Quote:
Originally Posted by Rain King
Didn't I see someone mention this was based on Scouting Accuracy? The lower accuracy, the more 80 grade prospects but at 100% accuracy it was realistic?
If that is the case, I would consider it an issue but not a major one. Hopefully it gets tweaked, but it doesn't seem to functionally hurt anything based on that description (and that everyone here has been saying the actual development works as expected).
|
Well, we kind of melded two different discussions together here. One being the distribution of overall potentials (too pitcher-heavy) like the OP started with, and the other being overalls distributed higher compared to real life (a subjective preference).
It does appear that pitchers might be overly represented, but only from my cursory looks. I don't know whether it's due to being created with internal ratings that are generally higher than positional counterparts, or that their overall rating calculation needs a little fine-tuning.
Or it could simply be a matter of the small sample size that I've looked at and it's much ado about nothing.