Quote:
Originally Posted by jpeters1734
The point of using extreme values is to isolate a mechanic and make its behavior obvious. That is standard testing logic. Just because the game does not normally create a 1 current, 600 potential player does not mean the result is meaningless. It actually confirms that something is fundamentally wrong with how the engine handles potential in minor league simulations.
Consider this additional test. I simmed a season in a standard MLB game, turned off scouting, and found the highest rated international signing. I gave him average rating relative to rookie ball and then locked him to AAA.
He still had a 102 OPS+... come on
|
The thing is, you're literally just breaking the engine here. Obviously doing so says something about the mechanics where you're breaking things, but it doesn't mean the game itself is broken or justify such a sky is falling sort of response.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpeters1734
Top prospects perform better in real life because they have better current ability and are placed at appropriate levels. Not because of some abstract “future potential” force-field. If I take a player in OOTP who objectively has zero functional skill, like someone who should be buried in rookie ball, and he performs in AAA just because he has high potential, that’s a design flaw. Full stop.
You’re trying to reverse-engineer the outcome to justify the mechanic, but it doesn’t hold up. If a player with no actual ability is producing because of future projection, then the game is simulating fantasy, not baseball.
This completely breaks the purpose of minor league stats. You can’t use them to judge readiness, evaluate talent, or make informed decisions because the numbers aren’t reflecting actual skill.
|
The question of whether top prospects should get a slight boost to current performance is a valid one to debate given that they do in fact perform better in general in reality.
Your contention that this is because of their current skills solely is certainly valid, but is also not the only possible explanation, as even MLB scouts and personnel would likely debate the exact role of skills versus tools here, where a top player can get by on raw physical ability at lower levels, but get exposed once reaching MLB.
I think we're certainly open to hearing your opinion on that and you surely know from experience we are willing to change things where needed, if the consensus is that there is a genuine problem.