Player Development for "Advantaged" Teams

[Ghosts]

...so I've had this theory kicking around for awhile: that OOTP "compensates" for teams with lots of money, big market, high fan interest, etc, by giving them worse "luck" when it comes to player development.

i may be paranoid, it may be luck, or it may be that Bakersfield is doing something wrong, but in the 1.5 "years" we've been playing the ratio of "good" prospect news to "bad" prospect news has got to be 10-1, if not worse. i think mid-2007 was the last time we had a prospect report discussing something positive.

also, we've had a bunch of our 3-5 star prospects absolutely fall to pieces.

like i said, maybe it's us. but this has been across the board...and mostly involves players who were "auto drafted" at the start of 2007, etc. in fact, it seems that our amateur draftees are doing pretty well, and the "issue" seems to arise with players we were originally assigned.

i don't even have a problem with this: i think it's probably "better" for the game...but i'm just wondering whether there's something to this or not.

(and all sarcastic remarks are permitted...but only after somebody tells me i'm not crazy).

[Dinosaurs]

Well Fargo has been pretty terrible, and isn't exactly a wealthy franchise right now, and I've received more bad news than positive news in regards to my prospects.

[Sandgnats (Bill)]

I am in the same boat as you, Bakersfield!
It is absolutely HORRIBLE!! Player after player that were 4-5 stars are reduced to rubble in less than a year. Nobody in our organization that had the potential of an upper tier player, held their own last year.

We have received good news a fair amount of times. Lately we received a bunch of good reports and it's probably close to 50/50 overall. But, all in all, our 'highly touted prospects' have been complete duds.

My guess is for 2 reasons.
1) In general, drafting an elite prospect and having them actually reach their potential is a crap shoot. Most of them do not even come close in my opinion.
2) We do not have good coaching in the minors at all!

That being said, all of this talk about millions of dollars being offered on draft picks is crazy to me. A backup middle infielder at the major league level is more valuable to me than the highest prospect ever! Don't get me wrong-I get as excited as anybody when I see 4 hitting categories lit up in blue on their potential. But in reality, most do not pan out. A hitter that tears it up in A ball isn't even on the same planet and being able to hit ML pitching. I'm sure all of you have noticed that there is a large enough gap between matching performances at AAA & ML. Well, add 3 more levels to climb successfully to that(from Lo-A) and then you see how high the odds are of an elite prospect succeeding at the ML level.

Sorry, I'm babbling. To answer your question. No, I don't think there's any evil OOTP gremlin cursing all of the high end team's prospects. I just think that's the reality of developing a great prospect.
It's really, really hard!

I wasn't here for last year's draft, but let's make it a point to watch the top couple of pitchers in this years draft. Whomever you pick-I'm going with Garcia-Hancock-Toro. They look like remarkably talented pitchers. Well, let's watch and see where they are in a few years(Peba years).

My guess is that 1 will have a descent career in PEBA. I hope I'm wrong and they're all studs, but that's my opinion.

[Hitmen]

I've had more bad news than good usually, but I also have a lot of minor leaguers playing above their level according to my coaches. Unfortunately, you can only move so many back down without having to move other unprepared players back up. I'm hoping the addition of the SS-A level will allow my youngsters to start off their careers at the appropriate level and work their way up, instead of being force fed to a level for which they are not ready. In the long run, I think we'll be okay.

[Hitmen]

My guess is that 1 will have a descent career in PEBA.

Is that a career where you start at the top and slowly descend to the bottom?

[Denny]

I've had more bad news than good usually, but I also have a lot of minor leaguers playing above their level according to my coaches. Unfortunately, you can only move so many back down without having to move other unprepared players back up. I'm hoping the addition of the SS-A level will allow my youngsters to start off their careers at the appropriate level and work their way up, instead of being force fed to a level for which they are not ready. In the long run, I think we'll be okay.

I think there is a lot to this. Looking around at various teams' minor league system reports I often see a ton of guys who are listed as being "Probably overmatched at" or "Not ready for" whatever level they are playing at. I know that suggestions are not accurate in every case, but, especially when combined with a player's stats, I think they are usually a good guideline. Like NJ I think the new SS-A will help with this problem.

