Does age have any real effect on minor league performance?

bombboy85 · 10-06-2018, 03:07 AM

I am working on my own little formula to add my development tracker that will suggest a minor league level based on age and ratings. My question though is in OOTP does age have any real effect on minor league player performance/development? It might just be easier to go off ratings and stats as age seems to really be making it difficult to find a formula that makes sense

TGH-Adfabre · 10-06-2018, 12:43 PM

Age has an effect on development. I do not see players improve very much past 25 years or so. At that age I assume the player has maxed out their talent.

NoOne · 10-06-2018, 01:31 PM

like tgh said ont he ceiling... 25-28 is the very unlikely developement phase.. not sure if i've ever seen non-TCR rating improvments toward potential after ~28. 26? maybe 26 i think i've seen something.. but faded memory could be crossed wires in brain.

it is an effect... is the best way to describe it. it may or may not be visible for any 1 particular player.

an 18 year old does not always succeed at AAA, even if same exact ratings as a 24 year old. some will do fine, though.

i typically keep bumping them until they near ~average for that league in results -- small samples so very forgiving... the more important thing is that their development does not stop -- use of player profile and scouting reports makes this visibly easy to understand.

this may be random.. the only way to find out would be a test experiement and see if same ratings/different ages at each level have a statistically significant development rate... also need that baseline rate.

if more than a normal amount of players stagnate at a particular level while all other factors are controlled and remain the same, you know it is age causing the deviations.

i have doubts, because i've seen some horrid stats pile up while developing extremely fast, so i keep promoting and they always turn out fine in MLB relative to ratings and regardless of a .180 career MiL BA over 2-3 years or less...

however, i also commonly see a promoted "18" year old to SA or A and their development nearly halts while they hit way below average and many ways relative to that league and what you'd expect with their suitable ratings for that level.

if i see that, i demote and a good portion of time they start to tick upward again. coincidence, maybe... you'd have to do an expirement to know for sure on this... the %'s aren't obvious and do not present themselves to the capability of the human eye and brain in real time.

stick to ratings, but as with anything, cross-referencing is a good thing. age is something i take note of if i promote them.. i will look into them a bit more the next scouting report to see how they did... dip toe in water and keep promoting regardless of age until you see a stoppage of development.

bombboy85 · 10-07-2018, 02:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoOne

this may be random.. the only way to find out would be a test experiement and see if same ratings/different ages at each level have a statistically significant development rate... also need that baseline rate.

I actually had some time and did some testing with correlations the last couple of days with pitchers. I found that age had very little correlation to per 9 stats and rWAR. The only times it seemed to have any remotely meaningful effect was in AAA where as age went up rWAR went down so that mainly told me the AAAA guys that are stuck in the minors as depth mostly caused this effect as they are just depth guys that aren't good enough to pitch in the majors. Granted these were 1 month sample sizes as that was the only way to get a close to accurate ratings for the stats as going a whole year would be prone to wide gaps in rating when compared to when the stats were compiled.

NoOne · 10-09-2018, 12:17 AM

see how it correlates to change in ratings... more or less likely to improve? again, mil stats don't mean anything... if they develop 'better/neutral/worse' than some other comparison that is all that matters. the question is whether poor stats has a large effect on developement.

(from horse's mouth it is at least a small factor as far as doing well vs doing poorly.. but how small? that tidbit doesn't limit other potential effects like age and how that may or may not effect stats as well as development.).

in the most basic sense.. you cannot get better from simply a good result. you don't gain strength by hitting a home run etc. you learn through practice and other things to get better (learning on field too -- competitors, parks etc). confidence and other man-made effects (psychological?) like these are probably what they are modeling etc.

i've seen guys with very high contact and any promotion above X results in extremely bad stats.. i am very forgiving due to sample and all the moving parts... i mean really really bad... like you should retire bad if this happened in real life, lol.

sometimes it scares me, sometimes i see continued development and so i ignore it... if you want to get some teenagers to the MLB over time, you'll need to push some early and see what happens.

i am all about maximizing # of years for the 'best' players. while i may not have the 'best' way possible, it's a very good method. stick to ratings development. focus any study around how that rate of change or probabilty of increases per time can be improved.

Cactusguy21 · 10-09-2018, 05:00 PM

The rule of thumb that I have used is this:

Bad stats mean nothing, but good stats have meaning.

