Does OOTP Player Development Needs to Be Fixed? - Page 5

Treches · 04-16-2008, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Check his stats... that's what influences development.

Besides that there are no stats for March, methinks the timeframe is too short. I don't mind gents dropping and increasing talent; what pisses me is that this-month-we're-up-next-month-we're-down stuff. Might be that the report gets generated on the spot, but it's odd to see fellas having their talent rollercoasted in a such a short period of time.

Markus Heinsohn · 04-16-2008, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jarmenia

A players physical tools are not going to change without a life altering event. Those tools are what potential should be modeling.

If the only time talent drops there is a VALID reason, then I'll hold my other comments until I see the new beta. If talent still drops, just over the course of a few months, then no, its still broken you've just made it less noticeable.

There's a game play issue here at the core of this discussion. As OOTP works right now there's very little reason for teams to take a "flyer" on a player who is under performing because his potential has dropped. There's very little chance once potential starts dropping its going to start heading back up.

In real life, these type of players could be seen as a late bloomer. But no OOTP owner is going to try and acquire a 28 year old with potentials of 40/40/40 with actuals of 40/40/40, but darn well might for a 28 year old with potentials of 80/80/80 and actuals of 40/40/40 because there's potential upside. However small it is, the player with the 80/80/80 potential is seen as having a little more value.

Talent drops only due to bad performance or injury...

Markus Heinsohn · 04-16-2008, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Treches

Besides that there are no stats for March, methinks the timeframe is too short. I don't mind gents dropping and increasing talent; what pisses me is that this-month-we're-up-next-month-we're-down stuff. Might be that the report gets generated on the spot, but it's odd to see fellas having their talent rollercoasted in a such a short period of time.

That's fixed in OOTP 9...

injury log · 04-16-2008, 11:58 AM

This is all semantics. 'Talent', the way jarmenia appears to use the word, is not what OOTP means by 'Potential' or 'Talent'. It does not mean 'God-given ability'. If you try to interpret it that way, of course there will be things in the game that seem ridiculous. There is no real life semantic equivalent of OOTP's Potential now (which is a problem, of course), though 'Projection' is closer than 'Potential'. Before Koufax learned a curve, he wouldn't have projected as well; only 'God' could really have known how well he'd be able to throw the pitch. Once he learns the curve, the projection improves. Now, I don't think the game needs to provide 'God's view' of each player; I think it's enough to provide 'true current projections' with scouts off, and 'scout-filtered projections' with scouts on.

SittingDuck · 04-16-2008, 12:04 PM

Wow. that is good.

Projection is a hell of a lot better in concept that potential. I like it.

I think the point is, to me, that projections or the viewpoint of potential should not rise or drop drastically in a short time period, unless from injury.

jarmenia · 04-16-2008, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by injury log

This is all semantics. 'Talent', the way jarmenia appears to use the word, is not what OOTP means by 'Potential' or 'Talent'. It does not mean 'God-given ability'. If you try to interpret it that way, of course there will be things in the game that seem ridiculous. There is no real life semantic equivalent of OOTP's Potential now (which is a problem, of course), though 'Projection' is closer than 'Potential'. Before Koufax learned a curve, he wouldn't have projected as well; only 'God' could really have known how well he'd be able to throw the pitch. Once he learns the curve, the projection improves. Now, I don't think the game needs to provide 'God's view' of each player; I think it's enough to provide 'true current projections' with scouts off, and 'scout-filtered projections' with scouts on.

Scouts project. God gives Talent. The development engine should give talent and scouting should give projections. After all, if you play with scouting off shouldn't you be getting a god's eye view not some projection?

jarmenia · 04-16-2008, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SittingDuck

Wow. that is good.

Projection is a hell of a lot better in concept that potential. I like it.

It is better, I'll give you that.

Neags23 · 04-16-2008, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Talent drops only due to bad performance or injury...

Not sure what game you're playing, but it's not OOTP8.....

Another Mike D · 04-16-2008, 12:10 PM

I've always been in favor of a less info-type environment. Have the ratings, but have talent/potential on a completely different scale. More of a worded scale, like:

John Smith has shown great power potential but has had his share of difficulties getting the ball in play and tends to be a bit of a free swinger.

Then watch the ratings develop, if a talent drop or something should occur, maybe it changes to:

John Smith hasn't been able to knock the ball out much, but he's still got some good pop. Still seems to be a bit of a free swinger.

It's very difficult to implement and probably would require some sort of re-write to put numbers in to words, but the biggest problem most people would agree with is that the impact of changes seems very drastic. If you could dampen that with words perhaps instead of raw numbers, it could be inetesting.

injury log · 04-16-2008, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jarmenia

Tango is real world data. Granted its a small sample. Wouldn't it be better to use that as a base rather than just coming up with a development model out of thin air?

