Current ability ratings is higher than potential ratings?

Rod · 07-30-2006, 09:05 AM

I have a player that does better than what he should be able to do according to his potential ratings. How is this possible?

fauteuil7 · 07-30-2006, 12:18 PM

I've noticed this a lot too and thought it was strange. Just out of curiosity, do you have scouts on or off?

sfgiants88 · 07-30-2006, 01:27 PM

This is actually normal.

If he is young, his ability rating may fall back to reality, but he could also maintain his current ability ratings for a while.

If 2006 works the same way as 6.5, many older players end up having ratings like this as they come to the end of their careers.

fauteuil7 · 07-31-2006, 11:35 AM

Cool. This is one of those things that seems like an error until you hear a reasonable explanation from someone.

TETCHY · 07-31-2006, 06:59 PM

These ratings of course are not absolutes, especialy with scouting on. Note that each scout has a different opinion of what a player's potential AND current stats are (typicaly). Further, it is not unreasonable to OOTP-zen a player having higher ratings relative then potential as having exceded the expectations of the scouts. It's kinda cool when you come across players like this, and a real drag when 95% of them come back down to earth.

(I have thus completed my one usefull (I hope) post for the year and will now go back to lerking....

)

ptwarr18 · 08-01-2006, 04:02 PM

People play about their ability level at times in real life.... It is not an error when a prospect or older player falls below their talent ratings, so why is this considered an error to you

fauteuil7 · 08-01-2006, 04:37 PM

If this happens with scouts off (as I've noticed), then it's an error. Players in OOTP aren't people, they're an accumulation of numbers, so if the numbers don't jibe, then it appears to be an error, or at least incomplete information. If one of the ratings climbs above what the stated maximum is, then the maximum should be slid up too. It's nit-picking, I know, and I'm not all that concerned about it, but it's just not logical.

sfgiants88 · 08-01-2006, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fauteuil7

If this happens with scouts off (as I've noticed), then it's an error. Players in OOTP aren't people, they're an accumulation of numbers, so if the numbers don't jibe, then it appears to be an error, or at least incomplete information. If one of the ratings climbs above what the stated maximum is, then the maximum should be slid up too. It's nit-picking, I know, and I'm not all that concerned about it, but it's just not logical.

One plus side to it is that it often gives you a clue when your veteran player is about to tank. After the talent drops significantly, actual ratings soon follow. I understand your point though.

Carplos · 08-01-2006, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fauteuil7

If this happens with scouts off (as I've noticed), then it's an error. Players in OOTP aren't people, they're an accumulation of numbers, so if the numbers don't jibe, then it appears to be an error, or at least incomplete information. If one of the ratings climbs above what the stated maximum is, then the maximum should be slid up too. It's nit-picking, I know, and I'm not all that concerned about it, but it's just not logical.

...they need numbers to fall to as they get older.

It wasn't an error in previous versions when "talents" fell below the numerical ratings. It's the way the game has players abilities decline.

Cooker · 08-01-2006, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carplos

...they need numbers to fall to as they get older.

It wasn't an error in previous versions when "talents" fell below the numerical ratings. It's the way the game has players abilities decline.

But the odd thing is that so many minor league players who are still young (i.e., under 25) have ratings higher than their talents. In general it'd make more sense if (ordinarily) younger players had talents HIGHER than their ratings, while older players (those well over 30) had talents that were LOWER.

It doesn't ruin the game for me or anything.

But I do think it's strange.

fauteuil7 · 08-01-2006, 07:05 PM

What I was talking about was when a player has a "Gap Power" potential of 74 but his actual rating is 81; not that players' ratings dropped below their potential, which of course makes perfect sense. I'm living far below my potential in a lot of areas so I certainly understand how that works.

If a player has an actual rating higher than his potential rating (which I always took to be the cap of what he can achieve in that ability) then calling it a potential rating doesn't seem percise. Once again, no big deal, I just think it's curious. Reading some of the responses, I do understand what's going on - when a player ages, the potential drops before the actual. So what does the word "potential" in this context mean? I always assumed that it meant the highest value this rating could ever reach. Once a player passes his peak the potential rating starts a downward trend? How can you follow this without keeping close track of every player's ratings from year to year?

You know, I started out just a little confused, but now it's full-blown befuddlement.

Carplos · 08-01-2006, 08:28 PM

Quote:

But the odd thing is that so many minor league players who are still young (i.e., under 25) have ratings higher than their talents. In general it'd make more sense if (ordinarily) younger players had talents HIGHER than their ratings, while older players (those well over 30) had talents that were LOWER.

Fair enough--that probably has a good deal to do with the problems with aging in the game.

Quote:

What I was talking about was when a player has a "Gap Power" potential of 74 but his actual rating is 81; not that players' ratings dropped below their potential, which of course makes perfect sense. I'm living far below my potential in a lot of areas so I certainly understand how that works.

