For future versions: Analytics Department

[wallewalls]

I've wanted more analytics in this game for years, and it's usually falling on deaf ears. It doesn't need to be a fully-fledged out thing (although that would be the dream) but I don't understand how a baseball game released in 2020 only has FIP as the most advanced pitching statistic. MLB The Show has really bumped up how many stats they have in their game over the past few years. Nobody forces players to look at them as you have to look for them to see them, but they are at least there if you want them. This game, which is supposed to be the peak of baseball simulation (it is, and I still love the game), doesn't feature the same stats that MLB The Show does, has always been really odd to me.

[Westheim]

The game has all the stats it needs. Wins, batting average, homers, stolen bases. ERA if you're feeling fanciful.

Now excuse me, I have to somehow cough up a playoff spot on 84-ish wins.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by jimmysthebestcop

Sounds like a great concept. But the game already has several not fully realized concepts

Challenge mode, team chemistry, personality, traits, coaching, stories, owner goals

I would need at least 1 of them to be fully fleshed out and updated for 202x before adding a new concept that will fall into the same trap.

But it's a great idea.

Yes, I think with many of these features, they need to go back into the oven for awhile. Coaches, and staff would be a great starting point. Let me add more robust financial and player development systems as well.

[SirMichaelJordan]

I don’t think this should be a separate entity. Otherwise it would be another case of “hire team with highest ratings”

This should either be apart of scouting budget or development budget. I’m leaning more towards scouting.

Your scouting budget would be split into

Major
Minor
Amateur
International
Data Analytics


The more money you put into data analytics, the more updates and reports you get in the email.

Reports could give us projections and highlight certain advance stats on players that can help the team.

Nothing needs to be complicated. FM does a pretty good job here while giving simplicity with depth.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by SirMichaelJordan

I don’t think this should be a separate entity. Otherwise it would be another case of “hire team with highest ratings”

This should either be apart of scouting budget or development budget. I’m leaning more towards scouting.

Your scouting budget would be split into

Major
Minor
Amateur
International
Data Analytics

I can be down with this.

Kind of. I mean, analytics isn't scouting
Nor is it really development

The more money you put into data analytics, the more updates and reports you get in the email.

Eek
Have you seen my inbox

Reports could give us projections and highlight certain advance stats on players that can help the team.

Did you say "projections"?
[Salivating.gif]

There should be projections

A user can run the single season simulator and get team projections, and projections for a handful of hitters and pitchers. We should be able to get projections for every player. And be able to compare different "what ifs". What if I have X player and Y position vs Z player at Y position.


Now, I see how some people might find this weird. Like an Inceptionist simulation inside a simulation. And, maybe, it kind of is. But the game should be able to provide some sort of "projection" (based on an imperfect translation of the stats used to create the ratings.

The stats are in there.

We can peak at them through scouting.
We can peak at them through the simulator
We should be able to peak at them through projections as well

[ALB123]

Originally Posted by jimmysthebestcop

Sounds like a great concept. But the game already has several not fully realized concepts

Challenge mode, team chemistry, personality, traits, coaching, stories, owner goals

I would need at least 1 of them to be fully fleshed out and updated for 202x before adding a new concept that will fall into the same trap.

But it's a great idea.

Don't even get me started on Coaching. It's my #1 pet peeve at the moment.

Can someone explain to me what you mean by "Stories"? A quick sample would be very helpful.

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Yes, I think with many of these features, they need to go back into the oven for awhile. Coaches, and staff would be a great starting point. Let me add more robust financial and player development systems as well.

I must not understand the player development system because I can't tell you how often I'm left scratching my head. For example:




In the second example, I could possibly see this happening in real life where you notice your CF is doing a little bit better in one area of hitting, but after evaluating him again, you believe you rated him too highly to begin with. So, even with a little improvement he still isn't exactly what you rated him as... Just because I could see something like that happening in real life doesn't change the fact that the odds of it happening are about 1 in a billion. These are MLB professionals and that CF (Andre Dawson) has been on my team for 3+ years now. Ooops! can happen with an early appraisal, but not after you've already given me 5-6 reports on the player. Plus, just because it is possible to occur in real life, I'd be surprised if it was an intended ootp feature to "mess up".

