Player development

[Charlie Hough]

Originally Posted by Brad K

If they view it that way they could never have produced the OOTP that we have.

I have seen them make many statements saying that something is working but not necessarily working as intended or the way that people are wanting. So that is, in fact, how they view these things at times. Fortunately, since they understand that it might not be working as intended or the way people want, that's what's led to many of those continuous improvements over the years.

They definitely did not fully implement what I and others were requesting when we asked to have them finally enable development to start working once players run out of recalc stats. They certainly implemented it on some level, as the evidence clearly shows that development changes are taking place. But obviously those changes don't match what we were asking to see. Recalc with development isn't the answer either, because that can cause player ratings to change during the course of the season, and based on many posts I've seen over the years, it seems that most recalc players don't want that. Maybe there is a way to work around it with other settings, but I don't think they want workarounds either. Let's just get what was originally requested.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

Recalc with development isn't the answer either, because that can cause player ratings to change during the course of the season, and based on many posts I've seen over the years, it seems that most recalc players don't want that. Maybe there is a way to work around it with other settings, but I don't think they want workarounds either. Let's just get what was originally requested.

You say people don't want ratings to change during the season yet most people are playing with TCR on.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

I have seen them make many statements saying that something is working but not necessarily working as intended or the way that people are wanting. So that is, in fact, how they view these things at times. Fortunately, since they understand that it might not be working as intended or the way people want, that's what's led to many of those continuous improvements over the years.

On one hand you argue that something not working as intended is still working then credit that as causing improvements in the game. Your view only applies in once instance. An escalator can never be broken. When it stops working it becomes stairs. (credit to Mitch Hedberg)

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Brad K

On one hand you argue that something not working as intended is still working then credit that as causing improvements in the game. Your view only applies in once instance. An escalator can never be broken. When it stops working it becomes stairs. (credit to Mitch Hedberg)

Oh man, a fricken Mitch Hedberg quote. Thank you.

[Andrej72]

I am curious what the development engine will do with Branch Rickey in my current save where I used "imported season" setting for current ratings. IRL in 1906 he had pretty decent stats by deadball era standards, so his ratings are quite good, and for some reason he also has pretty decent ratings for infield positions not only for catcher. After this single season he never played any decent ball again.

[Andrej72]

A player with higher overall rating than his potential. :-)

[luckymann]

OK, so I've been following this fascinating thread from the sidelines and just wanted to revisit the comments I made early on.

So this is exactly the sort of thing I was referring to regarding preordained imprints. Now it is only early and could change, but this is exactly what I was talking about.

In this instance, it involves NeL / Cuban star of the 1900s Carlos Moran.

I edited him and entered the edits into his profile after he came in as a 20/20 scrub because of course the NeL and similar leagues of that era are still regarded as low minors.

This is how his profile looked after my edits:



Now - halfway through the first season in this dev-only league - this is how he looks:




It's bizarre, because while his CONTACT tanked, his OVR / POT remain roughly in the vicinity of the original and he is performing really well. Anyway, this is the sort of behaviour that has convinced me about this imprint conspiracy I seem obsessed with.

Whatever the case, it's fairly bizarre all the same. It has basically just ripped out whatever potential I had edited in for him.

G

[Charlie Hough]

Originally Posted by luckymann

I edited him and entered the edits into his profile after he came in as a 20/20 scrub because of course the NeL and similar leagues of that era are still regarded as low minors.

They're not treated as low minors. The issue is that the NeL played around 80 official games per season, so players' AB and IP totals are way lower than those of NL and AL players. As a result, the adjust/weaken settings in OOTP often cause many players to be rated lower than you would expect. You have to lower your adjust/weaken AB and IP thresholds in order for NeL players to be given the proper major league ratings. Otherwise, OOTP adjusts many NeL player ratings in the same way that it handles part-time NL or AL bench players.

