Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskyTango
I cannot comprehend how philthepat did a "better test" when the OP is talking specifically about MiL and philthepats test involved ML performance. It's like my car sounds wonky in 2nd gear and the mechanic reports my car sounded fine to him. I ask him if he ran it in 2nd gear and he says no he ran it in 3rd gear.
The OP has made heroic efforts to call attention to a question involving MiL stats. To reiterate: a teenager with a very bright future (which in baseball years is a few years away at least) but oddly contemptable current ability immediately goes to AAA, competes against much more experienced (and hence developed) semi-pros, and doesn't do too bad. No. Not realistic. For you to suggest there's nothing really unlikely with that scenario suggests baseball is a completely alien concept for you.
There may be a question of how the software manages extreme scenarios, but it does not seem to change the OP's basic conclusion. Perhaps the more average scenario is not as noticeable (though the OP reported he was noticing it with normal usage which led to his test involving 1/600 settings).
|
Philthepat's test confirmed what this issue is about. Including the ML data is crucial because it proves that potential ratings are only used for the sim engine output in the minor league levels. That highlights the issue that a player can be very effective in AAA and looks ML ready, but performs like a middle-schooler once promoted