I'm assuming I'm wrong and I have no clue what I'm talking about, so if someone could educate me on this, I will give you a nice, shiny quarter.

Originally Posted by CBeisbol

I can be down with this.

Did you say "projections"?
[Salivating.gif]

There should be projections

A user can run the single season simulator and get team projections, and projections for a handful of hitters and pitchers. We should be able to get projections for every player. And be able to compare different "what ifs". What if I have X player and Y position vs Z player at Y position.


Now, I see how some people might find this weird. Like an Inceptionist simulation inside a simulation. And, maybe, it kind of is. But the game should be able to provide some sort of "projection" (based on an imperfect translation of the stats used to create the ratings.

The stats are in there.

Am I reading that correctly? Are you saying that ootp would have to program in some sort of intentional variance so projections aren't always close to 100% reliable for every player in every situation?

While I would prefer to have the features of coaching, team chemistry, etc. re-worked into something cool and useful first, I've had these questions bouncing around the brain recently. Does ootp currently simulate the general location of thrown pitches? In real life, some pitchers are really good at keeping the ball down in the strike zone. Some pitchers rely on 97 mph fastballs with movement that they can't fully control. Sometimes it moves left, sometimes right, sometimes up high. Ball 4 might have been way inside or just a hair outside. You know what I mean. Is this calculated in OOTP? I forgot who recently suggested this, but the thought was that Hitter "Heat Maps" would be a great addition. I agree, but I suppose that possibility depends on how pitches are "thrown" and bats are "swung" in the simulation engine, no? If we're just talking about mathematical formulas & probabilities, I don't think that Heat Maps could be possible without just making 'em up, or am I completely wrong on those type of things.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by ALB123

I must not understand the player development system because I can't tell you how often I'm left scratching my head. For example:




In the second example, I could possibly see this happening in real life where you notice your CF is doing a little bit better in one area of hitting, but after evaluating him again, you believe you rated him too highly to begin with. So, even with a little improvement he still isn't exactly what you rated him as... Just because I could see something like that happening in real life doesn't change the fact that the odds of it happening are about 1 in a billion. These are MLB professionals and that CF (Andre Dawson) has been on my team for 3+ years now. Ooops! can happen with an early appraisal, but not after you've already given me 5-6 reports on the player. Plus, just because it is possible to occur in real life, I'd be surprised if it was an intended ootp feature to "mess up".

I don't understand the problem here

Players' skill levels change
As does a scout's interpretation of those skills.

Am I reading that correctly? Are you saying that ootp would have to program in some sort of intentional variance so projections aren't always close to 100% reliable for every player in every situation?

Yes.
If I understand the game correctly, projected stats are created by the game (or the user). They can be viewed in the editor.
Those stats are used to create the ratings.
The ratings, through scouting, are then varied so the user doesn't have perfect information.

It should be the same with projections. It wouldn't be fun to just see the underlying numbers that the game uses. But, a foggy idea of them, would be realistic.

[ALB123]

Originally Posted by CBeisbol

I don't understand the problem here

Players' skill levels change
As does a scout's interpretation of those skills.

I just think that it's weird for a scout to say: Player A lost some power and his contact is down a bit too. It's probably because his eye for the zone isn't what it was 6 months ago. But, I rate him as being better, overall, than I thought he was when I gave you a report 6 months ago. How do you get better overall as a player if your individual attributes all drop a bit?

Then, in the second example the scout it reporting that CF hasn't really changed at all since the last report when I graded him 4.5 stars. Actually, his eye improved a bit, to be honest. So now I grade him not being quite as good as my last report. NO SOUP FOR YOU!

It seems weird to me that as his attributes are improving, his overall grade is declining and vice versa.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Originally Posted by ALB123

I just think that it's weird for a scout to say: Player A lost some power and his contact is down a bit too. It's probably because his eye for the zone isn't what it was 6 months ago. But, I rate him as being better, overall, than I thought he was when I gave you a report 6 months ago. How do you get better overall as a player if your individual attributes all drop a bit?

Then, in the second example the scout it reporting that CF hasn't really changed at all since the last report when I graded him 4.5 stars. Actually, his eye improved a bit, to be honest. So now I grade him not being quite as good as my last report. NO SOUP FOR YOU!

