuna, Soto, Tatis, Bichette, etc) so I kind of feel inclined to raise the overall to the prospects that are considered the cream of the crop, so that they have a realistic chance of making it to the 26 man roster by 21-22.

I also do what you do with draft classes. I'll take pictures of every pick in the draft summary with my phone, then go back and re-rate players/potentials based on their draft slot. I also change positions a lot, because the CPU has a tendency to draft 2-4 closing pitchers in the 1st round.

I do agree that there are too many A potential players in the rosters, but the average person who downloads a roster is going to be upset if their teams # 11 ranked prospect is a C potential.

What I have been doing was 1-5 (Teams Top 30) were definite A potential prospects. 6-15 were B potential prospects, with a few exceptions of there being an A or C. 16-30 were high C to low C.

But I am definitely intrigued now with toying around with the potentials more based on your first post and the scouting metric grading system in comparison to the potential rating.

Unfortunately what you describe about young players is accurate. They contribute younger and require editing for the game to have that happen. Which is something I also do as well, especially when editing draft classes at years end. Though I am old school and hand write it lol.

In reference to your first question, I am talking about top 8 in all of baseball, not just a team.

Re potential affecting progression. I have found that progression is more stats based and all players in A no matter what go up about 3 points per year. This is an inherent problem with progression. It is way to slow.

I totally get that people don't want to see their top 15 prospects on their team be anything under a B potential.

It's part of the reason why my theories on this topic are not always well received.

I think you can find a middle ground with prospects potentials and still do top 5 with A potential per team. I think it will require some ratings improvement as you mentioned.

Simply put, 90 man rosters just aren't enough to stop clogging of players.

In the end this is the solution I came up with that works for me. If you want me to go over more of my edits, etc, let me know and I can write them up after work tomorrow.

[Funkycorm]

Re: 2021 Roster for The Show 2020

The main tell tale sign of an unbalanced roster isn't those players over 90. It's the sheer number over 80.

With most rosters you see full rotations have pitchers rated 84+ and full starting nine over 80 plus others in their 80s riding the bench once you are about 6 years in.

The prospect edits is the tip of the iceberg of the potential edits I did. In my last roster base I edited, I edited over 1500 player potentials.

That is where my fix truly came in and where I lose most people. There are a lot of young MLB players with potential in the mid 90s.

Back to the prospects. As an example, back in 2019, Nolan Jones was a 55 grade prospect. Based on 50 being average and a 76 overall, he should have had about a potential of 80 and that is what I gave him. Now in the FM roster, he had a potential of 91 which would equal a prospect grade of 70 per my scale.

This is where the discrepancy comes in. You have an above average prospect being given elite level potential.

This is only one example of countless others but I wanted to share it so I could illustrate my point better.

[Bushido]

Re: 2021 Roster for The Show 2020

Unfortunately what you describe about young players is accurate. They contribute younger and require editing for the game to have that happen. Which is something I also do as well, especially when editing draft classes at years end. Though I am old school and hand write it lol.

In reference to your first question, I am talking about top 8 in all of baseball, not just a team.

Re potential affecting progression. I have found that progression is more stats based and all players in A no matter what go up about 3 points per year. This is an inherent problem with progression. It is way to slow.

I totally get that people don't want to see their top 15 prospects on their team be anything under a B potential.

It's part of the reason why my theories on this topic are not always well received.

I think you can find a middle ground with prospects potentials and still do top 5 with A potential per team. I think it will require some ratings improvement as you mentioned.

Simply put, 90 man rosters just aren't enough to stop clogging of players.

In the end this is the solution I came up with that works for me. If you want me to go over more of my edits, etc, let me know and I can write them up after work tomorrow.

Definitely!

I think me and you are on the same page in what we want from this game.

The more data, the better it is for me.

I have no intention on buying 2021, so I will go DEEP into my franchise when I finish this roster. And I'm all about realism, and I have been chewing on the idea of cutting back on the A and B potential prospects, to eliminate having rosters log jammed with 80+ players by the time you reach 2025 and beyond.

We both agree that we need to "overrate" certain prospects, to ensure that they get called up around 21-22.