Lowering your thresholds won't fix all NeL players, as inevitably some are going to be below your thresholds, unless you set them to zero. But you'll see much better results if you change your settings. Hopefully we can get this fixed in OOTP25 by having a multiple applied to the thresholds when they're applied to NeL players. It would be as simple as multiplying the AB/IP thresholds by around 0.5 when adjusting NeL players, while keeping them as they are for the rest of MLB.

[luckymann]

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

They're not treated as low minors. The issue is that the NeL played around 80 official games per season, so players' AB and IP totals are way lower than those of NL and AL players. As a result, the adjust/weaken settings in OOTP often cause many players to be rated lower than you would expect. You have to lower your adjust/weaken AB and IP thresholds in order for NeL players to be given the proper major league ratings. Otherwise, OOTP adjusts many NeL player ratings in the same way that it handles part-time NL or AL bench players.

Lowering your thresholds won't fix all NeL players, as inevitably some are going to be below your thresholds, unless you set them to zero. But you'll see much better results if you change your settings. Hopefully we can get this fixed in OOTP25 by having a multiple applied to the thresholds when they're applied to NeL players. It would be as simple as multiplying the AB/IP thresholds by around 0.5 when adjusting NeL players, while keeping them as they are for the rest of MLB.

Not an issue for me as I edit them to 550AB / 250IP. Plus I use 120/100 and 25/18 as my make bads - again, making it a non-factor.

And they do treat these 1900-era guys as low minors when using recalc.

All the same, appreciate the feedback.

G

[Charlie Hough]

Originally Posted by luckymann

Not an issue for me as I edit them to 550AB / 250IP. Plus I use 120/100 and 25/18 as my make bads - again, making it a non-factor.

Those settings work okay for starters, but they'll cause some semi-regulars to be weaker than what they should be. Quite a few teams had a couple of players who played in one-third or more of their games but only had around 95 to 120 at bats. It's also an issue for some of the top-hitting pitchers such as Bullet Joe Rogan. Suddenly, they go from being outstanding or very good hitters to below-average or well-below-average.

And they do treat these 1900-era guys as low minors when using recalc.

When are you seeing this? Are you seeing it after a season is simulated and new ratings are recalculated? I just created a new recalc saved game starting in 1924, and all NeL players have MLB-level ratings. Their ratings are calculated based on their stats being at an MLB level. I haven't used recalc since OOTP 23, and I wasn't playing during the NeL era at that time, so maybe the game is incorrectly recalculating future ratings. But it's definitely working properly when these players are first imported and created.

[luckymann]

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

Those settings work okay for starters, but they'll cause some semi-regulars to be weaker than what they should be. Quite a few teams had a couple of players who played in one-third or more of their games but only had around 95 to 120 at bats. It's also an issue for some of the top-hitting pitchers such as Bullet Joe Rogan. Suddenly, they go from being outstanding or very good hitters to below-average or well-below-average.

When are you seeing this? Are you seeing it after a season is simulated and new ratings are recalculated? I just created a new recalc saved game starting in 1924, and all NeL players have MLB-level ratings. Their ratings are calculated based on their stats being at an MLB level. I haven't used recalc since OOTP 23, and I wasn't playing during the NeL era at that time, so maybe the game is incorrectly recalculating future ratings. But it's definitely working properly when these players are first imported and created.

I'm talking guys like Home Run Johnson, Julian Castillo, Carlos Moran. Pre-1920 guys. These guys played the majority of their careers in leagues the game considers minors - in the case of the Cuban / Mexican Leagues, low minors.

[Charlie Hough]

Unless their stats are from one of the recognized Negro major leagues, then that's how their ratings are going to be calculated. I'm sure that's by design. Otherwise, you'd be going against the official assessments of MLB and baseball historians.

Obviously, there are only seven Negro leagues recognized as major, and all others are considered to be minors or low minors because their talent levels were considerably lower, and they didn't have the money to retain the best players. Then there are the issues with franchises folding, leagues folding, and general volatility. Hence, OOTP appears to handle these leagues the way they're viewed by historians and by MLB. The same thing happens with all historical minors players who played in leagues that are considered lower-level.