It seems weird to me that as his attributes are improving, his overall grade is declining and vice versa.

Those are usually more ratings being updated that aren’t highlighted. Under hood ratings are 1-250. The ratings that were highlighted reached a certain threshold. Also if you go into the development report page, you can chose to show some of the unimportant ratings that weren’t mentioned in the report.

It’s also important to mention that if you are rating players by position, position changes from other players will influenced how a player is rated. Someone could have switched from RF to CF and bumped him down.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by ALB123

I just think that it's weird for a scout to say: Player A lost some power and his contact is down a bit too. It's probably because his eye for the zone isn't what it was 6 months ago. But, I rate him as being better, overall, than I thought he was when I gave you a report 6 months ago. How do you get better overall as a player if your individual attributes all drop a bit?

Then, in the second example the scout it reporting that CF hasn't really changed at all since the last report when I graded him 4.5 stars. Actually, his eye improved a bit, to be honest. So now I grade him not being quite as good as my last report. NO SOUP FOR YOU!

It seems weird to me that as his attributes are improving, his overall grade is declining and vice versa.

Ahh
Yes, I've seen that and over it
It probably deserves it's own thread, if there's not already one (or a dozen)
But, maybe analytics could tell you why

Also, remember the ratings are not granular.
A change from 32.4 to 32.6 might be reported as a change from 30 to 35
While a larger change in another area from 27.5 to 32.4 might still be a 30.
*Not that the game uses 32.4 but a wide range of performance will be listed as a 30.

[ALB123]

Originally Posted by SirMichaelJordan

Those are usually more ratings being updated that aren’t highlighted. Under hood ratings are 1-250. The ratings that were highlighted reached a certain threshold. Also if you go into the development report page, you can chose to show some of the unimportant ratings that weren’t mentioned in the report.

It’s also important to mention that if you are rating players by position, position changes from other players will influenced how a player is rated. Someone could have switched from RF to CF and bumped him down.

Ahhh...I didn't know that about the dev. report page. Cool! In the example I gave you the CF in question was Andre Dawson and I haven't played him anywhere else for even a single pitch, but I get what you're saying and I appreciate you letting me know so I don't have to get grumpy about it in the future. LOL

Originally Posted by CBeisbol

Ahh
Yes, I've seen that and over it
It probably deserves it's own thread, if there's not already one (or a dozen)
But, maybe analytics could tell you why

Also, remember the ratings are not granular.
A change from 32.4 to 32.6 might be reported as a change from 30 to 35
While a larger change in another area from 27.5 to 32.4 might still be a 30.
*Not that the game uses 32.4 but a wide range of performance will be listed as a 30.

Yup. I didn't know that when I made the post, obviously...so thanks for setting me straight! It seems like I learn 1 or 2 things, minimum, each day in the forums. I love it.

[dward1]

Originally Posted by ALB123

I just think that it's weird for a scout to say: Player A lost some power and his contact is down a bit too. It's probably because his eye for the zone isn't what it was 6 months ago. But, I rate him as being better, overall, than I thought he was when I gave you a report 6 months ago. How do you get better overall as a player if your individual attributes all drop a bit?

Then, in the second example the scout it reporting that CF hasn't really changed at all since the last report when I graded him 4.5 stars. Actually, his eye improved a bit, to be honest. So now I grade him not being quite as good as my last report. NO SOUP FOR YOU!

It seems weird to me that as his attributes are improving, his overall grade is declining and vice versa.

it's clear that scouting and player development and coaching and player personalities are maybe 15% of the way to useful features, I think we need to keep bringing it up because they've shown no interest in improving them since they dumped them out.

it honestly feels like people who play the "core" game are just ignored now, the features for this year were laughably low-effort and unfinished and the gameplay remains the same

[majesty95]

I’ve thought of something similar. I’d like to be able to make my hitters improve launch angles like the Twins have done. Or maybe all develop sinking fastballs like the early 2010’s Pirates. I think some of that is “baked” into coaches and some into scouting. I’m not sure we need a new department but maybe more control over what type of players we’re creating in our system.