What this means is that when your 4-star prospect is struggling in the minors, it's not a big deal. But chances are, if a two-star prospect is doing well in AAA or AA, they might actually have value in the majors. This is because 4-star players always have a ton of talent no matter what, but a 2-star player varies. It depends on their combination of skills.

For example, I had a guy in my Orioles franchise, Jonathan Bowlan. He was a 28-year old 2-star reliever who had never seen the majors. But somehow, he wins the IL Pitcher of the Year award. So I give him a chance in spring training, and he ends up being a critical component of my 2026 World Series-winning team.

NoOne · 10-10-2018, 12:51 AM

that's going to be a weak correlation. rp are wildly volatile per ~60-80ip in a season. that alone clouds it. an average player can always have a great year too. are better players more likely? sure are, but still wildly all over the map.

rp are easily underrated initially... after ~3 years with ai eval they get some bumps.

i bet he has at least one wicked-good pitch if he's going to be a real workhorse in bullpen and not a flash in the pan. ground ball pitcher. good movement and at least nearing average control.

i've been surprised by a few lowly rated players... lowly compared to ~hof typical ratings for RP, that is. i think it was a couple years ago.. changed my mind about 3-pitch relievers too. this guy was nothing special to look at... you'd assum middle relieve at best... had one of my best SV% of any closer i'ver ever had. put up a few sub-2.00 era years and was closer for the next 7-10. not a small sample by that point.. still was unsure the first few years but rolled with it.

if i recall, 1 pitch was dark blue or teal (not >max or lt. blue)

gentlemanofleisure · 10-10-2018, 10:51 AM

I took over a fictional expansion team. I took a pitcher late in the expansion draft that was 27 and was just roster filler for me. Career minor league pitcher that was 1/2 star with 1 star potential. His stuff and control jumped off the charts after half a year playing at AAA. Never seen anything like that. I called him up and he was the ace of my staff the rest of the year. Next year, same thing until the trade deadline when I dealt him for 2 4 star prospects.

NoOne · 10-12-2018, 10:39 PM

Talent change randomness. if it's that extreme.

possibly scouting, but not likely at 27. even if original team miscouted, it'd be claimed by someone when out of options. 29 teams wouldn't miss it.

see a 16-18 year old change potential(s) rapidly, and you can assume scouting is a more likely reason, but tcr remains a possible culprit.

10-06-2018, 03:07 AM	#1
bombboy85 Major Leagues Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 455	Does age have any real effect on minor league performance? I am working on my own little formula to add my development tracker that will suggest a minor league level based on age and ratings. My question though is in OOTP does age have any real effect on minor league player performance/development? It might just be easier to go off ratings and stats as age seems to really be making it difficult to find a formula that makes sense

10-06-2018, 12:43 PM	#2
TGH-Adfabre Hall Of Famer Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 2,601	Age has an effect on development. I do not see players improve very much past 25 years or so. At that age I assume the player has maxed out their talent. __________________ You mock me, therefore I am My wife

10-06-2018, 01:31 PM	#3
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/1 (3)	like tgh said ont he ceiling... 25-28 is the very unlikely developement phase.. not sure if i've ever seen non-TCR rating improvments toward potential after ~28. 26? maybe 26 i think i've seen something.. but faded memory could be crossed wires in brain. it is an effect... is the best way to describe it. it may or may not be visible for any 1 particular player. an 18 year old does not always succeed at AAA, even if same exact ratings as a 24 year old. some will do fine, though. i typically keep bumping them until they near ~average for that league in results -- small samples so very forgiving... the more important thing is that their development does not stop -- use of player profile and scouting reports makes this visibly easy to understand. this may be random.. the only way to find out would be a test experiement and see if same ratings/different ages at each level have a statistically significant development rate... also need that baseline rate. if more than a normal amount of players stagnate at a particular level while all other factors are controlled and remain the same, you know it is age causing the deviations. i have doubts, because i've seen some horrid stats pile up while developing extremely fast, so i keep promoting and they always turn out fine in MLB relative to ratings and regardless of a .180 career MiL BA over 2-3 years or less... however, i also commonly see a promoted "18" year old to SA or A and their development nearly halts while they hit way below average and many ways relative to that league and what you'd expect with their suitable ratings for that level. if i see that, i demote and a good portion of time they start to tick upward again. coincidence, maybe... you'd have to do an expirement to know for sure on this... the %'s aren't obvious and do not present themselves to the capability of the human eye and brain in real time. stick to ratings, but as with anything, cross-referencing is a good thing. age is something i take note of if i promote them.. i will look into them a bit more the next scouting report to see how they did... dip toe in water and keep promoting regardless of age until you see a stoppage of development. Last edited by NoOne; 10-06-2018 at 01:35 PM.

