Why does Kansas City keep cutting their top prospects? - Page 2

Fronzizzle · 05-15-2018, 06:28 PM

I do have roster size limits. I have 30 for AAA/AA/all A and then 50 for Rookie Ball. A couple of questions about not having limits:

1) Will this affect prospect development? I guess I don't care much if there is no limit on other teams, I can always put my own internal limit on my team but if a given team has, say, 75 players - won't most go totally unused? Or will the computer AI try to get all of them some playing time, which means less playing time for any one player to develop?

2) Seems the downside of having unlimited roster spots is that there will be way less players in free agency (duh). Maybe the players are are 1/2 star variety, but if you go from a limit of 30 players to unlimited for 30 teams, isn't the potential there for teams to hoard a just a bunch of players, making them unavailable?

3) Not sure how the computer determines computer-controlled teams' needs, but does the overall amount of players at a given position affect that? Like, maybe I'm trying to deal a C to a team that needs one, but because they have 20 of them in the minors they determine it isn't necessary?

From reading this (and other) posts regarding roster sizes, I'm most likely going to change mine - just wondering about some potential side effects.

damientheomen3 · 05-15-2018, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Qeltar

Okay, but the Astros shopped Martinez around to every other team before they dropped him. Right now the AI isn't programmed to shop guys, which I understand, it takes time to program things like that. But there's a valuation disconnect problem here: the AI shouldn't go from "I need one of your regulars if you want to trade for this prospect" to outright release in a couple of weeks, especially with no new data (gameplay). There's a problem there that maybe they can tweak.

It would also be nice to eventually see the occasional "regeneration" of a career later than normal, like Martinez's. At the time he was cut I believe he was 26, and only then hit his stride. I haven't seen that happen to any players so far in my play, though admittedly it's limited, but I have seen plenty of guys just drop off the table once they get in their 30s. Andrew Miller's career basically started at 27. For Rich Hill it was what, 36? But any pitcher I see in game gets aged right out of the majors by that point.

It definitely takes a few seasons to see players take a big bump up, since in a lot of cases it'll take two or three positive bumps to bring them up to a good level. If you want to get a better idea of this, create a new fictional or MLB league and sim ahead 20-40 seasons. You'll get your fair share of players with HOF-level impacts whose careers in the pros started aged 24-26 because they were bumped up by the game.

rudel.dietrich · 05-15-2018, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fronzizzle

I do have roster size limits. I have 30 for AAA/AA/all A and then 50 for Rookie Ball. A couple of questions about not having limits:

1) Will this affect prospect development? I guess I don't care much if there is no limit on other teams, I can always put my own internal limit on my team but if a given team has, say, 75 players - won't most go totally unused? Or will the computer AI try to get all of them some playing time, which means less playing time for any one player to develop?

I have found no evidence that player development is tied in any way to playing time.
The only thing I have seen minor league playing time for is developing a defensive rating at a new position and even that seems very hit or miss.

Dyzalot · 05-15-2018, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

I have found no evidence that player development is tied in any way to playing time.
The only thing I have seen minor league playing time for is developing a defensive rating at a new position and even that seems very hit or miss.

Here's the evidence.

http://manuals.ootpdevelopments.com/...er_development

rudel.dietrich · 05-15-2018, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

Here's the evidence.

http://manuals.ootpdevelopments.com/...er_development

I will admit I have not done any advanced studies. But from what I have seen the effects are so small that I have not noticed any effect from players who do not play at all vs those who get starting spots.
I first noticed it with some two way players who did one or the other but still developed their other skill.
I then began to look at players who their was a positional log jam in the minors and did not get playing time and I noticed they still seemed to develop based on the whims of the engine.
Granted your better prospects are still going to get playing time no matter what.
I did do some testing where I intentionally made top prospects not be able to play in games and they still seemed to develop as if they were playing.

If it's in the manual then I believe the code is there. I just have yet to see that the impact is large enough to matter.

Dyzalot · 05-15-2018, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

I will admit I have not done any advanced studies. But from what I have seen the effects are so small that I have not noticed any effect from players who do not play at all vs those who get starting spots.
I first noticed it with some two way players who did one or the other but still developed their other skill.
I then began to look at players who their was a positional log jam in the minors and did not get playing time and I noticed they still seemed to develop based on the whims of the engine.
Granted your better prospects are still going to get playing time no matter what.
I did do some testing where I intentionally made top prospects not be able to play in games and they still seemed to develop as if they were playing.

If it's in the manual then I believe the code is there. I just have yet to see that the impact is large enough to matter.

Well unless I am misunderstanding you, it appears that your sample size is too small to make any kind of accurate statistical analysis. Without such analysis with an appropriate sample size, I will continue to assume that the manual is correct in stating that playing time does affect development.

Qeltar · 05-15-2018, 11:13 PM

It's entirely possible that there is a component of development based on play time that is in practical terms overwhelmed by the (considerable) random elements in the development engine.

Dyzalot · 05-15-2018, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Qeltar

It's entirely possible that there is a component of development based on play time that is in practical terms overwhelmed by the (considerable) random elements in the development engine.

Sure but that's kind of like stating that "it is entirely possible that contact rating is overwhelmed in practical terms by the random elements in the game" after seeing a guy with 15 (1-20 scale) contact rating hit .250 for 500 plate appearances.

Qeltar · 05-16-2018, 12:05 PM

My point was that both you and rudel could be correct. There could be an effect on development, and it could be so small that it is very difficult to detect. Only the developers know for sure.

The correlation with contact is much easier to verify. If there were sufficient randomness in gameplay that the contact rating was overwhelmed by it, the game would be virtually unplayable, and obviously so. The development system is far more opaque.

05-15-2018, 06:28 PM	#21
Fronzizzle Minors (Double A) Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 177	I do have roster size limits. I have 30 for AAA/AA/all A and then 50 for Rookie Ball. A couple of questions about not having limits: 1) Will this affect prospect development? I guess I don't care much if there is no limit on other teams, I can always put my own internal limit on my team but if a given team has, say, 75 players - won't most go totally unused? Or will the computer AI try to get all of them some playing time, which means less playing time for any one player to develop? 2) Seems the downside of having unlimited roster spots is that there will be way less players in free agency (duh). Maybe the players are are 1/2 star variety, but if you go from a limit of 30 players to unlimited for 30 teams, isn't the potential there for teams to hoard a just a bunch of players, making them unavailable? 3) Not sure how the computer determines computer-controlled teams' needs, but does the overall amount of players at a given position affect that? Like, maybe I'm trying to deal a C to a team that needs one, but because they have 20 of them in the minors they determine it isn't necessary? From reading this (and other) posts regarding roster sizes, I'm most likely going to change mine - just wondering about some potential side effects.

05-15-2018, 11:13 PM	#27
Qeltar Major Leagues Join Date: Apr 2018 Posts: 382	It's entirely possible that there is a component of development based on play time that is in practical terms overwhelmed by the (considerable) random elements in the development engine.

05-16-2018, 12:05 PM	#29
Qeltar Major Leagues Join Date: Apr 2018 Posts: 382	My point was that both you and rudel could be correct. There could be an effect on development, and it could be so small that it is very difficult to detect. Only the developers know for sure. The correlation with contact is much easier to verify. If there were sufficient randomness in gameplay that the contact rating was overwhelmed by it, the game would be virtually unplayable, and obviously so. The development system is far more opaque.