Player progression, or lack thereof.

[Gagnon39]

Why are my players, even when performing decent decent or well constantly down in ratings? I'm not taking about aging veterans either. Young players in their early to mid twenties. Constantly -1 here and -2 there.

I really don't understand player progression. Furthermore, it is my understanding that progression is based largely on performance. I think this is inherently flawed. Players don't get better because they bat .300 with 40 home runs. They bat .300 and hit 40 home runs because they get better.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[The Chef]

Yeah I can't figure out progression or regression. Mitch Haniger turned in a solid first season yet he hasn't improved in a single area even with the training feature playing a part in it, he literally hasn't moved the needle at all in any rating. Then Segura hit's over .300, sets a career high in steals, stays healthy but because his HR's were down and his potential is below his current rating he has been slowly regressing ever since early in season one and not just in power but across the board. Same with James Paxton, potential is below his current rating so he's had the dreaded red arrow down since early in season one, he's struck out 35 and only walked 3 in his first 35 IP of season 2 but it hasn't reversed the regression or even stopped it. Furthermore I believe Paxton is 29 and Segura is 28 so they aren't exactly old. I just deal with it at this point unfortunately.

[Gagnon39]

Rizzo won NL MVP for me in 2017... he's down two points overall. It's bizarre.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[gp005]

when i see players perform at a higher than avg pace, i raise ther potential ratings.. this allows them to possibly have highers increases in ratings

i feel this helps with progression, also when players begin to age in your franchise, especially good ones.. you HAVE to raise there potentail to 99 or there ratings will just nose dive..
it can be a little tedious but it works

[kric9132]

I think the game chooses who they progress. I had bench players progress so much

Sent from my SM-G930V using Operation Sports mobile app

[sydrogerdavid]

Over my four seasons in my A's carryover franchise, Jharel Cotton has barely progressed at all. He has A potential but is still in the high 60s overall. Lots of my guys would still be stuck down there if I didn't boost their attributes a little bit.

[Jr.]

Quote: Originally Posted by Gagnon39

Why are my players, even when performing decent decent or well constantly down in ratings? I'm not taking about aging veterans either. Young players in their early to mid twenties. Constantly -1 here and -2 there. I really don't understand player progression. Furthermore, it is my understanding that progression is based largely on performance. I think this is inherently flawed. Players don't get better because they bat .300 with 40 home runs. They bat .300 and hit 40 home runs because they get better. Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

Quote: Originally Posted by Gagnon39

Rizzo won NL MVP for me in 2017... he's down two points overall. It's bizarre. Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

You're kind of making your own point here. Rizzo's attributes are decreasing even though he's playing well, which shows that progression/regression isn't really based on performance. Despite him winning the MVP, his skills are deteriorating, which is normal for an aging player.

Rizzo isn't getting better by winning the MVP, he won the MVP because of his skills and now they're slowly deteriorating.


I don't really have a problem with progression/regression. Sometimes it seems like it's performance related, but I still think there's quite a bit of relative randomness to it, which I like.

[TheWarmWind]

I actually really like the variance in progression I've seen in my carry over. It makes me think there is another layer to progression that we just don't see.

I've seen guys just have "off" years, where despite having great potential and performing well, they actually regress. These guys might come back and have a great year of progression the next year.

I've seen guys that make very little progression for a long time, then suddenly burst forward in ratings one year.

I've seen longshots progress to MLB quality and I've seen near MLB quality languish for years in the minors.

I've seen late bloomers (think like Josh Donaldson) and I've even seen prospects just not pan out at all.

I do wish there was more rhyme or reason to it (I talk about that in the wishlist thread) but overall I'm actually pretty happy with the results. Now regression on the other hand, that pisses me off. Way to consistent and uniform, should be more performance based.