Player Development From Where I'm Sitting

[Curve Ball Dave]

So I come on here and read threads about the Development Lab doesn't do this, and player development in general is bad because of that.

I drafted four pitchers several seasons ago. They all had big time potential. Each off season I sent them to the Development Lab to work on things and I tweaked their development focus to my liking.

Did I see instant results? No. Did they become Cy Young candidates overnight? No. Are they still anywhere near their full potential? No. Are these four now in my starting rotation after four or five years of development with the highest ERA among them 3.64, two them among the top five in ERA, and one of them a strong candidate for ROY? Yes.

If you want instant gratification, you're playing the wrong game. It's not how baseball works, it's not how OOTP works anymore. If anything has changed dramatically for 26, IMO, it's that you don't have to be Superman anymore to be a very good pitcher or position player. Guys who haven't maxed out their potential (not just on my team) are making All Star teams and winning awards in my league. In 26, at least to me, ratings are overrated. If the guy is producing, so what if he's far away from his max potential? It doesn't take that anymore for a guy to be an excellent player.

Let the debate begin.

[eas9898]

It has been well documented by several users that players are not developing as they should or even used to. After several seasons, the league just gets to a point where there is very little variation from player to player -- most are simply average.

Does this mean that some players won't end up with good seasons or even careers? No. That's RNG for you.

But to keep pretending that player development is not broken doesn't help anything. The developers have been having problems with this the past two seasons since the introduction of the dev labs, and it's unclear if they are going to continue working on it or not, but they really should, because player development over years and even decades is one of the most interesting things about games like this.

[mytreds]

Originally Posted by Curve Ball Dave

it's not how OOTP works anymore.

I think this is the point a lot of people have to realize.

[FlexD]

And it appears that despite the constructive criticism the developers are going to do it their way. From the development of prospects to minor league stats being generated by potential more so than ever , something feels off with version 26.

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by FlexD

And it appears that despite the constructive criticism the developers are going to do it their way. From the development of prospects to minor league stats being generated by potential more so than ever , something feels off with version 26.

I'll assume you haven't seen the most recent Beta Patch changelist, where they have both introduced an option to disable the potential thing you mentioned and also where they have adjusted how Potential displays for players 26-30 so that you will no longer have older players with large Current/Potential gaps (since people complained about that).

Yes, they are sticking to the more realistic Current rating system. I think more people are in favor of that than are against.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by eas9898

It has been well documented by several users that players are not developing as they should or even used to. After several seasons, the league just gets to a point where there is very little variation from player to player -- most are simply average.

Does this mean that some players won't end up with good seasons or even careers? No. That's RNG for you.

But to keep pretending that player development is not broken doesn't help anything. The developers have been having problems with this the past two seasons since the introduction of the dev labs, and it's unclear if they are going to continue working on it or not, but they really should, because player development over years and even decades is one of the most interesting things about games like this.

I hate to tell you....but this actually mirrors real life.

[jpeters1734]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I hate to tell you....but this actually mirrors real life.

This is what so many ootp players just don't understand. Most players have very short peaks. Most players do not maintain high level production over many seasons.

In a very rough and crude example, over the last 4 seasons (22-25), 30 different players finished in the top 10 in position WAR. Only 8 players appeared on that list multiple times. Only 2 players appeared three times, and no player finished top ten in all 4 years.

The bottom line is most players are pretty close in ability, and great seasons don’t usually repeat.

[Curve Ball Dave]

I write from my experience. Forget about instant gratification. The effort spent on player development doesn't show up immediately. It takes a while for all of that effort to bear fruit. Sure, I'd like that 5 star potential guy in High A to become a Major League starter overnight, but that's not baseball. And I'm not bothered by guys really coming into their own until the second half of their 20s. That's reality. IMO we were spoiled by quick developing players and guys with actual ratings to the moon by the time they were 25.

I see things like the Development Lab in a different light now. I know that a kid who was successful at something won't show it in all it's glory the very next season. If I stick with his development I know there's a good chance I will see it four or five seasons down the road which means I have to think long term.

Personally, I'm enjoying the heck out of this version.

[Curve Ball Dave]

Originally Posted by jpeters1734

This is what so many ootp players just don't understand. Most players have very short peaks. Most players do not maintain high level production over many seasons.

In a very rough and crude example, over the last 4 seasons (22-25), 30 different players finished in the top 10 in position WAR. Only 8 players appeared on that list multiple times. Only 2 players appeared three times, and no player finished top ten in all 4 years.

The bottom line is most players are pretty close in ability, and great seasons don’t usually repeat.

That's why there's relatively so few players in the HOF.

[Hrycaj]

Originally Posted by jpeters1734

This is what so many ootp players just don't understand. Most players have very short peaks. Most players do not maintain high level production over many seasons.

In a very rough and crude example, over the last 4 seasons (22-25), 30 different players finished in the top 10 in position WAR. Only 8 players appeared on that list multiple times. Only 2 players appeared three times, and no player finished top ten in all 4 years.

The bottom line is most players are pretty close in ability, and great seasons don’t usually repeat.

This I agree with. In my experience with past versions I thought mediocre players hung around way too long. The career arcs seemed to be too long. However, it’s a video game so you take it for what it is. Still, in this new OOTP world I do wish there were more instances where you get these lightening rod players that are ready to go at 19-22. Acura Jr. comes to mind. 26 homers at age 20. Bobby Witt Jr. is another one to a lesser degree. I’m not saying we need a boatload of these players but a few sprinkled in makes for a nice mix in a league. Whether those players have HOF staying power is going to be based on injury and development but they will have that chance.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by Rain King

Yes, they are sticking to the more realistic Current rating system. I think more people are in favor of that than are against.

