[Baconi]

So, I like to play stats only because I find it to be the most realistic experience - the ratings in the game allow far more accurate evaluations of players than what you’d get in real life, even when adjusting the settings. However, I find I have to severely limit the amount of teams and draft rounds when I play stats-only, because it’s very difficult to keep track of so many young prospects without meaningful stats (I have to rely on the written scouting reports most of the time).

On Fangraphs, if you go to a player’s page, you’ll see they have ratings similar to OOTP describing their potential - the ratings shown reflect their potential FV when they made their debut. What if OOTP had something similar, where you could see a players potential ratings up until they had a certain amount of Major League service time? After that, you would have to judge based on their performance whether they will fulfill their potential or have hit a plateau. For veteran players, they should have enough stats to make an evaluation based on that rather than actual ratings. But if you wanted, you could always look at their potential ratings right before they “graduated” to the majors to decide if you think they still have untapped potential.

That means you could still evaluate prospects and young players based on their potential ratings, but would need to rely on their actual Major League performance beyond that. It would make it easier to deal with the draft, minor leaguers, etc. while still being more challenging than using 20-80 current and potential ratings. It would also mean you wouldn’t be able to see a veteran player’s decline before it happens - e.g. having a players ratings all drop by 20+ in the offseason before it’s actually reflected in their performance, which I think is more accurate to real life.

What do you think?