[OutS|der]

Originally Posted by Yanksrock02

Long time player that doesn't comment that much, but this topic is pulling me out of the weeds. This is long drawn out by this point, and a setting that allows users to choose whether or not potential affects stats output in the minors seems like a fair compromise.

Personally, I believe that current ability is just that. How the player should currently perform. I think allowing potential to influence influence statistical output makes zero sense, and potential is FUTURE potential. Current ability is how good the guy is RIGHT THIS MOMENT

However, this topic is part of a larger, almost philosophical discussion. What is potential?

- For some ratings, this is easy. A 30/75 power potential can be described as a tall, lanky player that if he fills out his frame with muscle, he'll be able to smack the crap out of the ball due to his current swing path.

- Though for other ratings, it is hard to quantify how potential would be calculated. How do you calculate a player's eye potential? It has to be how good their eye currently is against the level they face, right? How could a scout look at two players, both walking and showing discipline at the same rate in Low A, and say "okay this guy is a 35/70 eye, and this other guy is a 35/45.

I've always had this debate in my own head. I feel like for power, you can clearly delineate "Okay this guy doesn't have too much pop right now, but if he adds 25 pounds of muscle he could hit 30 a year" while for something like Eye, or Contact, its just "eh this guy is walking at this rate/making contact at this rate in the low minors, if he keeps this up he could maybe do the same in the majors"

I welcome any thoughts because I have been having this debate for ages

The five tools for position players are 1) Hitting 2) Power 3) Running 4) Fielding and 5) Throwing. The hit tool includes plate discipline.