Jasson Dominguez for example (not a Yankees fan, by the way - Go Nats!) has a 60 in power, 65 in run, 60 arm, 55 hit, 55 field. He's 18 years old in 2021. I feel like he's the next International Superstar (besides Franco), along the lines of Ronald Acuna Jr, Fernando Tatis, and Juan Soto. I noticed some of my personal favorite roster creators have had him as high as 76 overall. At first, I was like an 18 year old at 76? Then I did the math +3 +3 +3 (the average increase for A potential) and you're looking at an 85 overall for a 21 year old, which is about on par with what Acuna Jr and Tatis Jr were when they hit the big leagues. But it's all about guessing and projecting, honestly.

In the past I have used MLB.com Top 30 as a reference point, but I think I'm going to go with prospects1500.com and do potentials based on their rankings.

They break it down by Tiers. Here's a copy and paste.


Tier 1: Players with high expectations of both making the majors and playing at an All-Star level for a number of years

Tier 2: Players with an above average expectation of making the majors and being a solid contributor

Tier 3: Players with an average expectation of making the majors and being a solid contributor

Tier 4: Players who have the potential of making the majors, or have high likelihood of making the majors but providing minimal impact (e.g. middle reliever, low-ceiling UT guys)

Tier 5: Players who are worth keeping an eye on, but likely to never make a team’s 40-man roster

Let's use the Rays as an example...

TIER 1

1. Wander Franco
2. Randy Arozarena
3. Vidal Brujan
4. Luis Patiño

TIER 2

5. Josh Lowe
6. Brendan McKay
7. Shane McClanahan
8. Heriberto Hernandez
9. Shane Baz
10. Xavier Edwards
11. Carlos Colmenarez
12. Nick Bitsko
13. Greg Jones
14. Joe Ryan
15. Cole Wilcox
16. Brent Honeywell Jr
17. Pete Fairbanks

ETC ETC ETC

So Tier 1 prospects would be A potentials

Tier 2 would be B potentials (mostly -- some of the lower end Tier 2 could be high C potentials)

Tier 3 would be C potentials

Obviously, there will be some exceptions, for example, international free agents.

Someone like Yiddi Cappe (Marlins) is ranked 21st as a Tier 3 prospect on their 2021 Top 50 for the Marlins. But I think he's someone who will be a Tier 2 prospect for sure, with the potential to end up being a Tier 1 prospect by the time he's 19-21. So what do you do? Give him an 85-86 potential at 17? Or do you give him an A potential?

Scouting Report from prospects1500 and MLB.com

1500.com

"21. Yiddi Cappe, SS (2020 Rank N/A)
Age: 18
Highest Level: Dominican
Cappe is one of the top international prospects and has drawn comparisons to Derek Jeter and Carlos Correa thanks to his projectable 6’3 frame. The Marlins awarded the SS with a $3.5M signing bonus and he is considered to be close to major league ready. Scouts agree that he does not have a “stand out” tool but he projects as above average tools across the board with a great feel for the strike zone. Cappe has a plus arm, good hands and superior footwork in the field, scouts are torn on where he ends up playing as he may outgrow the position but time will tell. Depending on how his stateside debut goes he could move swiftly."

[Funkycorm]

Re: 2021 Roster for The Show 2020

I like the tier concept. Never seen that before. I will definitely have to look at it.

One thing I did when I lowered a prospects potential, I never went down 2 grades. Meaning if a prospect was an A prospect on a roster but their potential would have been 76(average), I made them have an 80 instead. Kind of like what you said, people want to play with their favorite prospects and don't want them to be super low potential.

We discussed improving ratings of prospects initially in the roster. I have a whole slew of edits I do for future draft classes as well. Also, so you continue to get the yearly young future star.

I am going to do a bigger write up of those edits that I do and how I base potentials of prospect grades later on today/tonight for you.

[Funkycorm]

Re: 2021 Roster for The Show 2020

So I don't keep spamming your thread so people can discuss the roster with you, I am going to create a new thread tonight or likely tomorrow once I finish writing 2 pretty long posts up.

I will let you know when I do that so we can talk there and I won't hijack your thread anymore than I have lol

[tiptonhr]

Re: 2021 Roster for The Show 2020

That sucks about your Playstation, man.