[luckymann]

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

Unless their stats are from one of the recognized Negro major leagues, then that's how their ratings are going to be calculated. I'm sure that's by design. Otherwise, you'd be going against the official assessments of MLB and baseball historians.

Obviously, there are only seven Negro leagues recognized as major, and all others are considered to be minors or low minors because their talent levels were considerably lower, and they didn't have the money to retain the best players. Then there are the issues with franchises folding, leagues folding, and general volatility. Hence, OOTP appears to handle these leagues the way they're viewed by historians and by MLB. The same thing happens with all historical minors players who played in leagues that are considered lower-level.

Yeah, I'm fully aware how it works. You're kind of missing my point. I'm talking about an edited guy in a dev only environment. It refers back to a conversation early in this thread.

[Charlie Hough]

Originally Posted by luckymann

Yeah, I'm fully aware how it works. You're kind of missing my point. I'm talking about an edited guy in a dev only environment. It refers back to a conversation early in this thread.

I get your point, but I didn't understand editing the player in the first place, especially when his ratings were calculated the way they were supposed to be, based on his real-life league level. But, if you want to edit a player, it's your game.

However, let's talk about the rest of your theory and the example you provided. If there's an "imprint," then how did Carols Moran's power potential increase from 11 to 19? Was his original power potential higher, and you edited it to be lower? What was his power potential originally?

If his power potential has increased above what OOTP originally calculated, before your edits, then that would seem to dispel the idea that there's an imprint and that the game is now lowering the player's ratings to fit that imprint. I don't know how the game could be enforcing "imprints" when I've seen many thousands of players end up with ratings that are radically different from what you'd expect based on their initial potentials or initial ratings.

Maybe this is something weird that's happening only when players are edited. I have rarely edited players in an OOTP game, and I don't think I've ever edited their potentials. But if the idea is that there are imprints for non-edited players, then there are just too many counter-examples.

Earlier in this thread, when we were looking at how players such as Willie Mays develop, if there were an "imprint" for their potentials, then why were Willie's potentials starting to decline, and why was he failing to match his imprint? Why did his potentials decline when they should have stayed the same or increased?

The player in your example is at a pivotal age in OOTP, where players with lower ratings at the age of 23 or 24 can often start to see a decline in their potential. That's what happened with Willie Mays. He was getting a bit older for a prospect, and it seems that OOTP has a law of diminishing returns or diminishing potential when players get to that point and haven't really started to realize their potential yet. There is a high risk that their potential will end up lower than it was just a year or two earlier. I suspect that this is what happened with Carlos Moran.

[luckymann]

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

I get your point, but I didn't understand editing the player in the first place, especially when his ratings were calculated the way they were supposed to be, based on his real-life league level. But, if you want to edit a player, it's your game.

However, let's talk about the rest of your theory and the example you provided. If there's an "imprint," then how did Carols Moran's power potential increase from 11 to 19? Was his original power potential higher, and you edited it to be lower? What was his power potential originally?

If his power potential has increased above what OOTP originally calculated, before your edits, then that would seem to dispel the idea that there's an imprint and that the game is now lowering the player's ratings to fit that imprint. I don't know how the game could be enforcing "imprints" when I've seen many thousands of players end up with ratings that are radically different from what you'd expect based on their initial potentials or initial ratings.

Maybe this is something weird that's happening only when players are edited. I have rarely edited players in an OOTP game, and I don't think I've ever edited their potentials. But if the idea is that there are imprints for non-edited players, then there are just too many counter-examples.

Earlier in this thread, when we were looking at how players such as Willie Mays develop, if there were an "imprint" for their potentials, then why were Willie's potentials starting to decline, and why was he failing to match his imprint? Why did his potentials decline when they should have stayed the same or increased?

