Dev / Aging Speed

[hfield007]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

If I find the defaults not to yield what I consider to be reasonable results, which has been the case in every version so far, I reserve the right to change them.

It's my game, I'm going to play it my way

It's not your game, it's Markus'.

And lukasberger really didn't say you couldn't or suggest otherwise. You basically scoffed at his response about Markus with your "lol" and all he did was defend that Markus considers his work to be accurate. Ya know, Markus, who is also nice enough to include the ability to change it.

Seems as if you are being overly sensitive.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by hfield007

It's not your game, it's Markus'.

And lukasberger really didn't say you couldn't or suggest otherwise. You basically scoffed at his response about Markus with your "lol" and all he did was defend that Markus considers his work to be accurate. Ya know, Markus, who is also nice enough to include the ability to change it.

Seems as if you are being overly sensitive.

You don't know the OOTP Mantra, do you? It's "It's your game, play it your way."

I laughed because I always have to change those settings. And yes, I know Markus.

Bye.

[Eiskrap]

Testing default aging/development. Simmed to 2032 and used the next 5 years of data compared to 2009-2013 MLB data.

[The Wolf]

Good work. You can see where the settings need a bit of tweaking.

[Eiskrap]

Same test using batter ageing at 0.250, development 1.000

[rworth88]

Great work!

[tejdog1]

So what's the right settings? I use 0.775/0.825 for batter/pitcher aging.

[MrWideFrame]

Good work! The .250 aging makes a pretty substantial improvement.

[Questdog]

I recently did a study on the distribution of ages for drafted players making their debuts and OOTP15's data matched the MLB data for the last 20 years pretty closely with the default settings. If you are playing the MLB quickstart or are otherwise trying to mimic current MLB conditions, there is no reason to alter the default development speed, and in fact if you do, you are making your league out of whack with real life. If that's what you want, that is fine, but if you are doing it to get more realistic results, you are just mistaken.

I did not do any formal study of the aging speed, but with the defaults you will get a few players hanging around into their mid-forties and and some players who crash before they hit 35, just like real life.

As far as the two speeds working together, the distribution of career plate appearances in OOTP is very similar to the MLB data of the last 20 years.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Eiskrap

Same test using batter ageing at 0.250, development 1.000

Thank you. Time to tweak the numbers again.

[Klew1986]

So what would you recommend using for 2014 MLB game?

[Questdog]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Thank you. Time to tweak the numbers again.

I would be hesitant to use the numbers from the MLB Quickstart as a guide to what you'd see in a standard fictional league. The players in the Quickstart were created by humans and not the game.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by Klew1986

So what would you recommend using for 2014 MLB game?

The defaults.

[Eiskrap]

Originally Posted by Questdog

I would be hesitant to use the numbers from the MLB Quickstart as a guide to what you'd see in a standard fictional league. The players in the Quickstart were created by humans and not the game.

For my testing I used the quick start and then simmed ahead to 2035 to get rid of all human created players, so it was essentially fictional.

Be really interested to see any results you have that suggest OOTP15 defaults mimic real life, as my testing suggests that players drop off too early and you don't get many players aged 33+ (just for batters at present)

[Questdog]

Originally Posted by Eiskrap

For my testing I used the quick start and then simmed ahead to 2035 to get rid of all human created players, so it was essentially fictional.

Be really interested to see any results you have that suggest OOTP15 defaults mimic real life, as my testing suggests that players drop off too early and you don't get many players aged 33+ (just for batters at present)

In my pertinent studies, I focused on debut ages of drafted players and was more concerned about the development speed rather than the aging speed. Only thing I checked related to aging speed was the career plate appearances and innings pitched distribution, which looked good in OOTP compared to the 1993-2013 MLB data. Those leagues were created on early beta builds that will not load on the current build, so I did not keep them.

Currently, I am working on a fictional league where I want players to age much more quickly than current MLB players. I want 40 year olds to be rare and I want most players to be unable to keep their jobs past age 35.

