Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukas Berger
As far as the purpose of minor league stats though, I think you're trying to use these for something that even real life minor league stats cannot be solely used for, to gauge MLB readiness.
There are hundreds, if not thousands of players, including many top prospects who put up awesome MiLB stats, but then never turned out to be ready for MLB.
Their minor league stats really told you nothing about them, because they could never replicate them in MLB.
That's where the term 'AAAA player' comes from. Also the term 'scouting the stat line'. These sort of guys exist in large numbers in real life, and they generally tend to be top or at least well regarded prospects.
|
I think you’re shifting the discussion away from what the actual problem is.
Of course real life minor league stats do not perfectly translate to MLB. Of course there’s noise. Of course there are AAAA players. That’s not what’s being tested here.
This is about whether minor league stats in OOTP reflect actual current ability. And what these tests show repeatedly is that they don’t. A player with zero skill by the game’s own rating scale can produce at a competent level in Triple-A if his potential is high. That has nothing to do with real life and everything to do with how the engine is built.
You’re saying this is “just like real life,” but it’s not. In real life, a guy who hits .300 in AAA has real tools, even if they don’t carry over. In OOTP, a guy with no tools at all is hitting .300 just because he might someday develop them.
If the engine is giving players a performance bump because of potential, then it’s not simulating baseball. It’s simulating projection models. That’s fine for development curves. It’s not fine for in-game performance.
And calling that out isn’t “breaking the engine.” It’s showing what the engine is actually doing.