possible fixes -- change Player Creation Modifiers. League settings->players or whatever. Or, change LTM (modifiers) until you get production you want and adjust eye to the ratings that achieve that production.
i know '19 looks different, but that doesn't mean you cna differentiate the same ways as you always have with a little adaptation.
i'd look at what you want to change, first. adjust the PCM or LTM accordingly. you may need to do both, if you adjust PCMs. that will be a rising tide if you increase, say power PCM. whatever the 'average' draft player potential power was before, it is now higher. the random ebb and flow around it is shifted too (larger range of varied results in most contexts of an increase likely).
-------------
https://www.baseball-reference.com/l...-rookies.shtml
rookies usually aren't so good. the top 1-2 might be, but no guarantee. i didn't look at the pitching. in this link, the top guys are 3-4war. one of them should be excluded at age 28 and PA over 3 years, but still technically a rookie. he was the 'best' by war, i didn't look too closely at this, though.
*and, i'm not a fan of war if you've read a few of my posts, lol..
looking at one real year is dangerous. this may or may not be an 'average' year, and even so doesn't tell you much. most rookies are junk, though.
also, 1 top-shelf guy and 3or4 4-star guys would be a hefty 'average'. there aren't 30 amazing batters in the mlb. if you spread it out, you'd probably get 2-3 decent players and the rest ~middling and below. very few at the top. sometimes the 2-3 wouldn't even be that stunningly good. (ootp "80/80" represents more than the 'top' players.)
perception is skewed by emotion. i think we've all experienced looking up some stats from a decade or more ago and realizing our memories were a bit rose-colored and not quite realistic about that particular team in history. unless you are looking at the '27 yankees. then, likely your perceptions are very near reality most likely, lol.
we like players and think of them as better than what they are. therefore, we think there are more better players than there are. (grammatically correct, read it slowly,
)
it's no surprise the league BA is astonishingly low. most players aren't so good, because average isn't good. that average is skewed high compared to median -- it's a 'false' level of production to expect from a truely average player. an average player's expected production is lower than 'league average' due to distribution curve of talent. further reason why most players aren't so good, relative to what 'good' is statistically.
while any average player is capable of an amazingly good year, it won't happen often. hence, one-year wonders every year crop up. it is inevitable. this is why it takes a larger sample to be confident about a player's ability. 2-3 years, and exceptions for drastic re-working of mechanics/mental approach, which as bystanders we'll never know for sure. think JD Martinez... he changes swing and approach and you can see the black and white difference of his historical sample before and after that point -- a real causal change was made.