So here are the last two season's of that league's numbers for hitters with Development and Aging for hitters both set to 1.500:

Age % of PA
20    .24
21   1.31
22   3.31
23   5.10
24   7.90
25   9.79
26  10.43
27  11.18
28   9.78
29   8.73
30   7.26
31   7.66
32   4.90
33   4.54
34   2.76
35   2.15
36   1.28
37   1.12
38    .46
39    .03
40    .07
41    .01

[dickysty]

Originally Posted by Questdog

In my pertinent studies, I focused on debut ages of drafted players and was more concerned about the development speed rather than the aging speed. Only thing I checked related to aging speed was the career plate appearances and innings pitched distribution, which looked good in OOTP compared to the 1993-2013 MLB data. Those leagues were created on early beta builds that will not load on the current build, so I did not keep them.

Currently, I am working on a fictional league where I want players to age much more quickly than current MLB players. I want 40 year olds to be rare and I want most players to be unable to keep their jobs past age 35.

So here are the last two season's of that league's numbers for hitters with Development and Aging for hitters both set to 1.500:

Age % of PA
20    .24
21   1.31
22   3.31
23   5.10
24   7.90
25   9.79
26  10.43
27  11.18
28   9.78
29   8.73
30   7.26
31   7.66
32   4.90
33   4.54
34   2.76
35   2.15
36   1.28
37   1.12
38    .46
39    .03
40    .07
41    .01

Curious. Are you keep pitching dev and aging at 1.000?

[abooth]

I found the aging speed quite odd last year, and it seems more prevalent this year. There are things that this game can't/doesn't take into account such as a power pitcher loses velocity at some point and need to transition as a different kind of pitcher. For some pitchers this is incredibly successful. There just doesn't seem to happen in this game. So particularly for power pitchers, once they lose velocity in this game, they are done.

As far as players in general, I still feel they peak WAY too soon, and then age way too fast. If a player is exceptionally good, say a 4-5 stars at age 25, should they peak then? And then should they be in rapid decline by age 30/31? I understand the intent, to a certain extent, is to encourage rapid turn over of players to keep the game from getting stale, but I feel that this actually makes the game more stale. It's harder to rebuild a team, or maintain a franchise if you try to build upon a 27 year old star and within 4 seasons, he is getting 20+ mill a year to come off the bench and hit .210.

[Questdog]

Originally Posted by dickysty

Curious. Are you keep pitching dev and aging at 1.000?

No....I actually have pitchers at 1.600 development speed and 1.400 aging. It's not a big difference from 1.500 for each, but I want pitchers to have a little better chance to be good at a very young age and hang around a bit longer.

I'm trying to mimic baseball back in the early 20th century when most everyone was done by 35, but a few managed to hang around.

I think it's working well so far.

[dave1927p]

i like shorter careers so i do 1.400 or higher than 1.200...not realistic but rather fun for my first 50 years of existence, then i do 1.100

[RchW]

Originally Posted by abooth

I found the aging speed quite odd last year, and it seems more prevalent this year. There are things that this game can't/doesn't take into account such as a power pitcher loses velocity at some point and need to transition as a different kind of pitcher. For some pitchers this is incredibly successful. There just doesn't seem to happen in this game. So particularly for power pitchers, once they lose velocity in this game, they are done.

As far as players in general, I still feel they peak WAY too soon, and then age way too fast. If a player is exceptionally good, say a 4-5 stars at age 25, should they peak then? And then should they be in rapid decline by age 30/31? I understand the intent, to a certain extent, is to encourage rapid turn over of players to keep the game from getting stale, but I feel that this actually makes the game more stale. It's harder to rebuild a team, or maintain a franchise if you try to build upon a 27 year old star and within 4 seasons, he is getting 20+ mill a year to come off the bench and hit .210.

You should read some Fangraphs stuff.
Are Aging Curves Changing? | FanGraphs Baseball