Every young major leaguer with collapsing ratings at once

[TLB1975]

Originally Posted by voxpoptart

I've also defined a home rule to inject *more* talent changes back into the game: a hundred games into every season, starting this one, I'm going over the pitching and batting WAR leaderboards at every minor league level, and giving everyone in the top eight a weighted chance (based on their Work Ethic, Intelligence, and coaches) in a random number generation. The winning batter and winning pitcher at each level get an across the board ratings and potential boost, courtesy of me in Editor Mode: they're having a good year because they figured something important out. I'll see, over time, if that works.

I've never thought of doing that. I may give that a try as well, although I wonder if I'll use WAR. Maybe I'll look the a teams top 10 prospects and randomly give 1 who is having a great year a bump up and one who is having a down year a drop. Thanks for that idea.

[TLB1975]

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

Which was an echo of what others have complained about as well. Perhaps I should have said "we"?

Prior to your post, who else on this thread echoed that?

[Dyzalot]

Originally Posted by TLB1975

Prior to your post, who else on this thread echoed that?

I didn't realize this thread was the "end all and be all" of debate on this forum.

[Fyrestorm3]

Originally Posted by TLB1975

A few thoughts. I get that the real ratings create the stats and that for a young prospect there is a large gap between his real ratings and his potential ratings. What I don't understand is why do the potential ratings drop so significantly when the real ratings are producing solid stats at a minor or even major league level? Wouldn't it be better if the potential ratings stayed fairly consistent but the real ratings stopped improving? So the gap between the two stops narrowing. Why not let the stats fall off first and then have the potential decline? A players potential would still be high (Lastings Milledge), but because his hidden, real ratings did not improve, the stats suffered. And then after the stats suffered, the potential rating begins to drop.

It's pretty much the same thing as the talent bumps. When a player's potential disappears, it outright disappears, and usually becomes pretty close to his current ratings. Since his current ratings don't change, he continues producing at whatever level he's at, but when he's re-scouted, your scout is all "WAIT HOLD THE PHONE" and slashes his overall potential. The stats likely aren't going to die off at all, unless the player gets moved up to the next level, since his actual ratings very rarely will start to decline until he passes his physical "peak".

[TLB1975]

Originally Posted by Fyrestorm3

It's pretty much the same thing as the talent bumps. When a player's potential disappears, it outright disappears, and usually becomes pretty close to his current ratings. Since his current ratings don't change, he continues producing at whatever level he's at, but when he's re-scouted, your scout is all "WAIT HOLD THE PHONE" and slashes his overall potential. The stats likely aren't going to die off at all, unless the player gets moved up to the next level, since his actual ratings very rarely will start to decline until he passes his physical "peak".

I get it. My question is why the need for the potential ratings to get slashed? Wouldn't it work better if nothing happened at all other than a players real ratings stopped improving (which I wouldn't see)? So rather than arbitrarily slashing the potential, just leave it alone. Wait until that player gets moved up to a level past his real ratings and allow him to underperform, while the potential remains. As a GM, then I would have an interesting decision. Did he underperform because he has peaked as a player and isn't going to develop towards his potential? Or did I advance him too fast and he needs more time to develop?

When the AI slashes the potential, it takes that decision away from me.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Notice how potential rating get slashed but the individual potential rating stays about the same?

Its because the players are getting evaluated against other players in the database. You are in the second season so I am going to guess that there were two drafts? Those drafted players are created with much more potential than the young guys who were created when you started the league which is responsible for the decrease in potential ratings. The players initially created are pretty much developed already, the age of the players created with the league does not matter.


I am 50% sure that this is what's happening.

P.S

Are you seeing similar regression with players created from the draft?

[Fyrestorm3]

Originally Posted by TLB1975

I get it. My question is why the need for the potential ratings to get slashed? Wouldn't it work better if nothing happened at all other than a players real ratings stopped improving (which I wouldn't see)? So rather than arbitrarily slashing the potential, just leave it alone. Wait until that player gets moved up to a level past his real ratings and allow him to underperform, while the potential remains. As a GM, then I would have an interesting decision. Did he underperform because he has peaked as a player and isn't going to develop towards his potential? Or did I advance him too fast and he needs more time to develop?

When the AI slashes the potential, it takes that decision away from me.

Fair enough, I'd be on board with that.