If a player has an actual rating higher than his potential rating (which I always took to be the cap of what he can achieve in that ability) then calling it a potential rating doesn't seem percise. Once again, no big deal, I just think it's curious. Reading some of the responses, I do understand what's going on - when a player ages, the potential drops before the actual. So what does the word "potential" in this context mean? I always assumed that it meant the highest value this rating could ever reach. Once a player passes his peak the potential rating starts a downward trend? How can you follow this without keeping close track of every player's ratings from year to year?

I agree that "Potential" may become inaccurate, but like you said yourself, players in OOTP aren't real people, the computer needs something work with.

Quote:

How can you follow this without keeping close track of every player's ratings from year to year?

The same way you keep track of developing players? I'm not quite sure I understand what you're asking. If you notice a player with potentials lower than their current ratings, you can guess they're likely to come down from wherever they are at some point, rather than go up further.

JDOldSchool · 08-01-2006, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fauteuil7

If this happens with scouts off (as I've noticed), then it's an error. Players in OOTP aren't people, they're an accumulation of numbers, so if the numbers don't jibe, then it appears to be an error, or at least incomplete information. If one of the ratings climbs above what the stated maximum is, then the maximum should be slid up too. It's nit-picking, I know, and I'm not all that concerned about it, but it's just not logical.

I've never considered the talent number to be a "maximum possible rating." I'm not sure why you do.

sfgiants88 · 08-01-2006, 08:41 PM

Rather than thinking of it as a "max potential" rating, try thinking of it as "what's likely to happen in the future."

fauteuil7 · 08-02-2006, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sfgiants88

Rather than thinking of it as a "max potential" rating, try thinking of it as "what's likely to happen in the future."

Fair enough. I had read "potential" more in the "this kid's got potential" way than in the "this is potentially what's going to happen" sense.

Just to round up my defense of my sounding like Larry Literal...how do you know if a player is on the upswing or downswing. Okay, the way I understand these Potential ratings now, you can have a guy with the following Potential Contact:

Age Rating
22 70
25 75
28 80
31 77
34 72
37 68

But if you only see the player at age 31, how do you know if he's on a ratings upswing or a downswing?

I think I got my impression of what Potential ratings in OOTP are from Front Page Sports Baseball where they had (if I'm remembering correctly) hidden potential ratings which were each player's absolute ratings cap - it was the same at age 18 as it was at 38. That's someone's potential - as it's used in OOTP, it's more of a "Projected" rating like you say, sfgiants88.

Thank you everyone for explaining it - I never used to post in the forum here until this version (despite having started with OOTP 5) and am glad that people are so helpful with explaining things that may be obvious to everyone else but which I have completely misunderstood for years now. (Is there a smiley with a dunce cap?)

07-30-2006, 09:05 AM	#1
Rod Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 29	Current ability ratings is higher than potential ratings? I have a player that does better than what he should be able to do according to his potential ratings. How is this possible?

08-01-2006, 04:02 PM	#6
ptwarr18 Major Leagues Join Date: May 2006 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 308	People play about their ability level at times in real life.... It is not an error when a prospect or older player falls below their talent ratings, so why is this considered an error to you __________________ Former OOTP veteran looking to get back into it

07-30-2006, 12:18 PM	#2
fauteuil7 Major Leagues Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 356	I've noticed this a lot too and thought it was strange. Just out of curiosity, do you have scouts on or off?

07-30-2006, 01:27 PM	#3
sfgiants88 All Star Reserve Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 885	This is actually normal. If he is young, his ability rating may fall back to reality, but he could also maintain his current ability ratings for a while. If 2006 works the same way as 6.5, many older players end up having ratings like this as they come to the end of their careers.

07-31-2006, 11:35 AM	#4
fauteuil7 Major Leagues Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 356	Cool. This is one of those things that seems like an error until you hear a reasonable explanation from someone.

08-01-2006, 04:37 PM	#7
fauteuil7 Major Leagues Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 356	If this happens with scouts off (as I've noticed), then it's an error. Players in OOTP aren't people, they're an accumulation of numbers, so if the numbers don't jibe, then it appears to be an error, or at least incomplete information. If one of the ratings climbs above what the stated maximum is, then the maximum should be slid up too. It's nit-picking, I know, and I'm not all that concerned about it, but it's just not logical.

08-01-2006, 07:05 PM	#11
fauteuil7 Major Leagues Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 356	What I was talking about was when a player has a "Gap Power" potential of 74 but his actual rating is 81; not that players' ratings dropped below their potential, which of course makes perfect sense. I'm living far below my potential in a lot of areas so I certainly understand how that works. If a player has an actual rating higher than his potential rating (which I always took to be the cap of what he can achieve in that ability) then calling it a potential rating doesn't seem percise. Once again, no big deal, I just think it's curious. Reading some of the responses, I do understand what's going on - when a player ages, the potential drops before the actual. So what does the word "potential" in this context mean? I always assumed that it meant the highest value this rating could ever reach. Once a player passes his peak the potential rating starts a downward trend? How can you follow this without keeping close track of every player's ratings from year to year? You know, I started out just a little confused, but now it's full-blown befuddlement.

08-01-2006, 08:41 PM	#14
sfgiants88 All Star Reserve Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 885	Rather than thinking of it as a "max potential" rating, try thinking of it as "what's likely to happen in the future."