[ALB123]

Originally Posted by dward1

it's clear that scouting and player development and coaching and player personalities are maybe 15% of the way to useful features, I think we need to keep bringing it up because they've shown no interest in improving them since they dumped them out.

it honestly feels like people who play the "core" game are just ignored now, the features for this year were laughably low-effort and unfinished and the gameplay remains the same

When you say the core game, do you mean NOT Perfect Team? I've not looked into PT yet and I don't think I will now that I know more about it.

Originally Posted by majesty95

I’ve thought of something similar. I’d like to be able to make my hitters improve launch angles like the Twins have done. Or maybe all develop sinking fastballs like the early 2010’s Pirates. I think some of that is “baked” into coaches and some into scouting. I’m not sure we need a new department but maybe more control over what type of players we’re creating in our system.

I wouldn't hold your breath about things like launch angles. No one has told me what truly goes on behind the scenes with pitches and swings, but I have a feeling every "swing" is the same - the outcomes differ because of probability and player statistics and other formulas along those lines. Not because this player swung 0.0082s late and the center of his barrel sweet spot was 1/8 inch lower than square which results in the ball being fouled off behind the 1st base dugout. Again, I'm speculating...

[jimmysthebestcop]

Originally Posted by dward1

it's clear that scouting and player development and coaching and player personalities are maybe 15% of the way to useful features, I think we need to keep bringing it up because they've shown no interest in improving them since they dumped them out.

it honestly feels like people who play the "core" game are just ignored now, the features for this year were laughably low-effort and unfinished and the gameplay remains the same

I do think the core received quality of life and UI improvements this version. I mean I couldn't even play an older version after 21 ui betterment initiative.

I give them credit for Perfect Team it brought in a lot of fans and filled a market need. And def has given some better cash flow.

The problem with the core game is it appeals to a broad fan base. Where it is split between just baseball mechanics/stats/customization and people wanting the "video game sim" experience.

I think that is where the disconnect is for certain fans. As I think the baseball mechanics might improve each version that video game sim experience hasn't been updated in at least 5 versions with anything significant.

I was pleased with OOTP 21 so far. OOTP 20 all I did was basically play Perfect Team as I only finished 1 or 2 seasons base game. It just felt so much like OOTP 18/19 I couldn't bother doing the same thing over and over again.

That's another problem a certain portion of the user base likes to do exactly the same thing over and and over again. They want to run their seasons and watch the results be as realistic as possible. They don't want to get in the video game parts of it.

Just look at the user base demographics. A lot are older players, strictly baseball fans and ootp is their only "video game". They've been playing it for 15+ years etc.

Then the fan base is further divided by historical, modern, fictional and any combination of that. So I sympathize with OOTP devs and their juggling act.

But I think they should present a clear vision for future versions and start talking about OOTP 22 when the N. American summer starts.

The video game elements is what gets me to come back year after year, season after season. But now they are the same. It is very stale. So I try not to even play OOTP like that anymore.

Think I went from 400-500 hours in 18 & 19 to under 150 in XX and it was all perfect team. I'm not sure where I will end up in 21 but I doubt it will be more than 200. But I'm a big gamer and do a couple dozen games a year. So my plate is full.

[majesty95]

Originally Posted by ALB123

I wouldn't hold your breath about things like launch angles. No one has told me what truly goes on behind the scenes with pitches and swings, but I have a feeling every "swing" is the same - the outcomes differ because of probability and player statistics and other formulas along those lines. Not because this player swung 0.0082s late and the center of his barrel sweet spot was 1/8 inch lower than square which results in the ball being fouled off behind the 1st base dugout. Again, I'm speculating...

You clearly haven’t researched this much yet then. There are several books that talk about this and it’s just beginning. It’s not so precise that their repeatedly adding a small increments of lunch angle but it’s repeatable in an upward swing. Hell, that goes all the way back to Ted Williams The Science of Hitting. It’s been a belief for a long time. Analytics now are just uncovering it’s actual benefit. Personally, I hate it. It’s all home runs, walks and strikeouts now. But it’s a real thing and if we’re replicating then game today it should be accounted for (as well as the possible counter of grooming ground ball pitchers).

