Player development

[Andrej72]

I have a historical save in 1953, this time without recalc, but with development on and TCR set to 120. Willie Mays has been imported as FA with 20 CA / 80 PA, since he did not play in MLB that year. I am curious how he will develop. IRL he was already a beast in 1954, but in game that is hardly possible with 20 current ability in 1953.

I am not sure how to develop him. Will he better develop if I use him at a higher league level, possibly in AA if he can bear it, or is it better to put hit at a lower level where he can be more effective with his current ratings?

[Charlie Hough]

I try to assign players to the minor league level where they can perform really well. I base it on their ratings. Then, when they have great stats, are too good for their lower level, and they are clearly ready to take on a new challenge, I will promote them to the next level.

Since Willie Mays is already 22 years old in 1953, and he has extremely high potential, it's possible that he could make a major improvement in his ratings for 1954. Maybe the development engine will accelerate his development because of his age. But, if it doesn't, and if it takes him an extra one or two years to develop because of his low ratings at the start, there may not be much you can do to change that.

[Brad K]

This could be very interesting considering a significant number of high potential players are busts in real life. I wonder how closely OOTP simulates real life.

[fredbeene]

Originally Posted by Andrej72

I have a historical save in 1953, this time without recalc, but with development on and TCR set to 120. Willie Mays has been imported as FA with 20 CA / 80 PA, since he did not play in MLB that year. I am curious how he will develop. IRL he was already a beast in 1954, but in game that is hardly possible with 20 current ability in 1953.

I am not sure how to develop him. Will he better develop if I use him at a higher league level, possibly in AA if he can bear it, or is it better to put hit at a lower level where he can be more effective with his current ratings?

i don't understand why importing with PEAK Seasons potential will likely provide close results, but the random factor is what should make it fun....that should make it more and harder since you don't game the system by knowing willie will absolutely be a HOF

[thehef]

For this scenario, based upon my understanding of how things work, is that since recalc is off, the HOF-level stats that Willie accumulated in real life from 1954 onwards will not come into play at all. The only things that will matter are:

- the ratings he imported with for 1953, and
- whatever whims OOTP applies over time based upon Development set to ON and TCR set to 120

IOW, Mays is just as likely to develop into a HOF-er, remain as a scrub, or become anything in-between as is any other insignificant player who imported in 1953.

That said, I've never quite understood Potential Ratings, at least as they would apply in a scenario without recalc. I would think that - if my understanding above is correct - Mays' potential ratings would be meaningless if recalc is off. But I could definitely be wrong.

[luckymann]

My understanding, very much framed by my own observations, differs slightly from hef's.

I am of the firm belief that a player has an "imprint" that is the basic template from which the game plans out his career that he receives when he is "born" IE imported. This will differ in various ways if you import him at different stages of his career, but only in that it cuts off the section of the career that came before the import date.

In this case, which is why WM has come in with 80 POT.

So theoretically, with only the dev engine on he'll gravitate along this preordained path, like a plane goes from takeoff to landing (in a way), in other words less accurately without the "waypoints" that recalc provide along the course of his career.

Recalc keeps things tighter with regard to the IRL career than dev only, which leaves the player more susceptible to deviation and volatility, either just as a natural part of the game or because of settings such as LTMs and TCR.

But, regardless of whether recalc or dev is being applied, the general trajectory of this player's career has already been set. So you get something that resembles Willie or whomever it is. It's merely a matter of degrees from there.

That, at least, is how I have come to think of this question.

Hope that helps.

G

[thehef]

Originally Posted by luckymann

My understanding, very much framed by my own observations, differs slightly from hef's.

I am of the firm belief that a player has an "imprint" that is the basic template from which the game plans out his career that he receives when he is "born" IE imported. This will differ in various ways if you import him at different stages of his career, but only in that it cuts off the section of the career that came before the import date.

In this case, which is why WM has come in with 80 POT.

So theoretically, with only the dev engine on he'll gravitate along this preordained path, like a plane goes from takeoff to landing (in a way), in other words less accurately without the "waypoints" that recalc provide along the course of his career.

Recalc keeps things tighter with regard to the IRL career than dev only, which leaves the player more susceptible to deviation and volatility, either just as a natural part of the game or because of settings such as LTMs and TCR.

But, regardless of whether recalc or dev is being applied, the general trajectory of this player's career has already been set. So you get something that resembles Willie or whomever it is. It's merely a matter of degrees from there.

That, at least, is how I have come to think of this question.

Hope that helps.