10-10-2018, 12:51 AM	#7
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/1 (3)	that's going to be a weak correlation. rp are wildly volatile per ~60-80ip in a season. that alone clouds it. an average player can always have a great year too. are better players more likely? sure are, but still wildly all over the map. rp are easily underrated initially... after ~3 years with ai eval they get some bumps. i bet he has at least one wicked-good pitch if he's going to be a real workhorse in bullpen and not a flash in the pan. ground ball pitcher. good movement and at least nearing average control. i've been surprised by a few lowly rated players... lowly compared to ~hof typical ratings for RP, that is. i think it was a couple years ago.. changed my mind about 3-pitch relievers too. this guy was nothing special to look at... you'd assum middle relieve at best... had one of my best SV% of any closer i'ver ever had. put up a few sub-2.00 era years and was closer for the next 7-10. not a small sample by that point.. still was unsure the first few years but rolled with it. if i recall, 1 pitch was dark blue or teal (not >max or lt. blue) Last edited by NoOne; 10-10-2018 at 12:53 AM.

10-09-2018, 12:17 AM	#5
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/1 (3)	see how it correlates to change in ratings... more or less likely to improve? again, mil stats don't mean anything... if they develop 'better/neutral/worse' than some other comparison that is all that matters. the question is whether poor stats has a large effect on developement. (from horse's mouth it is at least a small factor as far as doing well vs doing poorly.. but how small? that tidbit doesn't limit other potential effects like age and how that may or may not effect stats as well as development.). in the most basic sense.. you cannot get better from simply a good result. you don't gain strength by hitting a home run etc. you learn through practice and other things to get better (learning on field too -- competitors, parks etc). confidence and other man-made effects (psychological?) like these are probably what they are modeling etc. i've seen guys with very high contact and any promotion above X results in extremely bad stats.. i am very forgiving due to sample and all the moving parts... i mean really really bad... like you should retire bad if this happened in real life, lol. sometimes it scares me, sometimes i see continued development and so i ignore it... if you want to get some teenagers to the MLB over time, you'll need to push some early and see what happens. i am all about maximizing # of years for the 'best' players. while i may not have the 'best' way possible, it's a very good method. stick to ratings development. focus any study around how that rate of change or probabilty of increases per time can be improved.

10-09-2018, 05:00 PM	#6
Cactusguy21 Major Leagues Join Date: Jun 2018 Posts: 332	The rule of thumb that I have used is this: Bad stats mean nothing, but good stats have meaning. What this means is that when your 4-star prospect is struggling in the minors, it's not a big deal. But chances are, if a two-star prospect is doing well in AAA or AA, they might actually have value in the majors. This is because 4-star players always have a ton of talent no matter what, but a 2-star player varies. It depends on their combination of skills. For example, I had a guy in my Orioles franchise, Jonathan Bowlan. He was a 28-year old 2-star reliever who had never seen the majors. But somehow, he wins the IL Pitcher of the Year award. So I give him a chance in spring training, and he ends up being a critical component of my 2026 World Series-winning team.

10-10-2018, 10:51 AM	#8
gentlemanofleisure Minors (Double A) Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 198	I took over a fictional expansion team. I took a pitcher late in the expansion draft that was 27 and was just roster filler for me. Career minor league pitcher that was 1/2 star with 1 star potential. His stuff and control jumped off the charts after half a year playing at AAA. Never seen anything like that. I called him up and he was the ace of my staff the rest of the year. Next year, same thing until the trade deadline when I dealt him for 2 4 star prospects.

10-12-2018, 10:39 PM	#9
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/1 (3)	Talent change randomness. if it's that extreme. possibly scouting, but not likely at 27. even if original team miscouted, it'd be claimed by someone when out of options. 29 teams wouldn't miss it. see a 16-18 year old change potential(s) rapidly, and you can assume scouting is a more likely reason, but tcr remains a possible culprit.