Understanding Minor League Performance in OOTP 26

[WhiskyTango]

There is no such thing as objective current ability. Current ability is always coloured by expectations - either what the player has done or is expected to do. Or both. But current ratings so to speak are always in relation to expectations. So in that sense maybe the devs aren't all wrong. But stats only is just not how the game is approached IRL.

[Brad K]

For people who consider stats to some degree (I think anyone who has scouting set to less than 100% accurate does) normal randomness is sufficient fog of war. And it's actually randomness on top of randomness because ratings are based on RL output which itself has randomness.

The idea a person can look at the editor (if they don't consider it cheating or if they're doing tests) and may not see the player's current true rating is deception.

[Lucas718]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Rather than not knowing, wouldn't it be better if the situation didn't exist?

Yes, because it now feels like I can't evaluate my minor leaguers with any confidence. I'm always going to suspect that a guy putting up good numbers in the minors is just getting artificially boosted.

It's starting to not feel like a simulation game anymore

[Paul Reuschel's Mustache]

Originally Posted by Lukas Berger

I guess the ultimate solution here is likely going to be something along the lines of making this yet another setting, where folks who want to have potential influence minor league stats can turn that on, and those who hate the idea can turn it off.

Thank you, Lukas.

Would this setting be implemented in a future patch for this version of the game?

[DennisDenver]

Originally Posted by Lukas Berger

I guess the ultimate solution here is likely going to be something along the lines of making this yet another setting, where folks who want to have potential influence minor league stats can turn that on, and those who hate the idea can turn it off.

I don't want to get in this debate but PLEASE do add this. Literally begging haha

[OutS|der]

Originally Posted by WhiskyTango

There is no such thing as objective current ability. Current ability is always coloured by expectations - either what the player has done or is expected to do. Or both. But current ratings so to speak are always in relation to expectations. So in that sense maybe the devs aren't all wrong. But stats only is just not how the game is approached IRL.

What do you even mean by this? You can test players current abilities in real life. Real data that isn't coloured by expectations.


In RL they don't give top prospects bonus stats like OOTP does, so why should the game now.

We need real stats for minors, without them I have no clue how well they are performing. I can't trust overall/potential ratings as that formula changes every year, going as far as taking players rated 55 over one year to 35 the next.

[tejdog1]

Potential should never boost a player's stats, it's potential for a reason. It's not realized.

Just because one is a top prospect doesn't mean they should smash a level. Any level.

[WhiskyTango]

Originally Posted by OutS|der

Real data that isn't coloured by expectations.

The interpretation of data is what I referred to. And that is obvious. And in this game, AFAIK (which isn't much I'll admit), the relative generating and interpretation of ratings is what generates seasonal stats.

So, what is this "real" "data" of which you speak? Your CF hit .272 second half in 3A. That's your "test". What does that test mean? Good? Bad? Disasterous? Wonderful? Depends on expectations. Your expectation is if he hit .272 in AAA he'll hit oh maybe .250 his first year in MLB. See? Expectations. That's the game. So, why can't the game use expectations (aka potential) to inform current ability? It's already using ratings to generate stats (or, "data" if you prefer), and apparently involving potential ratings helps expand the stat/data - generating engine's performance in some ways.

Totally mis-read billyball? No where on planet earth does anyone manage anything looking at "stats-only" - whether baseball teams or military supply chain logistics or horserace betting. Experience and functional memory tells us this.

It's like a driving sim in which players want to drive only in reverse. Ok, not totally realistic but heh! reverse is a gear too so I should be able to drive in reverse only. So now the game engine has to reflect that you can play the entire sim in reverse only and totally realistic too(!) or people are getting ripped off.

[highandoutside]

I have a player — Charles Battle — whom I drafted largely because I suspected he had unique physical tools that gave him elite potential. I play in a stats-only league, so this was based purely on his scouting reports and the eye-popping numbers he was putting up in the minors. He struck out a ton of guys, threw absolute fire, but was a little wild.

His minor league stats were downright intimidating, but I was never fully convinced it would translate to the majors. Turns out, he did have a flaw that major league hitters were quick to exploit: he gives up home runs. After several call-ups, where he’d dominate in the minors only to get shelled in the majors, I am now seriously considering trading him.

He has become a bit of a puzzle to me, which I actually enjoy. I can easily picture a guy like him — incredible raw talent that allows him to overpower minor league hitters, but that same arsenal just does not play the same way in the big leagues. He can't simply rely on his electric arm to overwhelm MLB hitters; he needs to develop the finer points of pitching to survive at that level.

Maybe what he really needs is a fresh start with another organization and a different coach who can help him unlock the next phase of his game — like how Tyler Glasnow “found it” in Tampa after leaving Pittsburgh. I don't know. But what I really appreciate is the bit of mystery here: how players translate across levels isn’t always predictable. It feels very true to life.

[WhiskyTango]

Originally Posted by highandoutside

I have a player — Charles Battle — whom I drafted largely because I suspected he had unique physical tools that gave him elite potential. I play in a stats-only league, so this was based purely on his scouting reports and the eye-popping numbers he was putting up in the minors. He struck out a ton of guys, threw absolute fire, but was a little wild.

His minor league stats were downright intimidating, but I was never fully convinced it would translate to the majors. Turns out, he did have a flaw that major league hitters were quick to exploit: he gives up home runs. After several call-ups, where he’d dominate in the minors only to get shelled in the majors, I am now seriously considering trading him.

