Which develops faster in prospects - Contact vs Power / Stuff vs Movement

[sloanrobe]

I'm scouting players for an upcoming fictional league draft. Any advice or input on which ratings develop more quickly in prospects? Tidbits of knowledge or draft strategy you use? And yes, I do realize there are a lot of other factors, like coaching and personality, that affect development.

For example, I read somewhere that for HS pitchers, many times their Stuff is on the lower end but it increases as the grow older. Thus, don't necessarily ignore HS pitchers with good movement and a low Stuff rating.

For batters - Contact or Power? For pitchers - Stuff or Movement?

[Syd Thrift]

*This* is something I'd love to see studied. Conventional wisdom states that power takes longer to develop than contact, although it's my sense that in-game the Avoid Ks skill takes about as long as Power (probably) but BABIP (which is heavily correlated to speed) is maxed out or close to it from the get-go... that would have the effect of making power seem to take longer.

CW is also that Control and Movement are what you assume will get better as you get older but I do see an awful lot of young prospects with pinpoint control so I'm not sure how much that's true with fictional leagues. I think with Stuff in particular the thing is that if a guy has, say, 3-4 pitches that are all already decent quality with room for improvement, you can assume they'll usually all get better (although development can be fickle); however, if a guy's got a 20/80 slider or (especially) changeup, you should probably assume that never develops, even if the potentials on it are decent, and that in turn that pitcher will probably only ever be a reliever in the major leagues.

Again though, these are personal observations, not data from studies.

[KBLover]

I've never done a formal study (don't have the energy or even a good methodology), but from what I can tell both in my leagues and the OOTP23 online league I'm in:

Pitchers:
Usually Stuff unless they have a high GB rate. Then both Stuff/Movement can move in lock step and if velo/pitches are low, Movement takes the lead.

Pitchers with poor pitch ratings, even with high potential, can take FOREVER to move their stuff up, especially if it's bad third-fifth pitches (and by that I mean their rating, not the tradition 1 = fastball...if fastball is the 4th rated pitch, even with high pot it can be slow and hold the Stuff rating back accordingly.

Control - if it's bad, it's another one that can take forever to develop. If it's around 35-40, it probably will move up gradually, perhaps faster with a Finesse pitching coach (don't quote me on that, but just something I do - switch out pitching coach at all levels to Finesse if there's prospects that are good...except for 20/60 control). It seems like Control is the "failed prospect" rating. Guys that have 50/60/70 in Stuff/Movement but...20 control....and get stuck there. They either are effectively wild (maybe, one guy in my league is 80/70/20 and he's been a journeyman hit-or-miss guy) or just wash out and eventually quit in the minors.


Batters:
Seems like it depends on how much they start with. I don't know if that sets some kind of "archetype" development in the engine...but those Joey Gallos rarely develop good contact even with plus potential for the league. I've seen these guys with 75 power and maybe go from 25 to 35 in contact.

Power tends to "catch up" better (i.e 70 contact with 20 power is more likely to maybe reach average or fringe power more likely than 20 contact and 70 power will reach fringe contact).

[mytreds]

For pitchers, Stuff is first, it’s the raw talent of a young pitcher. Movement develops over time as the pitcher gets older

For batters, Power is the raw talent stat. Contact develops over time.

[Pelican]

And to focus for a moment just on “faster”, meaning variability over time - hopefully, improvement - the prospect age is important. That 16-year-old international prospect signed for a million dollars has tremendous variability. Plenty of time to get better - or get worse. If, like me, you prefer drafting experienced college players, at 21 or 22 or 23, it’s much more “what you see is what you get”. You should not expect too much further development (or loss of skill, barring an injury) in any skill. There still should be some potential; but a higher floor and lower ceiling.