The player in your example is at a pivotal age in OOTP, where players with lower ratings at the age of 23 or 24 can often start to see a decline in their potential. That's what happened with Willie Mays. He was getting a bit older for a prospect, and it seems that OOTP has a low of diminishing returns or diminishing potential when players get to that point and haven't really started to realize their potential yet. There is a high risk that their potential will end up lower than it was just a year or two earlier. I suspect that this is what happened with Carlos Moran.

Well my way of thinking is that there has to be some kind of imprint created upon import, so that the player at least goes some way to being representative of his IRL self in a dev only environment.

That being the case, it follows on that the imprint must at least in part and to some degree be derived from his IRL stats.

The points you raise are valid, and I can't reply unequivocally. The Mays example has undermined my theory, I'll readily admit that.

I just fail to understand why, if you set an under-30yo guy with a CURRENT and POTENTIAL set of stats, why the game doesn't simply adhere to them. Why allow the edit in the first place if it isn't going to stick?

As for why edit in the first place? Well, because even with the recent improvements I feel NeL guys remain hard done by, particularly those like Carlos and Julian Castillo and Ben Taylor. Go visit any of my many saves and you'll see I'm not just throwing darts here. I've probably done as much work as (and maybe even more than) anyone else since Spritze with regard to the in-game relationship between NeLers and OOTP. So I disagree entirely with the premise of your first point.

So many different factors play a part, this I do know. For example, Carlos Moran is a 3B and so his abject lack of power counts against him when all 3B ratings are marked like-for-like. This likely explains his PWR decrease. Same with Ben Taylor at 1B, who never holds his curated ratings much past the original edit.

As I said, I'd just love some guidance from those in the know as to how to proceed if I do want to curate my own versions of these early NeL guys. The later ones now like Oscar and Josh are much more accurate, same with the pitchers in general. Just not the non-US and pre-1920 guys.

And it must be pointed out that these aren't necessarily complaints I raise, although I do wish it was the way I just explained. I'd love some clarification about it from the devs if possible, that's all. So I can better understand the process and not have unreasonable expectations or make inaccurate claims.

Loving the to and fro, Charlie.

G

[luckymann]

I just realised I have a good v23 to v24 comparison I can offer. Here's a curated Carlos derived from the same edits in my quasi-NeL save which is still on 23. You'll see he's three seasons in and has suffered no such ill-effects, ratings-wise, and has performed well since coming into the league:

[Charlie Hough]

Originally Posted by luckymann

Well my way of thinking is that there has to be some kind of imprint created upon import, so that the player at least goes some way to being representative of his IRL self in a dev only environment.

I could definitely see OOTP Developments doing this, if the goal were to put "guard rails" on historical players. It could create a potential "path" for them to follow, based on their real-life stats, but still leave things open for the development engine. If "imprints" are actually coded into the game and used in development-only games, then I suspect that this is how it works. But that would go against the entire spirit and purpose of the development engine, which is to base player development on randomness, age, experience, coaching, performance, and other factors. For that reason, plus the many thousands of counter-examples where it doesn't seem to work that way, I highly doubt that imprints actually exist in OOTP. Ultimately, maybe you can ask Lukas and get a response.

I just fail to understand why, if you set an under-30yo guy with a CURRENT and POTENTIAL set of stats, why the game doesn't simply adhere to them. Why allow the edit in the first place if it isn't going to stick?

Well, do you want development or not? As soon as you turn on development, then the game is potentially going to modify a player's current and/or potential ratings. I can certainly understand being annoyed if it happens within a matter of months, and you don't get a chance to see how the player might have developed if the edited ratings hadn't changed. But that's just how development works.

As for why edit in the first place? Well, because even with the recent improvements I feel NeL guys remain hard done by, particularly those like Carlos and Julian Castillo and Ben Taylor.

I can certainly appreciate that, and it's a good cause. But it's also a problem endemic to all of early professional baseball. It's not just limited to those early NeL players. It affects hundreds of players in the OOTP database, particularly with historical minors. It's also a matter of how to evaluate individual players and their stats, relative to their leagues, in OOTP or any other sim.