He has become a bit of a puzzle to me, which I actually enjoy. I can easily picture a guy like him — incredible raw talent that allows him to overpower minor league hitters, but that same arsenal just does not play the same way in the big leagues. He can't simply rely on his electric arm to overwhelm MLB hitters; he needs to develop the finer points of pitching to survive at that level.

Maybe what he really needs is a fresh start with another organization and a different coach who can help him unlock the next phase of his game — like how Tyler Glasnow “found it” in Tampa after leaving Pittsburgh. I don't know. But what I really appreciate is the bit of mystery here: how players translate across levels isn’t always predictable. It feels very true to life.

Stats-only with scouting reports, is stats-only? Do the reports pull from the stats only? But if that were true there'd be no point having scouting. So I don't get it.

[highandoutside]

Originally Posted by WhiskyTango

Stats-only with scouting reports, is stats-only? Do the reports pull from the stats only? But if that were true there'd be no point having scouting. So I don't get it.

I guess I don't know if the way I play is technically stats-only. Depends on your definition, I guess. I have all ratings turned off except "Other ratings scale 2-8". I have my scout and OSA write up scouting reports. Playing this way gives me a level of fog of war and a reliance on stats that I like. I have also played out every game of my team's 17-yr fictional league history. So I really get to know these guys by "watching" them perform.

[WhiskyTango]

I don't get the sense that's what players like the OP mean with "stats-only". The scouting must come from the ratings * degree of accuracy. I mean, great way to play but not what I'd say is what is meant by stats-only, could be wrong though.

[OutS|der]

Originally Posted by WhiskyTango

So, what is this "real" "data" of which you speak? Your CF hit .272 second half in 3A. That's your "test". What does that test mean? Good? Bad? Disasterous? Wonderful? Depends on expectations. Your expectation is if he hit .272 in AAA he'll hit oh maybe .250 his first year in MLB. See? Expectations. That's the game. So, why can't the game use expectations (aka potential) to inform current ability? It's already using ratings to generate stats (or, "data" if you prefer), and apparently involving potential ratings helps expand the stat/data - generating engine's performance in some ways.

Because expectations aren't actual stats that can be measured. My real data of my CF hitting .272 shows he's becoming over talented for the levels he's at and is ready to move up. Yes I then expect him to perform at that level, I don't magically add stats for him because of it.

There's no boost to stats in RL so why should there be in game? If the game's AI can't handle this then maybe it needs a complete tear down.

[WhiskyTango]

Besides all this upset re "stats-only" -- am still on v25, but the game is experiencing a large issue with AI teams dropping top prospects. If this merging of potential with current ratings helps eliminate this issue, as it sounds like it might, then this needs to be given top priority. Season after season top prospects, often top 10 and #1 prospects, are drafted, signed and released while rated such.

[WhiskyTango]

Originally Posted by OutS|der

Because expectations aren't actual stats that can be measured. My real data of my CF hitting .272 shows he's becoming over talented for the levels he's at and is ready to move up. Yes I then expect him to perform at that level, I don't magically add stats for him because of it.

There's no boost to stats in RL so why should there be in game? If the game's AI can't handle this then maybe it needs a complete tear down.

Seems that the problem for you is the game is interfering with your assessment of potential with its own assessment. You want to be the only factor in your organization assessing potential, because you think the access to statistics provides that for you. And the point being restated is -- no the stats do not actually provide that for you. You think they do and that they should, but they don't. Neither in OOTP nor IRL.

[Paul Reuschel's Mustache]

Originally Posted by Paul Reuschel's Mustache

Thank you, Lukas.

Would this setting be implemented in a future patch for this version of the game?

Lukas and/or Matt, can we please have a basic A or B poll at the top of the forum for two weeks? Results only visible after voting.

A: Only current ratings should influence statistical output in the minors.
B: Potential ratings should also influence statistical output in the minors.

[WhiskyTango]

Originally Posted by Paul Reuschel's Mustache

Lukas and/or Matt, can we please have a basic A or B poll at the top of the forum for two weeks? Results only visible after voting.

A: Only current ratings should influence statistical output in the minors.
B: Potential ratings should also influence statistical output in the minors.

Would just say voting is irrelevant if the reason for the new direction is to improve other areas of gameplay. Having an on/off toggle which I think was offered likely suffices.

[Paul Reuschel's Mustache]

Originally Posted by WhiskyTango

Would just say voting is irrelevant if the reason for the new direction is to improve other areas of gameplay. Having an on/off toggle which I think was offered likely suffices.

It was casually offered by Lukas as a possibility without a follow-up confirmation from him or Matt.

Would be great to have the Devs take an official position on this issue, one way or another.

[OutS|der]

Originally Posted by WhiskyTango

Would just say voting is irrelevant if the reason for the new direction is to improve other areas of gameplay. Having an on/off toggle which I think was offered likely suffices.

I'll just vote with my wallet instead then.

[eas9898]

Originally Posted by tejdog1

Potential should never boost a player's stats, it's potential for a reason. It's not realized.

Just because one is a top prospect doesn't mean they should smash a level. Any level.

Amen. I can't even understand how this is even debatable in what is supposed to be a simulation based game. Why would anyone even think it should be otherwise?