Question about Potential Ratings

[bly08]

Hi, I have a question about the mechanics of potential rating in OOTP. If say, the same 5 star potential player at the beginning of two different saves with two different teams/scouts of the same game (ex. 2013 MLB start) turn quickly to 2 star potential in both games, does it mean that the player at the start of the game was never 5 star to begin with and that no matter how many times I play this start, he will develop into a bust; or that the factors of player development, ex. not enough playing time, playing at a level too high, etc, will lead him to becoming a bust and if those factors are managed better, he can actually reach his true potential?

I understand potential rating is comparative to the level of talent league wide, but since both starts are the same, the talent level should be the same. I have scouting on very high with two outstanding/legendary scouts, which I assume is close enough to scouting off that it won't matter. Basically if multiple scouts in different saves all see the same player as turning into a bust, does that reflect on the player or on outside factors? Thanks

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by bly08

Hi, I have a question about the mechanics of potential rating in OOTP. If say, the same 5 star potential player at the beginning of two different saves with two different teams/scouts of the same game (ex. 2013 MLB start) turn quickly to 2 star potential in both games, does it mean that the player at the start of the game was never 5 star to begin with and that no matter how many times I play this start, he will develop into a bust; or that the factors of player development, ex. not enough playing time, playing at a level too high, etc, will lead him to becoming a bust and if those factors are managed better, he can actually reach his true potential?

I understand potential rating is comparative to the level of talent league wide, but since both starts are the same, the talent level should be the same. I have scouting on very high with two outstanding/legendary scouts, which I assume is close enough to scouting off that it won't matter. Basically if multiple scouts in different saves all see the same player as turning into a bust, does that reflect on the player or on outside factors? Thanks

I bolded the part of your statement that I believe to be true. Here you are talking about actual versus potential.

However, there is another factor involved, perhaps. This one deals with potential itself; it's called Talent Change Randomness (found in Game Setup, Player & Picture Options). Here is what the online manual says about it ("Talent" = "Potential"):

The Talent Change Randomness option is a numeric value from 1 to 200 that controls how random player talent changes are. For example, a 200 here would mean that talent changes are highly random, making it more likely that players would experience significant changes in talent over the course of their career. Tweak this if necessary if you feel that player talent changes are either too drastic or too conservative. 100 is the default.

The way I read this is, same player, two different games means two different possible outcomes for this player's potential and therefore for his actual capabilities and performance.

EDIT: One more thing. You say he's a five-star guy. According to whom, if you have scouting enabled? It could be that he's overrated in any case and simply will bust over and over again. You could take a peek at his actual potential ratings as commissioner in edit mode to get a clue.

Heh. A complicated game. Are we having fun yet?

[bly08]

Thanks for the response, didn't know about talent randomness and I will check out the players in question in commissioner mode.

I have a couple more questions that I'll post here to keep the spam down.

I have several guys in their first and second years playing like all-stars. I think all of them are Super Twos. I messed up their call-ups and probably could have squeezed an extra year out of some of them. I would like to buy out all of their arbitration years but no one will accept a contract over 4 years. After extending their contracts I found that some still had one year of arbitration remaining after the deal ends. My questions are,

1.) Is it possible to convince a top player with less than three years, or even two years of service to sign a deal longer than 4 years? If yes then how?

2.) Should I be able to buy out all of the arbitration years of a Super Two if I offer the contract at the right time?

So in my dynasty, after giving out contracts to the players described above, some, not all have started under-performing, with one player at age 29 even dropping from five to three star potential in half a season.

3.) What are the causes to this?

4.) Does it have to do with the contract?

5.) Can I predict bad seasons by their personalities?

6.) Does this mean I should've maybe waited till after the first arbitration year to give out long term deals?


Thanks

[Déjà Bru]

1.) Is it possible to convince a top player with less than three years, or even two years of service to sign a deal longer than 4 years? If yes then how?

2.) Should I be able to buy out all of the arbitration years of a Super Two if I offer the contract at the right time?
The answer to both of these questions is, AKAIK, you can offer to do these things but there is no forcing or enticing players to accept the offer.
So in my dynasty, after giving out contracts to the players described above, some, not all have started under-performing, with one player at age 29 even dropping from five to three star potential in half a season.

3.) What are the causes to this?
Could be scouting reassessment, could be current bad performance, could be the aforementioned random talent change (which, by the way, you can control the frequency of in options).
4.) Does it have to do with the contract?
No. I am reasonably sure that contracts follow the ratings but ratings do not depend on contracts at all.
5.) Can I predict bad seasons by their personalities?
Very good question and one that is often overlooked by game players. The two biggest aspects that affect CAREERS (not just seasons) are Work Ethic and Intelligence. Amuse yourself sometime by tracking and noting which 4- and 5-star potential players are ignored by the AI in amateur drafts because they are LOW or VERY LOW in one or both of these aspects. The AI wants YOU to select them instead! These players will have a hard time developing into their potential, if ever. Also remember that all players can have a "bad season" and still be very good over time; this is built into the game.
6.) Does this mean I should've maybe waited till after the first arbitration year to give out long term deals?
Frankly, and maybe I'm naive about this, but why do you want to rush to give out long term deals to arbitration guys? Usually arbitration will cost you less and you get more time to evaluate the players before rewarding them with 10-year contracts.

[mgoetze]

Originally Posted by bly08

After extending their contracts I found that some still had one year of arbitration remaining after the deal ends.

I suppose you mean you found that the game was still displaying an arbitration year on the salary overview page? If so, the explanation is that they theoretically could have an arbitration year left if, say, they spend a lot of time on the 60-day DL. The game will display that arbitration year as long as that is still a possibility, but it will disappear eventually.

1.) Is it possible to convince a top player with less than three years, or even two years of service to sign a deal longer than 4 years? If yes then how?

Yes... just add more money.

6.) Does this mean I should've maybe waited till after the first arbitration year to give out long term deals?

Obviously this varies by player. The earliest I will sign a player long-term is when they have one more year of minimum salary left, as I find they just do not appreciate your paying them more for two minimum years enough. But the more common case is for me to do a longer-term deal before their first or second year of arbitration.