[ALB123]

Originally Posted by majesty95

You clearly haven’t researched this much yet then. There are several books that talk about this and it’s just beginning. It’s not so precise that their repeatedly adding a small increments of lunch angle but it’s repeatable in an upward swing. Hell, that goes all the way back to Ted Williams The Science of Hitting. It’s been a belief for a long time. Analytics now are just uncovering it’s actual benefit. Personally, I hate it. It’s all home runs, walks and strikeouts now. But it’s a real thing and if we’re replicating then game today it should be accounted for (as well as the possible counter of grooming ground ball pitchers).

Oh, I am very well familiar with things like launch angle in the real-life game of baseball. Still, I don't think it will appear in OOTP for quite some time. Hey, hopefully, I'm wrong. Well, if it's implemented properly, of course.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by dward1

it's clear that scouting and player development and coaching and player personalities are maybe 15% of the way to useful features, I think we need to keep bringing it up because they've shown no interest in improving them since they dumped them out.

it honestly feels like people who play the "core" game are just ignored now, the features for this year were laughably low-effort and unfinished and the gameplay remains the same

Yes in someways OOTPD could be at a crossroads. Is OOTP a baseball simulator, or a GM simulator?

I know many will say both...but the GM part hasn’t always measured up. PT and pure simming with MLB seems to be the direction. The core GM experience just isn’t there the way it is in FM. They have attempted some of this, but yes, much of it is half baked. I’d rather they implemented one of these elements very well before attempting more.

[mytreds]

I agree. IRL the Astros had a wonderful analytics dept, and look how well they did.

All jokes aside, the best part of OOTP is what it doesn’t give you. If you had a perfect game with everything you wanted, you wouldn’t need your imagination anymore and would be just hitting a button to progress your game.

I’m not opposed to the idea, but I really don’t think it’s necessary. The beauty of this game is that it is a simulation coupled with imagination. Make it too much like real life and it will get stale and boring.

[jimmysthebestcop]

Originally Posted by mytreds

I agree. IRL the Astros had a wonderful analytics dept, and look how well they did.

All jokes aside, the best part of OOTP is what it doesn’t give you. If you had a perfect game with everything you wanted, you wouldn’t need your imagination anymore and would be just hitting a button to progress your game.

I’m not opposed to the idea, but I really don’t think it’s necessary. The beauty of this game is that it is a simulation coupled with imagination. Make it too much like real life and it will get stale and boring.

OOTP has little imagination value.

The day to day coach/manager experience is solid. The actual sim of the game play does a pretty good job and incremental updates is fine for that aspect of the game.

But the GM Experience......................

The entire GM experience 100% completely void of life. Being a GM is the world is flat, boring, and lifeless. It is all stats and baseball simulation.

Oh there are owner stories and player stories but for 99% of everything us, the human player, have no interaction in any of these GM game mechanics.

At least in Motorsport Manager it requires human interaction for chained story events like when a character gets a trait. It's pretty simple with 2 or 3 outcomes for the most part but at least we are involved.

You can vote on league rules. Petition your owner. OOTP is great with the customization aspect but its all in "commish mode" not in actual game play mechanics. Random evolution just bypasses having actual game mechanics to get anything done the game just dictates whats happens.

To me long term this is the biggest downside of OOTP. They need a fresh approach to the GM experience. And having 100% customization is good but having actual game play mechanics to go along with it would be even better.

Like the stadium editor. Great addition but it has ZERO game play mechanics to go along with it. I would have rather have a ball park creation mechanic tied to financials, the team, the fan base etc then the 3D model creation tool.

Modders have been making stadiums for years with no official tools. But there has been zero game play mechanics revolving around ballparks. What do I care what a stadium looks like if it doesn't have an impact on game mechanics?

Some stadiums help bring about a new generation of a team. Increase fans. Increase payroll. Increase ads and local cable deals. That is everything that is missing.

The higher GM experience is void of life.

The game of baseball OOTP has it down cold. Team manger OOTP has. Imagination maybe with day to day player stuff I can give you that. All of the what if's etc.

It's just life as GM has been exactly the same for at least 5 versions now.
I'm not even sure if you are really the GM anymore. It's more like you are the team manager but you just handle personnel, trades and draft.

Maybe I'm being too hard on OOTP? I'm not sure. As a day to day baseball sim game its great A++++. As a GM simulation video game I would really have to give it an F in 2020.