Scouting Question

[NDAlum]

Quote: Originally Posted by tessl

I don't understand the desire to randomize the game. What is the value of scouting if progression is going to be that random?

100% disagree

You still get in the ballpark. The draft in ANY sports isn't an exact science and it's represented pretty damn well in this game.

Here are some #1 picks of the past 20+ years who didn't do much:

1991 - Brien Taylor LHP - never made it to the MLB
1994 - Paul Wilson RHP - very average pitcher in the MLB
1996 - Kris Benson RHP - 70-75 record...decent career but pretty average
1997 - Matt Anderson RHP - 5.19 Career ERA and injuries killed him arm (threw 100 MPH)
2002 - Bryan Bullington RHP - 1-9 overall record in bigs
2004 - Matt Bush SS - No comment needed
2006 - Luke Hochevar RHP - 5+ ERA and 43-61 record...pretty average
2008 - Tim Beckham SS - hasn't progressed and injuries/drug violations keep him down

I sincerely hope you are in the overwhelmingly LARGE minority with your feelings on this matter

[StevenSD]

I knew Matt Bush would make it on that list - smh

[cardinalbird5]

Quote: Originally Posted by NDAlum

100% disagree You still get in the ballpark. The draft in ANY sports isn't an exact science and it's represented pretty damn well in this game. Here are some #1 picks of the past 20+ years who didn't do much: 1991 - Brien Taylor LHP - never made it to the MLB 1994 - Paul Wilson RHP - very average pitcher in the MLB 1996 - Kris Benson RHP - 70-75 record...decent career but pretty average 1997 - Matt Anderson RHP - 5.19 Career ERA and injuries killed him arm (threw 100 MPH) 2002 - Bryan Bullington RHP - 1-9 overall record in bigs 2004 - Matt Bush SS - No comment needed 2006 - Luke Hochevar RHP - 5+ ERA and 43-61 record...pretty average 2008 - Tim Beckham SS - hasn't progressed and injuries/drug violations keep him down I sincerely hope you are in the overwhelmingly LARGE minority with your feelings on this matter

Of course the first pick will not always an amazing superstar. You basically just chose the worst ones and listed them to support your argument.

First...you can't really compare the MLB draft to any other sport or league due to the nature of the game and industry. It is just totally different. However, first round picks have exponentially been better than 2nd round and so on.......So let's not act like it is totally random. There are many great 1st round and top draft picks that have great success.

I am neither agreeing or disagreeing with your original statement in that the draft is not an exact science or that it is well represented in this game. I just don't like manipulative data. I haven't play franchise mode enough to see how well prospects turn out.

I just know from data that 1st round picks have the highest chance to succeed and pretty much after the 2nd round anything can happen. There are busts in every sport, but baseball will always lead the way since it is hard to scout so many players and put them in a relative comparison.

[tessl]

Quote: Originally Posted by NDAlum

100% disagree You still get in the ballpark. The draft in ANY sports isn't an exact science and it's represented pretty damn well in this game. Here are some #1 picks of the past 20+ years who didn't do much: 1991 - Brien Taylor LHP - never made it to the MLB 1994 - Paul Wilson RHP - very average pitcher in the MLB 1996 - Kris Benson RHP - 70-75 record...decent career but pretty average 1997 - Matt Anderson RHP - 5.19 Career ERA and injuries killed him arm (threw 100 MPH) 2002 - Bryan Bullington RHP - 1-9 overall record in bigs 2004 - Matt Bush SS - No comment needed 2006 - Luke Hochevar RHP - 5+ ERA and 43-61 record...pretty average 2008 - Tim Beckham SS - hasn't progressed and injuries/drug violations keep him down I sincerely hope you are in the overwhelmingly LARGE minority with your feelings on this matter

Maybe it is my inability to explain but I have very little confidence people on this forum will be able to comprehend this but I'll try.

There are 40 picks a year plus international signings in MLB. That is a far greater pool than mlbts has to develop players from. In mlbts there are 5 or 6 picks a year and no international signings. If mlbts replicates MLB in the failure rate of prospects there will be an inadequate number of MLB quality players to fill the 700+ needed for 30 MLB teams each with a 25 man roster. MLB teams bring in 50 or more new players a year when international signings are included. They sign an average of 1,200 players from the Dominican annuallyIn the show you get 5 or 6.

You have succeeded as those who wanted to reduce the effectiveness of CPU hitters have done. I posted results http://www.operationsports.com/forum...-per-game.html of a study I did which detailed the decreased effectiveness of CPU hitters. In manage mode every hitter is a CPU hitter.

The sim engine and game engine are different entities. For the 29 CPU teams in a franchise the only time their hitters are handicapped is when they are playing my team. The other 150 or so games a year they are simming and not impacted. Therefore the CPU hitters progress normally while the human hitters with poor hitting stats regress because progression is now based upon performance. Hitting in simmed games is far better than in games played.