Depending on when they're imported and created in OOTP, their ratings and potential can be wildly different because they were playing for different teams in different leagues, so their stats for a given season could be evaluated as anything from BC to AAA. If they were in a league that is now considered low minors, then generally their ratings are going to be downgraded, even though the "majors" vs. "minors" distinction didn't truly exist. But, if they had particularly amazing stats, they often get MLB-level ratings anyway, even in some cases where they shouldn't. I'm hoping that the latter problem will be fixed, but the overall issue of evaluating individual players will remain.

For certain famous NeL cases such as Moran, Castillo or Taylor, I can understand wanting to single them out and give them more of an individual treatment. But I just don't know how you could provide options in OOTP to make this work on such a selective basis. If you turn off development or lock down a player's current and potential ratings, then his ratings will never change. If you do anything less than that, then you're inviting possible changes. Maybe there's a potential solution, but I can't really conceive of what it would be without potential contradictions or unwanted outcomes.

[Charlie Hough]

Originally Posted by luckymann

I just realised I have a good v23 to v24 comparison I can offer. Here's a curated Carlos derived from the same edits in my quasi-NeL save which is still on 23. You'll see he's three seasons in and has suffered no such ill-effects, ratings-wise, and has performed well since coming into the league:

So there you go. This seems like strong evidence that your OOTP 24 instance was just a case of pure randomness. I would run a few OOTP 24 sims under the exact same conditions to confirm that.

[luckymann]

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

I could definitely see OOTP Developments doing this, if the goal were to put "guard rails" on historical players. It could create a potential "path" for them to follow, based on their real-life stats, but still leave things open for the development engine. If "imprints" are actually coded into the game and used in development-only games, then I suspect that this is how it works. But that would go against the entire spirit and purpose of the development engine, which is to base player development on randomness, age, experience, coaching, performance, and other factors. For that reason, plus the many thousands of counter-examples where it doesn't seem to work that way, I highly doubt that imprints actually exist in OOTP. Ultimately, maybe you can ask Lukas and get a response.



Well, do you want development or not? As soon as you turn on development, then the game is potentially going to modify a player's current and/or potential ratings. I can certainly understand being annoyed if it happens within a matter of months, and you don't get a chance to see how the player might have developed if the edited ratings hadn't changed. But that's just how development works.



I can certainly appreciate that, and it's a good cause. But it's also a problem endemic to all of early professional baseball. It's not just limited to those early NeL players. It affects hundreds of players in the OOTP database, particularly with historical minors. It's also a matter of how to evaluate individual players and their stats, relative to their leagues, in OOTP or any other sim.

Depending on when they're imported and created in OOTP, their ratings and potential can be wildly different because they were playing for different teams in different leagues, so their stats for a given season could be evaluated as anything from BC to AAA. If they were in a league that is now considered low minors, then generally their ratings are going to be downgraded, even though the "majors" vs. "minors" distinction didn't truly exist. But, if they had particularly amazing stats, they often get MLB-level ratings anyway, even in some cases where they shouldn't. I'm hoping that the latter problem will be fixed, but the overall issue of evaluating individual players will remain.

For certain famous NeL cases such as Moran, Castillo or Taylor, I can understand wanting to single them out and give them more of an individual treatment. But I just don't know how you could provide options in OOTP to make this work on such a selective basis. If you turn off development or lock down a player's current and potential ratings, then his ratings will never change. If you do anything less than that, then you're inviting possible changes. Maybe there's a potential solution, but I can't really conceive of what it would be without potential contradictions or unwanted outcomes.

The solution is simple. If you allow a player to be edited then let those edits be the determining factor for the player's career trajectory. I'm not saying it has to be followed to the letter. But the edits entered should become the new "guardrail" as you call it, replacing the game-generated imprint.

That wasn't the point I was trying to make with the v23 comparison but you're right, I'll let this be now and see how Carlos and other of his ilk perform in this new save. I'll report back at some point.

G