Which we both agree on. The difference is I'd prefer it be based on actual data such as Tango and extrapolate from there rather that just use imagination.

We have data that OOTP produces good results for MLB- better for hitters than for pitchers, so obviously there's room for improvement. Tango's data only covers MLB; there is absolutely no reason to think the model applies to minor leaguers- it would be ridiculous to analyse data on the top 1% of a population and hope the conclusions would apply to the other 99%. And I still have yet to see anyone comment on variation in Tango's data- Tango gives average rates of development, but I have yet to see information on the variation/std deviation in these changes (or even whether they're normally distributed). Without that data, I expect it's a long road to getting a Tango-based system to produce accurate results.

injury log · 04-16-2008, 12:13 PM

duplicate post

cuervo72 · 04-16-2008, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Talent drops only due to bad performance or injury...

So this guy took dev hits in 2028...why?

Player Report for #6 Tom Cornett
Development Report - Tom Cornett

This guy took one in early 2028...why?

Player Report for #26 Will Murphy
Development Report - Will Murphy

Markus Heinsohn · 04-16-2008, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cuervo72

So this guy took dev hits in 2028...why?

Player Report for #6 Tom Cornett
Development Report - Tom Cornett

This guy took one in early 2028...why?

Player Report for #26 Will Murphy
Development Report - Will Murphy

Rick Ankiel Syndrome?

Seriously, players do NOT get talent hits if they have enough playing time and play better than league average in OOTP 8, unless an injury is involved of course.

If you show me a player with 400 AB with an OPS+ of 120 who gets a talent drop then we have an issue/bug.

cuervo72 · 04-16-2008, 12:45 PM

But how is a minor league player going to amass that much playing time by April 17th? And if it was a case of the player not getting enough PT in that first week of play (something which often we can't directly control), isn't the threshold for performance-based dev set a little too low? If a player has a bad couple months, fine - maybe that can be reflected in a talent shift. But a week or two?

edit: also, I don't know that I would trigger it on something like "OPS+ of 120". Murphy for example - he's just not that kind of player, he's a slap hitter. Those guys aren't ever going to have great OPS numbers. Should their contact/avoid K's be at a dev risk because of that?

Treches · 04-16-2008, 12:46 PM

Odd scenarios like Ankiel's are okay with me, otherwise the game would be too predictable. Just try to keep them from getting out of whack, so we don't have a couple of Ankiels per year per team.

PineTar · 04-16-2008, 02:11 PM

Since it seems like there won't be any major reprogramming of the dev engine, might I suggest an alternate way of portraying potential to use within the existing approach. What if the player's Potential fields reflected some type of 12-24 month historical rolling average of the (weekly / monthly?) actual underlying potentials truly assigned to a player (which would be hidden)? Sure you'd have to remove the Development Report, but that seems to be the greatest source of consternation in OOTP today anyway. The result would be a smoothed view of a player evaluation from a scout's perspective, which is much more reflective of how real life works anyway. Scouts don't go to bed one night thinking a guy is a future all-star and wake up thinking he's a fringe player or career minor leaguer. These things evolve over time.

Sure, it would require extra resources to house the time series data in the player record, but honestly, if resource scarcity is a concern, there's plenty of statistics being tracked that are useless to a gamer that could get chucked to make resources available (night/day splits? no out, one out two out splits?)

jarmenia · 04-16-2008, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by injury log

there is absolutely no reason to think the model applies to minor leaguers- it would be ridiculous to analyse data on the top 1% of a population and hope the conclusions would apply to the other 99%.

And there's a better rational to use, as Markus put it, "imagination"? At least extrapolating Tango is based on real world data.

boilermaker · 04-16-2008, 02:26 PM

Yeah, I've seen some remarkable Andruw Jones levels of talent drop in a lot of players. Superstar one year, Double-A talent the next year.

I actually regularly commish mode and tweak abilities myself to compensate for these things.

RonCo · 04-16-2008, 02:33 PM

This is fun to watch.

BTW .. using stats to trigger talent changes has a certain sense of logic, but is, in the end, backwards and a flawed approach.

Carry on ...

Markus Heinsohn · 04-16-2008, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RonCo

This is fun to watch.

BTW .. using stats to trigger talent changes has a certain sense of logic, but is, in the end, backwards and a flawed approach.

Carry on ...

I respectfully disagree

View Poll Results: Should the player development issues in OOTP be fixed?
Yes. Its a game about developing players, the development model needs to be accurate.	132	67.01%
There are problems with the model but there are bigger fish to fry	36	18.27%
There are problems?	29	14.72%
Voters: 197. You may not vote on this poll

04-16-2008, 12:04 PM	#85
SittingDuck All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Richmond, VA Posts: 1,834	Wow. that is good. Projection is a hell of a lot better in concept that potential. I like it. I think the point is, to me, that projections or the viewpoint of potential should not rise or drop drastically in a short time period, unless from injury. Last edited by SittingDuck; 04-16-2008 at 12:07 PM.

