Is there a bias against 16/17 year olds performing?

[tejdog1]

I swear to god it seems like there is. They could have 44 contact, 30 gap, 35 power, 35 eye, and 40 avoid Ks at age 16, but you put them into the GCL, and they'll hit .110/.175/.240.

Whereas a 20 year old with the exact same ratings will hit .290/.375/.540.

Doesn't seem right.

[Cryomaniac]

Obvious response is "Sample size". Age could easily factor into things though, but if it does then it should really be reflected in the ratings.

[greenie25]

It may have something to do with the fact that a 16-yo would be quite young, even for the GCL, while a 20-yo would be closer to the average age (according to Baseball Reference, the average batter age for the GCL in 2013 was 19.6 years old and the average pitcher age was 20.6).

I know it may seem like bias, but a 20-yo is more developed physically than a 16-yo would be (in most cases). I would expect a 16-yo to struggle against 20-yo pitchers in most cases, even if they were fairly talented. Essentially you're comparing a high school sophomore/junior to a college sophomore/junior.

[olivertheorem]

Those ratings on the 16-yo would also be more subject to "fog of war". Sure, your scout says he has them, but what if he really doesn't?

Though if you're playing with scouting off the above doesn't apply.

[le receveur]

" into the GCL, and they'll hit .110/.175/.240."


curious, how do 16/17 y.o. generally perform in GCL?

[olivertheorem]

Answer*: They don't. They're all in Latin American baseball academies.

* - No, I didn't research this answer. But, I can't recall the last time I heard of a player that age playing pro ball in the States.

[Lukas Berger]

There are actually quite a few 17 year olds who played in the GCL and AZL last year. There were 25 17 years olds who played enough in those leagues to qualify for the leaderboards on Baseball Ref and more who didn't play enough to qualify. As to how they performed, just check out the BA leader boards for those leagues and sort by age.

Ahmed Rosario played the whole year in Kingsport as a 17 year old last year. He didn't play terribly well, but given his age he didn't do too badly at all.

Most famously the Dodgers 16 year old phenom Julio Urias played and dominated for the entire year in the full season A Midwest League.

[tejdog1]

Fernando Martinez DESTROYED the mid A Sally League at age 17: .333/.389/.505/.894, 64 for 194, 24 runs, 14 2b, 2 3b, 5 HR, 28 RBI, 15/36 BB/K

Then bad things happened because of the lackofbraintrust.

Deolis Guerra dominated the Sally at 17, too.

[le receveur]

Originally Posted by tejdog1

Fernando Martinez DESTROYED the mid A Sally League at age 17: .333/.389/.505/.894, 64 for 194, 24 runs, 14 2b, 2 3b, 5 HR, 28 RBI, 15/36 BB/K

Then bad things happened because of the lackofbraintrust.

Deolis Guerra dominated the Sally at 17, too.

2 cases. curious about the average, since your comment was general.
looking at jays, I know Urena did fine, but Evan Smith didn't even get a hit

[le receveur]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

Most famously the Dodgers 16 year old phenom Julio Urias played and dominated for the entire year in the full season A Midwest League.

but Urias is special. I would think 16 y.o in general would not fare well in the GCL

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by le receveur

but Urias is special. I would think 16 y.o in general would not fare well in the GCL

Yeah, have to agree with you on that.

[Righty Groove]

I think people are missing the point of the thread. Yes, 16-17 year olds should mostly struggle in professional leagues, altough there are exceptions. But the thing is: should two players have identical current ratings, but one is 16-17 and the other is, I don't know, 20, should one considerably outperform the other? Assuming the necessary sample size to draw a conclusion. I think that's what "bias" would mean, as is, does age directly afect performance, os just the ratings/morale/randomness?

I don't know, and I don't think it does, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did either. It can easily be tested, though, by creating a couple of fully developed teenagers and see how they do in leagues suited for their talents.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by Righty Groove

I think people are missing the point of the thread. Yes, 16-17 year olds should mostly struggle in professional leagues, altough there are exceptions. But the thing is: should two players have identical current ratings, but one is 16-17 and the other is, I don't know, 20, should one considerably outperform the other? Assuming the necessary sample size to draw a conclusion. I think that's what "bias" would mean, as is, does age directly afect performance, os just the ratings/morale/randomness?

I don't know, and I don't think it does, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did either. It can easily be tested, though, by creating a couple of fully developed teenagers and see how they do in leagues suited for their talents.

Yeah, you're right we did get sidetracked

Thing is I don't think that bias actually does exist in OOTP. Pretty sure it's just a sample size issue or perhaps the result of using a restricted ratings scale like the 1-8 scale, so that some players ratings seem to be more similar than they actually are.

[tejdog1]

I use 1-100 ratings.

[Righty Groove]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

Yeah, you're right we did get sidetracked

Thing is I don't think that bias actually does exist in OOTP. Pretty sure it's just a sample size issue or perhaps the result of using a restricted ratings scale like the 1-8 scale, so that some players ratings seem to be more similar than they actually are.

I totally understand what you're saying. So many variables can influence performance that it is really difficult to say without a throughout analysis.

Gun in my head, I would tend to say that no, there is no performance bias based only on player age, if only due to simplicity in coding the game engine generating those performance outputs. These struggles could be either related to ratings, morale, different leagues/enviroments, sample size or whatever. Just a guess, though.

[MinorLeagueBaseballData]

Originally Posted by le receveur

" into the GCL, and they'll hit .110/.175/.240."


curious, how do 16/17 y.o. generally perform in GCL?

I did a search for players age 17.6 or younger (age as of July first of the given season) in the GCL since 2002 (minimum 75 plate appearances or 20 innings pitched).

There were 43 hitters who averaged:
142 ab, 35 hits, 7 doubles, 1 triple, 2 homers, 11 walks, 33 strikeouts, and 5 sb. That's .250/.303/.353

There were 24 pitchers who averaged:
11 games, 6 games started, 34.1 innings pitched, 32 hits allowed, 14 earned runs, 2 homers allowed, 13 walks, and 28 k's. ERA was 3.76

I've attached two files (had to be csv as the forum won't allow excel attachments) in case anyone is interested in the details.

[tejdog1]

Damn that's clutch dude.

[MinorLeagueBaseballData]

No problem! We have all the information in our database, just a matter of grabbing it.

Happy to help!