For those who control the pitcher they are probably thrilled because the devs handicapped the CPU hitters for them. For those who claim to be manage mode players but in reality are simming most of their games they don't see a problem either. For me, as a person who plays 100% of the games in manage mode simming nothing, with teams scoring 1 or fewer runs 55% of the time and my hitters all performing poorly compared to the CPU teams and therefore regressing, the game is broken as a result.

Sometimes the best thing the devs can do is leave the game alone. mlbts14 is a perfect example of that.

[Jr.]

Quote: Originally Posted by tessl

Maybe it is my inability to explain but I have very little confidence people on this forum will be able to comprehend this but I'll try. There are 40 picks a year plus international signings in MLB. That is a far greater pool than mlbts has to develop players from. In mlbts there are 5 or 6 picks a year and no international signings. If mlbts replicates MLB in the failure rate of prospects there will be an inadequate number of MLB quality players to fill the 700+ needed for 30 MLB teams each with a 25 man roster. MLB teams bring in 50 or more new players a year when international signings are included. In the show you get 5 or 6. You have succeeded as those who wanted to reduce the effectiveness of CPU hitters have done. I posted results [=http://www.operationsports.com/forums/mlb-show/746205-chased-pitches-runs-per-game.html]here[/url]of a study I did which detailed the decreased effectiveness of CPU hitters. In manage mode every hitter is a CPU hitter. The sim engine and game engine are different entities. For the 29 CPU teams in a franchise the only time their hitters are handicapped is when they are playing my team. The other 150 or so games a year they are simming and not impacted. Therefore the CPU hitters progress normally while the human hitters with poor hitting stats regress because progression is now based upon performance. Hitting in simmed games is far better than in games played. For those who control the pitcher they are probably thrilled because the devs handicapped the CPU hitters for them. For those who claim to be manage mode players but in reality are simming most of their games they don't see a problem either. For me, as a person who plays 100% of the games in manage mode simming nothing, with teams scoring 1 or fewer runs 55% of the time and my hitters all performing poorly compared to the CPU teams and therefore regressing, the game is broken as a result. Sometimes the best thing the devs can do is leave the game alone. mlbts14 is a perfect example of that.

Have you tried playing on HOF difficulty? I'm on that for pitching and I'm not seeing that many chased pitches at all.

[tessl]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jr.

Have you tried playing on HOF difficulty? I'm on that for pitching and I'm not seeing that many chased pitches at all.

Difficulty does not make a difference in manage mode.

[Jr.]

Quote: Originally Posted by tessl

Difficulty does not make a difference in manage mode.

Ah ok. Don't know what to tell you then.

[NDAlum]

Quote: Originally Posted by tessl

Maybe it is my inability to explain but I have very little confidence people on this forum will be able to comprehend this but I'll try. There are 40 picks a year plus international signings in MLB. That is a far greater pool than mlbts has to develop players from. In mlbts there are 5 or 6 picks a year and no international signings. If mlbts replicates MLB in the failure rate of prospects there will be an inadequate number of MLB quality players to fill the 700+ needed for 30 MLB teams each with a 25 man roster. MLB teams bring in 50 or more new players a year when international signings are included. They sign an average of 1,200 players from the Dominican annuallyIn the show you get 5 or 6. You have succeeded as those who wanted to reduce the effectiveness of CPU hitters have done. I posted results http://www.operationsports.com/forum...-per-game.html of a study I did which detailed the decreased effectiveness of CPU hitters. In manage mode every hitter is a CPU hitter. The sim engine and game engine are different entities. For the 29 CPU teams in a franchise the only time their hitters are handicapped is when they are playing my team. The other 150 or so games a year they are simming and not impacted. Therefore the CPU hitters progress normally while the human hitters with poor hitting stats regress because progression is now based upon performance. Hitting in simmed games is far better than in games played. For those who control the pitcher they are probably thrilled because the devs handicapped the CPU hitters for them. For those who claim to be manage mode players but in reality are simming most of their games they don't see a problem either. For me, as a person who plays 100% of the games in manage mode simming nothing, with teams scoring 1 or fewer runs 55% of the time and my hitters all performing poorly compared to the CPU teams and therefore regressing, the game is broken as a result. Sometimes the best thing the devs can do is leave the game alone. mlbts14 is a perfect example of that.

My point in this thread was simple: not every #1 pick is going to be Mike Trout or at the minimum an All-Star. There are a few can't miss guys but for the most part they still have to develop into that great MLB player. It sounded like people want 100% definitive attributes and hard numbers with regards to future ratings. It clearly isn't that way.

I meant nothing more, nothing less.

Yep I really want them to limit the hitters...I'm 25th in ERA at ~4.5 and made sure to be on a level where it's difficult as I have a young pitching staff with the Astros.

Clearly you have an issue with MoM and it's unfortunate it's not working very well for you. Hopefully it gets cleared up