04-16-2008, 12:10 PM	#89
Another Mike D All Star Reserve Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: atl Posts: 891	I've always been in favor of a less info-type environment. Have the ratings, but have talent/potential on a completely different scale. More of a worded scale, like: John Smith has shown great power potential but has had his share of difficulties getting the ball in play and tends to be a bit of a free swinger. Then watch the ratings develop, if a talent drop or something should occur, maybe it changes to: John Smith hasn't been able to knock the ball out much, but he's still got some good pop. Still seems to be a bit of a free swinger. It's very difficult to implement and probably would require some sort of re-write to put numbers in to words, but the biggest problem most people would agree with is that the impact of changes seems very drastic. If you could dampen that with words perhaps instead of raw numbers, it could be inetesting. __________________ San Diego Padres NexGen Baseball League Cleveland Indians United Baseball League Co-commissioner of United Baseball League

04-16-2008, 12:13 PM	#91
injury log Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 9,162	duplicate post Last edited by injury log; 04-16-2008 at 03:40 PM. Reason: duplicate post

04-16-2008, 12:45 PM	#94
cuervo72 Minors (Double A) Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 140	But how is a minor league player going to amass that much playing time by April 17th? And if it was a case of the player not getting enough PT in that first week of play (something which often we can't directly control), isn't the threshold for performance-based dev set a little too low? If a player has a bad couple months, fine - maybe that can be reflected in a talent shift. But a week or two? edit: also, I don't know that I would trigger it on something like "OPS+ of 120". Murphy for example - he's just not that kind of player, he's a slap hitter. Those guys aren't ever going to have great OPS numbers. Should their contact/avoid K's be at a dev risk because of that? __________________ FOBL - Owner, Las Vegas Lightning FOFL - Owner, Bar Harbor Whitecaps IHOF - Owner, Frederick Red Menace, Former NAC President Last edited by cuervo72; 04-16-2008 at 12:47 PM.

04-16-2008, 11:58 AM	#84
injury log Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 9,162	This is all semantics. 'Talent', the way jarmenia appears to use the word, is not what OOTP means by 'Potential' or 'Talent'. It does not mean 'God-given ability'. If you try to interpret it that way, of course there will be things in the game that seem ridiculous. There is no real life semantic equivalent of OOTP's Potential now (which is a problem, of course), though 'Projection' is closer than 'Potential'. Before Koufax learned a curve, he wouldn't have projected as well; only 'God' could really have known how well he'd be able to throw the pitch. Once he learns the curve, the projection improves. Now, I don't think the game needs to provide 'God's view' of each player; I think it's enough to provide 'true current projections' with scouts off, and 'scout-filtered projections' with scouts on.

04-16-2008, 12:46 PM	#95
Treches Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Damned Hell Posts: 2,150	Odd scenarios like Ankiel's are okay with me, otherwise the game would be too predictable. Just try to keep them from getting out of whack, so we don't have a couple of Ankiels per year per team. __________________ The Computer Baseball League

04-16-2008, 02:11 PM	#96
PineTar Minors (Double A) Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 154	Since it seems like there won't be any major reprogramming of the dev engine, might I suggest an alternate way of portraying potential to use within the existing approach. What if the player's Potential fields reflected some type of 12-24 month historical rolling average of the (weekly / monthly?) actual underlying potentials truly assigned to a player (which would be hidden)? Sure you'd have to remove the Development Report, but that seems to be the greatest source of consternation in OOTP today anyway. The result would be a smoothed view of a player evaluation from a scout's perspective, which is much more reflective of how real life works anyway. Scouts don't go to bed one night thinking a guy is a future all-star and wake up thinking he's a fringe player or career minor leaguer. These things evolve over time. Sure, it would require extra resources to house the time series data in the player record, but honestly, if resource scarcity is a concern, there's plenty of statistics being tracked that are useless to a gamer that could get chucked to make resources available (night/day splits? no out, one out two out splits?) __________________

04-16-2008, 02:26 PM	#98
boilermaker All Star Starter Join Date: May 2004 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 1,956	Yeah, I've seen some remarkable Andruw Jones levels of talent drop in a lot of players. Superstar one year, Double-A talent the next year. I actually regularly commish mode and tweak abilities myself to compensate for these things.

04-16-2008, 02:33 PM	#99
RonCo Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 10,374	This is fun to watch. BTW .. using stats to trigger talent changes has a certain sense of logic, but is, in the end, backwards and a flawed approach. Carry on ...