G

Very curious about this, so I did a test:

1953 start
Current ratings = Real Stats
Potential = Remaining Years
Player Devel = Use Talent Ratings & OOTP Development Engine
Historical Txns enabled
After the game was created I sent TCR to 120 & turned off Real IL Txns and Historical Lineups

Mays imported as a free agent and was still a FA by opening day (expected), so I assigned him to the NY Giants. I won't bore with ratings details but the summary of his scouting report was "Mays is organizational filler." Expected... By opening day, it was "Mays' ceiling is as a bench contributor."

I simmed thru 1970. Probably because of his defense he had several years with 500+ AB's. However, only twice did he reach 10+ HR's (10 in '54, 12 in '55. For his career (thru '69) he hit 117 HRs. His avg generally flirted around the Mendoza line, with a high of .264 in '62. Seven times he batted less than .200. He swiped 10 bases in each of '64 & '65; those were his high marks.

So... I don't know if my hunch was right or if luckyman's is correct. After all, this is just one test, and anything can happen with Recalc off and TCR at 120... That said, in looking at the yearly leaderboards, I'm seeing a lot of familiar names, which tells me that for a lot of guys whose rookie year was decent, TCR may have tweaked them somewhat, but their rookie year was the baseline for their future. Mays' pretty dismal career (in my sim) would fall in line with that logic.

Oh, and FWIW, on his scouting reports, his potential was 4.5-5 starts from import thru late '55; dropped to 4 stars in early '56, 3 starts for the rest of '56, 2.5 stars in '57; 2 stars in '58-'59; back n forth between 1.5 & 2 stars thru '68, and then 1-1.5 stars thru end of '70.

By that time (when he was still very good IRL), the summary of his scouting report was "Mays has top-tier minor league skills, but will compete for a reserve role at the major-league level."

Happy to look up any details...

[luckymann]

Very interesting hef. Not sure where that puts my ideas on the matter, as you said this is just one run through, but still. Food for thought.

My experience in this regard was mainly prior to v24 with NeL players so maybe the DB tweaks have shifted this, or maybe my experience has been with different settings. I always use "peak seasons" for POT, maybe that's the kicker.

Keen to hear whatever further insights you have, as always.

G

[Andrej72]

I did similar test, but not until 1970. I simulated till 1956, and Mays was far from being MLB ready, he was still down somewhere the Indians minor league system.

So in my game I decided to trade him for Richie Ashburn, since I was in dire need for a good CF who is already MLB ready.

And as we discussed with Charlie the recalc off setting can create some alternate "history". A guy like Mays can never reach his initial potential, while some others who never reached the majors IRL can possibly overshadow him. :-)

[Brad K]

I believe in this situation Mays will reach his initial potential some of the time but so seldom it's best to bet against it.

[thehef]

Originally Posted by Brad K

I believe in this situation Mays will reach his initial potential some of the time but so seldom it's best to bet against it.

Hey Brad, which are you suggesting?

a) There's no connection to Mays' actual career stats but due to the randomness of "recalc off / development on / TCR 120" if enough sims are run, it's inevitable that he would occasionally reach greatness?
or
b) There's at least some connection to Mays' career actual stats to where even with recalc off, he'll sometimes reach greatness?

At any rate, I would think a possible solution to the Mays scenario would be - using the OP's example:

1. Start the game with Recalc ON, set at either 3-or 5-years.
2. Turn off Recalc at some point very early, perhaps right after creating the game. All other settings - development & TCR, specifically - stay the same.

That way pretty much all players start with initial ratings that reflect who they really are, but they can absolutely have alternate career paths based upon the whims of OOTP's TCR/development.

[Charlie Hough]

We need to keep in mind that Willie Mays is a special case because, in real life, he produced huge stats in the minors and had a great rookie season in 1951. But then he saw limited action in 1952 and missed an entire season in 1953 due to military service. Then he returned in 1954 and was instantly one of the best players in MLB. This means it is absolutely crucial when OOTP imports him.

If Andrej72 had started his game in 1951 or 1952, Willie Mays would already have really good current ratings in addition to his great potential. If you import him in 1954, then he's going to have some of the best ratings in MLB. In those cases, he will probably reach his full potential or he will already be at that level.

However, with the 1953 import, Willie Mays is given current ratings based on his much weaker 1952 stats, during limited playing time. That gives him really poor ratings and a much lower starting point at the age of 22. His ratings are also adjusted and tend to be worse due to his low number of AB in 1952. Having low ratings at age 22 increases the risk that he will never develop to his full potential because the development engine often starts to slow down and reduce player development and potential as they reach their mid-20s. That is exactly what happened to Mays in a test sim that I just ran.