And I love it! In a game that wants to simulate real life this should be the only way it is done. They've backtracked before on "reality" when some users complained "but it's a game". I hope they don't do that again.

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I hate to tell you....but this actually mirrors real life.

Yes....

Originally Posted by jpeters1734

This is what so many ootp players just don't understand. Most players have very short peaks. Most players do not maintain high level production over many seasons.

In a very rough and crude example, over the last 4 seasons (22-25), 30 different players finished in the top 10 in position WAR. Only 8 players appeared on that list multiple times. Only 2 players appeared three times, and no player finished top ten in all 4 years.

The bottom line is most players are pretty close in ability, and great seasons don’t usually repeat.

.. and yes.

Originally Posted by Curve Ball Dave

I write from my experience. Forget about instant gratification. The effort spent on player development doesn't show up immediately. It takes a while for all of that effort to bear fruit. Sure, I'd like that 5 star potential guy in High A to become a Major League starter overnight, but that's not baseball. And I'm not bothered by guys really coming into their own until the second half of their 20s. That's reality. IMO we were spoiled by quick developing players and guys with actual ratings to the moon by the time they were 25.

I see things like the Development Lab in a different light now. I know that a kid who was successful at something won't show it in all it's glory the very next season. If I stick with his development I know there's a good chance I will see it four or five seasons down the road which means I have to think long term.

Personally, I'm enjoying the heck out of this version.

Great first post from Curve Ball Dave and this just adds to it. I'm enjoying it too.

[Zooerp]

Agreed with everyone enjoying this year's version, especially with regards to development.

I used to be frustrated by development and I grew up learning about the game through the outliers, i.e. Hall of Famers and World Series winners. I think that's the standard experience. Then I wondered why I didn't have potential Hall of Famers coming through the pipeline every year. Outliers are fun when they happen, but OOTP helped me learn about winning on the margins, and appreciating how thin those margins are.

[Pdubya64]

Originally Posted by Curve Ball Dave

I write from my experience. Forget about instant gratification. The effort spent on player development doesn't show up immediately. It takes a while for all of that effort to bear fruit. Sure, I'd like that 5 star potential guy in High A to become a Major League starter overnight, but that's not baseball. And I'm not bothered by guys really coming into their own until the second half of their 20s. That's reality. IMO we were spoiled by quick developing players and guys with actual ratings to the moon by the time they were 25.

I see things like the Development Lab in a different light now. I know that a kid who was successful at something won't show it in all it's glory the very next season. If I stick with his development I know there's a good chance I will see it four or five seasons down the road which means I have to think long term.

Personally, I'm enjoying the heck out of this version.

While it is not w/o quirks and options I don't use like focus (seems too time consuming vs. payoff) I have to agree with Dave as well. While the game can produce some things that might be off, I am hopeful this upcoming patch will improve a lot of areas.
I also have found the game does produce a lot of interesting stories and believable events over medium to long term.

There is a palpable dopamine hit when you have taken the long view on a player or players and it pays off; not 100% which is fantasyland, but perhaps in a way you didn't anticipate. Some two-pitch RP's as amateurs turn into good starters, some don't.

There are no magic buttons to push, if you like a shorter "payoff" for your efforts I suggest a game like MLB The Show and its Dynasty mode. Great game, just a different take on your role as a gamer.

[Eburaci]

I'll chime in that I think the dev lab 2.0 and new ratings scales are great. I also agree that in today's game, there are fewer outliers and more players in the meaty part of the curve. If you want to say that players have short peaks and outlier seasons, that is fine too. I tend to think that RNG in the game engine already does a pretty good job of handling this, and that effect is magnified when more players are similarly rated.

My point/counter point is that none of the above are really specific about player development. I think a reasonable expectation of a gamer is that both the overall level of talent in the league and the distribution of that talent will stay roughly the same across age and skills as it is on initial start up. IMO, this is the job of the player development/aging part of the engine and could use a little fine tuning.

[oldfatbaldguy]

Originally Posted by Curve Ball Dave

Personally, I'm enjoying the heck out of this version.

Same. I don't want to be in charge of development, so I delegate it to the assistant GM. I delegate some things to the chief scout, too. In general the things that have changed in the last few versions are better, imo.

Trading on the hard settings is really hard now. I still use house rules, but now they're less anti-cheat mode than they are "let's not spend all of the time negotiating trades, let's actually play baseball games." I have a first baseman who strikes out too much, but he hits home runs and he's in his first year of arbitration and many of the trade offers I get are teams trying to unload more expensive first basemen. There are a metric shedload of trade offers, but most of them are non-starters. I have not worked as a major-league GM but I strongly suspect this is realistic.

[SirMichaelJordan]

There seems to be a trend going on with "simulation" games, where users are pushing for more "arcade" results. I guess this is just a side effect of trying to expand to more audiences.

[oldfatbaldguy]

Yup.

[mytreds]

Originally Posted by SirMichaelJordan

There seems to be a trend going on with "simulation" games, where users are pushing for more "arcade" results. I guess this is just a side effect of trying to expand to more audiences.

It’s been happening for awhile now, unfortunately.

[PSUColonel]

I’m very impressed with this year’s development system. I think they got it right (after years of going back and forth). I often wondered if it was Markus at times who sometimes didn’t mind sacrificing realism for what I many times heard him saying “fun factor”. I admit to getting g very frustrated with it over the years..but this is finally what I I think a lot (most of us purists) have been wanting and hoping for for some time now.

I understand how he became concerned with expanded by the audience/customer base of OOTP over the years, but my argument was always that there are plenty of other games out there not necessarily dedicated to absolute realism, and it was OOTP that could have its own market.l


And as pointed out earlier in this thread..this is much more of a simulation..and less of a game