How much of an effect does recent performance have output?

[Slammer]

So this is an extreme example, but say I have a 5-star player hitting .150 and a 1-star player hitting .350. Is the second player more likely to continue performing above expectations if his stats stay good? Is the first player going to play worse until his numbers climb back to normalcy?

Should I bench my ace pitcher with a 5.00 ERA and instead start the call-up from AA?

Basically, what I want to know is do player stats (not ratings) have any effect on real game performance? I've seen hot streak and cold streak icons from time to time, do those have any modifiers?

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by Slammer

So this is an extreme example, but say I have a 5-star player hitting .150 and a 1-star player hitting .350. Is the second player more likely to continue performing above expectations if his stats stay good? Is the first player going to play worse until his numbers climb back to normalcy?

Should I bench my ace pitcher with a 5.00 ERA and instead start the call-up from AA?

Basically, what I want to know is do player stats (not ratings) have any effect on real game performance? I've seen hot streak and cold streak icons from time to time, do those have any modifiers?

This is not an easy set of questions to answer, as the answers depend upon several factors.

First, ratings precede performance unless you have the game set to use recent performance in the ratings. Confusing, eh? You'll get used to it!

What I mean is, under Game Setup, Global Setup, there is an option to have Overall Rating Based on AI Evaluation, not Pure Ratings. By default, this is usually on and that means the overall rating does not take into account current performance. If this is unchecked, then you need to look at Game Setup, AI Options, AI Player Evaluation Options. You will see there how the Overall Rating will be determined by some combination of performance and ratings (which are things like contact, power, eye, stuff, movement, control, etc.)

So, to answer your first question directly, by default ratings are only predictors of performance, not determiners or byproducts of performance. IF you have your star (overall and potential) ratings based purely on ratings, and IF the evaluation is accurate (that depends on the quality of your scout and the setting for scouting quality in Global Setup, Scouting Options) then the tendency is going to be that the 5-star guy will get better and the 1-star guy will revert to being average or below average over time. Yet, even this is affected by other factors such as age, work ethic, team leadership, etc.

So I would not necessarily bench your ace pitcher with a 5.00 ERA and instead start the call-up from AA just yet. Give it enough time for a good assessment. But, after that time has passed and these guys are still doing as poorly/well, you may start saying "The hell with the scouting reports"!

As to the last questions, I am firmly convinced that past player stats do not determine future performance in this game. Performance is based on a bunch of hidden programming algorithms which depend on ratings and settings as well as a certain degree of randomness. Just because the player is currently "on fire" or "on ice" right now does not necessarily mean that he will continue that way; those icons are merely markers of recently significant excellent or poor performance.

One last thing: Remember that all of this is INTENTIONAL in that the designer wanted to replicate baseball reality as closely as possible. He wanted you to be scratching your head a bit over the 5-star guy in a slump and the 1-star guy in a perhaps brief, perhaps lasting, show of greatness. It's what owners, general managers, and coaches go through in real life.

[Fyrestorm3]

Not to trivialize Bru's answer, but the short and simple response is: no, how a player is currently performing will not change how he will perform in the future. Ratings and stats are separate from each other; the only rating that takes stats into account is the overall Star ratings - all the other "skill" ratings are completely independent of a player's stats. That doesn't mean they're accurate, but they will not change simply because a player is under- or over-performing.

[Slammer]

Interesting. Great answers!

So to take this a bit further, into the realm of contracts:

Say I have two free agents and only enough money for one of them.

One is a 1 star player who hit .400 and 25 HRs the previous season.
The other is a 4 star player who hit .200 the previous season.

Is it always the best move to sign the 4 star player since their stats will have no effect on the probability of good future performance?

I also assume that the performance does have an effect on contract demands. Is that correct?

[Fyrestorm3]

Originally Posted by Slammer

Is it always the best move to sign the 4 star player since their stats will have no effect on the probability of good future performance?

Oh no, absolutely not, unless you play with scouting off. Kind of the whole point of having a scouting system is that scouts can be wrong. You have to make the decision - do you trust your scout enough to gamble on a guy who had a poor season, or do you trust the stats enough to gamble on a guy who had a great season? If the stats and the ratings are at odds, that means that you're going to have to figure out which one is more indicative of a player's potential.

Originally Posted by Slammer

I also assume that the performance does have an effect on contract demands. Is that correct?

Absolutely; in fact, there's very little else that goes into players' demands. Market price and past contracts obviously have some weight, but a guy who's just had an all-star season is naturally going to ask for more money.

[Slammer]

Ok, but if I have an excellent scout and scouting accuracy is on 'very high' I should still assumer that the 4-star player will be better in the long run right?

[Fyrestorm3]

Originally Posted by Slammer

Ok, but if I have an excellent scout and scouting accuracy is on 'very high' I should still assumer that the 4-star player will be better in the long run right?

There is certainly a better chance of that happening, but still no guarantee.

[Slammer]

Cool! This game is awesome.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by Slammer

Cool! This game is awesome.

Enjoy. Thanks, Fyrestorm3.