|
||||
|
|
OOTP 24 - General Discussions Everything about the brand new 2023 version of Out of the Park Baseball - officially licensed by MLB, the MLBPA and the KBO. |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools
![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Minors (Double A)
Join Date: May 2016
Location: New York
Posts: 108
|
Player Dev & the Coaching Model
I understand that there are a ton of variables behind player development, and that a ton of it happens 'under the hood' is a good thing- the mystery of it is very baseball, a fog of war I would not seek to dispel. My question has to do with atypical player dev (specifically late bloomers who maintain high potential ratings without having reached them or seen them diminish) and the path to getting there.
With all features turned on, the overt 'controls' for development would seem to be the dev budget along with the coaching staff, assuming that a GM is going to try to put every high upside player in a position to thrive- plenty of opportunity, a healthy clubhouse, a winning environment, etc. I am wondering, if we play in a league where coaches are turned off, does the opportunity for late breaking dev bypass that route and rely on the dev budget and TCR chance to ever come to fruition? Here are two players I've been hoping to see turn out as they approach 30: ![]() In particular: Aho got a huge TCR bump a few seasons ago, but has not seen his actual ratings rise at all. That the potential remains up is tantalizing, but without a coaching staff to nurture him, I'm concerned he's locked in as a red herring, where his particular player model might only have the opportunity to get there with the right coaches. I realize I sound like a conspiracy theorist here, I'm just trying to decipher why a guy would keep such gaudy potentials; I imagine they'd meet in the middle eventually, with the potentials coming down to wherever his true talent level is. IF ANYONE COULD ADVISE ME- IS PLAYING WITH CERTAIN FEATURES TURNED OFF POTENTIALLY MAKING CERTAIN PLAYERS UNABLE TO DEVELOP? Or am I just seeing a player that may or may not develop, and the lack of coaches in this league has no impact either way- they can help or hurt if they're on, but they're not essential for any pseudo-storylines to arrive at their destination?
__________________
Last edited by the54effect; 11-28-2023 at 11:13 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
All Star Starter
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,610
Infractions: 0/1 (1)
|
just a hunch ootp made cut off pot ratings stop at 29. they mean nothing after that date. this always screws up historical play because it ignore peak season after 29
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,072
Infractions: 1/1 (1)
|
It's not making them "unable to develop". If coaches are off, it is like everyone has "average" coaches when it comes to their development affect.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Juust a bit outside...
Posts: 6,119
|
The development model does not change if coaches are disabled. Coaches are essentially a modifier, or variable, to the algorithm. Disabling coaches turn that variable number into a 1.
__________________
"Cannonball Coming!" Go Bucs!! Founder and League Caretaker of the Professional Baseball Circuit, www.probaseballcircuit.com An Un-Official Guide to Minor League Management in OOTP 21 Ratings Scale Conversion Cross-Reference Cheat Sheet |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Minors (Double A)
Join Date: May 2016
Location: New York
Posts: 108
|
Appreciate the feedback guys!
I figured the answer was something along the lines of the modifier going to 1 in the course of regular development. I also think that generally as players age, their actual ratings a potential ratings usually meet somewhere, then as they deteriorate, sink together. My query is a bit of a theory that maybe some players that keep their potential without reaching it need 'something' to hit that potential. I don't think that something is definitive, just that, in a certain set of circumstances, they might develop. An anecdotal example is, I have had two different players (in this league) get the 'kid with a video on his phone' storyline, where players rediscover their old stroke and their potential ratings go up again. In both cases (in this league) even though the potentials rose, the players never actually saw their ratings rise up to meet the potential again. Now, this could mean the storyline is a red herring, or that while the potential rising gives the opportunity to improve again, they're unlikely to bump up in their late 20s. Most people I talk to feel that after age 23ish, most players are unlikely to get any substantial development in, barring a TCR lightning strike. That's where I am postulating that the coaching system might come into play, where the storyline unlocks potential, but without some (proper) coaching bonus, a player just isn't going to progress, leaving 'late bloomers' impossible to identify and grow. Which would be fine and understandable!
__________________
Last edited by the54effect; 12-06-2023 at 01:47 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 10,607
|
My sense is that with the default ratings, players rarely develop into their potentials past even the age of 25. By 30, nah. That isnโt to say that a 30 year old never improves but at that point itโs due to talent change randomness. I guess occasionally youโll see a guy improve into those but itโs veeeeery rare and more often theyโll just lose the extra POT.
I do prefer playing with TCR jacked up a lot. I have it on 150; some guys go as high as 200. IME with 150 it still doesnโt feel like nothing happens; you still just only occasionally see someone break out later in their career, it just happens a little less occasionally.
__________________
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Minors (Double A)
Join Date: May 2016
Location: New York
Posts: 108
|
Good insight! I agree with your observations.
In trying to clarify my question I'd say, specifically in regards to Aho, in the screenshot: TYPICALLY a player will have their current and potential ratings meet as they age. Rarely do you see guys get to their late 20s with potentials far above their current ratings. This league has scouts off and 100% accuracy, so, it stands to reason that the potential for him to reach these ratings exists- even if the chance of that happening is diminished by virtue of his age. Do we think that in situations where potential remains up, where a player looks like they could be a late bloomer without a sudden TCR change, are they waiting for some sort of catalyst? And building off of that presumption, could that catalyst require coaches that fit what the player needs to bloom late? AND with scouting AND coaches off, is it possible that this sort of player will tantalize with high potentials (100% accurate) without the requisite circumstances to ever reach them? I have to believe that a 100% accurate scouting report means the potential for growth exists, but, the opportunity to grow while 'past their prime' is murkier than a regular dev pattern. The initial question is probably only answerable by the dev team, if they're willing to lift that particular curtain, but I'd love to hear if anyone has seen success stories where a player that retained potentials into their late 20s ended up reaching them. We've all seen those TCR babies get a dev out of nowhere (which is true to life!) but I'm looking to see if there's any hope for a Jarred Kelenic type (if he was 3/4/5 years older) getting to the Braves and becoming the prince that was promised.
__________________
Last edited by the54effect; 12-06-2023 at 01:29 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|