I just ran a simulation starting in 1953 and using the same settings that Andrej72 is using in his game. Willie Mays improved during 1953 and 1954, but as he got a bit older and reached the age of 25, the development engine reduced his batting potential ratings. Now his potential ratings are average at best, and it will be impossible for him to reach his real-life talent level. This resulted in him being stuck in the minors and unable to perform well during his brief MLB opportunities with the Red Sox, Cardinals and Phillies. But then he was claimed on waivers by the Washington Senators and finally got a chance to be a starter for a full season. Just imagine Willie Mays on waivers! In 498 AB with the Senaors in 1958, he hit .251 with 7 HR and 76 RBI, but based on his current ratings and potential, and now that he is 27 years old, he probably won't be able to do much better.

With the development engine, I have found that players with very high potential often develop into stars, as you would expect, and often they become good or very good players. But, yes, there is a chance that they will never make it out of the minors and be a complete failure. Their initial current ratings and their age also seem to be huge factors. If a player is already pretty good when he's created, and he has really high potential, it takes a much shorter time and distance to get from his current to his potential ratings. But if he's already 22 years old or is 18 and starting with really low ratings, then it's a very different situation, and it seems that there is much higher risk that he will not reach his potential.

[Andrej72]

At least ín my save Mays was a valuable trade asset to get Ashburn.

I think Aaron is going to have a different path. He is only 19-20, and his current rating is 45-50, which is already MLB average. Most probably he will reach his potencial (80).

[thehef]

Charie Hough, that all makes sense... With recalc off there's always going to be the risk of the "Mays in 1953" scenario happening to certain players (who miss years or only played sparingly, or had an uncharacteristically down year), regardless of which year you play... That's why I think my 3-or 5-year recalc only for the initial import is a good strategy for a development on / no recalc kind of game.

What I'm really curious about, though, is this:

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

With the development engine, I have found that players with very high potential often develop into stars, as you would expect, and often they become good or very good players.

With recalc off, are those players - who develop into stars - developing as such because they have very high potential? Or do they very high potential due to their real-life stats, but they are developing into stars because they had very good ratings upon import (based upon their real-life stats for that year)?

IOW, *if* potential ratings are meaningless in a Recalc=OFF game (we don't know that for sure, but let's just say...), but are still a reflection of a player's real-life stats, then even though there's no connection to potential ratings and how a player will develop, it still could appear as though there's a connection because if a guy imports with good ratings, it's a good bet that he had future real-life years with good stats. OOTP may not be factoring in hs future real-life stats, but the fact that he imported as a good player would bode well for him continuing to be a good player moving forward, thus making it appear as if he's developing according to real life.

Something like that

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by thehef

Hey Brad, which are you suggesting?

a) There's no connection to Mays' actual career stats but due to the randomness of "recalc off / development on / TCR 120" if enough sims are run, it's inevitable that he would occasionally reach greatness?
or
b) There's at least some connection to Mays' career actual stats to where even with recalc off, he'll sometimes reach greatness?

I think OOTP creates initial potential ratings based on something, perhaps performance before and including the creation year, perhaps future performance, perhaps a bit of both. Then the development engine takes over and doesn't care what the player did in the future when those years become the present.

The above is not a firm belief. It's based on a number of observations insufficient to be called data.

[Charlie Hough]

Potential ratings are a huge factor in a player's development, along with age, player usage, and coaching (if you use coaching). Player performance can also have an effect on development, and so can a player's work ethic, personality and morale (if you're using those options in your game).

A player who has been created or imported with really high potential is going to have a much better chance of becoming a star than someone who starts off with an average potential. That's because the development engine is already working with a high potential that could be realized, even if the player's ratings are currently low. In the other case, a player's potential would have to increase dramatically, and not just his current ratings, for him to have a good chance to become a star.

When historical players are created, OOTP gives them very detailed potential ratings in all of their batting, pitching and fielding categories, and those potential ratings are based on the settings you determine. It's all based on real life stats, and, if you turn on commissioner mode and look at a player in the editor, you can see the exact potential ratings it has calculated for all categories.

For player potential, I always use remaining peak seasons because I want players to have the potential to reach the absolute best performance they ever achieved in their future real life historical stats, and I want to be sure that this is only possible moving forward.

Historical games in OOTP are much different from regular modern MLB or fictional games because potential ratings are based on real life stats. But, with development, once those potentials are created, it's all up to the development engine and all the other factors after that. Real life stats are no longer a factor. However, since it all starts with real life stats, historical games have a full range of visible potentials of all varieties, right from the start.

In non-historical games, player ratings and potentials often seem to be identical or much closer to each other, unless players are newly created rookies or younger players with a lot of their future ahead of them. But even those rookies and young players may not have the full range of potentials that we typically see in a historical game. That's because everything is going to be based on the development engine, where both their long-term potential and their future ratings are yet to be determined. It's similar to the real life draft, where there are hundreds of high school or college players where there is very little to help scouts and GMs determine which ones will develop into future stars or at least good or average MLB players. I don't play a lot of non-historical games, but that seems to be the case from my limited experience.

I will run some more long-term historical sims during the coming days, and I'll take a closer look at all of this, to better evaluate how the development engine works with historical players with really high potential. I'm curious to see how things play out with more players such as Mays, Aaron, etc.

[Brad K]

Maybe its changed in recent versions but I tried dev only on an older version. Al Oliver imported as a 1B and never developed to play OF. So at least on fielding, at least on an old version, dev wasn't looking into the future.

[thehef]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Maybe its changed in recent versions but I tried dev only on an older version. Al Oliver imported as a 1B and never developed to play OF. So at least on fielding, at least on an old version, dev wasn't looking into the future.

I do recall that there were some fielding import issues on historicals - where OOTP did some things that were oblivious to your settings - that were fixed for v23.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by thehef

I do recall that there were some fielding import issues on historicals - where OOTP did some things that were oblivious to your settings - that were fixed for v23.

Brief test.

Al Oliver gets 1B and OF ratings for 1969.

Pete Rose gets OF only.

[Charlie Hough]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Maybe its changed in recent versions but I tried dev only on an older version. Al Oliver imported as a 1B and never developed to play OF. So at least on fielding, at least on an old version, dev wasn't looking into the future.

The development engine never uses historical stats. Once you have imported historical players and you are relying on the development engine instead of recalculation, real life statistics will never be used to determine any player ratings, development, or potentials.

Development does not look into future historical stats for any player ratings or potentials. When you first start your game and create a player's initial ratings and potential, OOTP looks into the future for the range of years you specify when you set up your game. Real life stats from the range that you specify are what create the initial ratings and the potentials in each category. In other words, if you choose to create fielding ratings based only on the current season, then the player is only going to receive current and potential fielding ratings based on positions that he played and the stats that he accrued during that one season. The development engine will never add positions based on his future historical stats because it does not use historical stats at all. If you choose a three-year or five-year period, it will do the same thing across those ranges of years. This is why some people choose to make fielding ratings based on a player's entire career, to avoid those limitations. But then you end up with initial fielding ratings that are often unrealistic.

The problem you saw with Oliver, however, was likely due to missing data in the OOTP fielding stats database. Al Oliver had real life stats as an outfielder, right from his first season in the minors in 1965 and in his first few games in MLB in 1968. However, in OOTP, Oliver does not have any fielding stats for his 4 games in MLB in 1969. They are missing from the database. He only played 4 games in MLB overall and only 1 in the outfield in 1968, but OOTP does not have any of those stats. Thus, if you were not playing with historical minors and were using only a one-year period to determine a player's initial fielding ratings and potentials, then OOTP would have no basis to calculate fielding ratings at all. It certainly would not give him any OF ratings, and I'm not sure how it would even make him a 1B.

I just created a 1965 game using historical minors and a one-year period for creating a player's initial fielding ratings. Since Oliver played LF and 1B in the minors in 1965, he was rated at both positions. But since he did not play RF until 1 game in 1967 and 8 games in 1969, and he did not play CF until 1971, he was not rated at any of those positions. He has no potential at those positions either. He will never be rated and will never have potential at those positions unless you choose to play him there and help him develop ratings and experience at those positions. A player will only be rated or have potential at positions that he played during the range of years you specified when creating your game The same thing applies to Pete Rose, who was only rated at 2B in my 1965 game, since I chose a one-year period for fielding ratings, and that's the only position he played during that season. For him to be rated at other positions from the past or future, I would have to change my fielding ratings setting to three years, five years, or the entire career when I create the game.

It would be nice if we could choose the same options for fielding ratings and pitching ratings that we have for batting ratings. That way, we could base a player's fielding and pitching potential on his remaining peak seasons, etc. That would help address this issue, because the game could give Oliver potential at all three OF positions as well as 1B when he is created, but he would start with a position rating of 1 and low ratings at CF and RF, since he did not play those positions until later. However, if he starts playing at those positions, he could gain more experience and potentially realize his potential ratings there.