The other thing to remember is that scouts are not as good at judging the talent of young players--so maybe those 4- and 5-star prospects were simply never that good to begin with.

[Coqui]

I know my guys are not developing well because I heap verbal abuse on them every time I check their stats. Surely that is not the actual reason.

[Ghosts]

I'm not trying to beat a dead horse (ok, maybe I am), but I compared our scouts/minor league personnel to others teams, and we are probably at least in the "middle".

And then I compared our "Development Report" (granted, it's a "SISA" product, but it is at least a decent baseline) to that from 8-10 other teams...and we are far and away the "worst".

http://peba.allsimbaseball3.com/lgrepor ... pment.html

This year, we've had 2 players "increase" and 7 "drop" (and one of the "increases" just "dropped" a few weeks later - - so we're 1-8 this year). And last year was no better. In fact, it may have been worse.

Look, we had plenty of luck to start the league, so I'm not complaining, but the more I look at our minors the more staggeringly bad they are.

The reason I think this is a great "equalizer" by the game is that it would be absurd for the Bears to get 100/100 fan interest, the highest payroll, gigantic market, etc. AND also not get screwed with our minor leagues. My only question is whether this is a function of luck or if the game (and this would be more impressive to me) took everything into consideration and built up teams' minor league systems accordingly.

[John]

I'm highlighting a post at the OOTP forums that deals with the topic of talent boosts/drops. The poster surmises that these are related to the stats the players are producing. Three posts later, Markus (the game's developer) confirms this is true.

What this means is that, if you're suffering an inordinate number of talent drops, it's because you're not optimally placing your minor leaguers at the best level for them (be it a level too challenging or a level too boring). As a result the stats they produce aren't good. Over time this leads to talent drops.

Denny is absolutely right to highlight the Minor League System report found on your team's homepage. This invaluable tool will give you your scouts' opinions on whether a player needs to be promoted/demoted to be at an appropriate level. Just this last sim I used this report to make a number of adjustments to my minor leagues. The goal is to have everyone at the optimal level for them.

That being said, there are a couple of caveats. One, that report is not always accurate (and purposely so... it'd be boring if the scouts were always right)! For instance, it's telling me that 28-year-old CL Rob Evans isn't ready for AAA. Hogwash! The dude's struck out 23 in 21.2 innings, allowed just 8 walks and 13 hits, and has a glowing ERA of 2.08 and a WHIP of 0.97. I think he'll be staying just where he is, thank you very much!

Also, there's never enough room in your organization to insure that everyone is at their optimal level. That's where "organizational soldiers" come in. Take 30-year-old 3B Masahiko Yamaguchi. The report tells me he's probably not ready for AAA, and the .214/.295/.262 line tells me the scouts may know what they're talking about. But at 30 years of age, he's probably hit his peak anyway. All I care about is that he provides me with a versatile defensive sub at all the infield positions. So I leave him at AAA and if he suffers a talent drop, so be it.

One final note regarding these bumps/drops: they're about to become a thing of the past. OOTP 9 will be changing the way minor leaguers develop. It will no longer be this radical situation where one minute you're looking at a potential star and the next minute you're looking at a scrub (or vice versa). Development will be more gradual and natural. As a result, the Development Report will be going bye-bye since there will no longer be major sudden talent shifts to report on.

[Paul Moots]

...so I've had this theory kicking around for awhile: that OOTP "compensates" for teams with lots of money, big market, high fan interest, etc, by giving them worse "luck" when it comes to player development.

i may be paranoid, it may be luck, or it may be that Bakersfield is doing something wrong, but in the 1.5 "years" we've been playing the ratio of "good" prospect news to "bad" prospect news has got to be 10-1, if not worse. i think mid-2007 was the last time we had a prospect report discussing something positive.

also, we've had a bunch of our 3-5 star prospects absolutely fall to pieces.

like i said, maybe it's us. but this has been across the board...and mostly involves players who were "auto drafted" at the start of 2007, etc. in fact, it seems that our amateur draftees are doing pretty well, and the "issue" seems to arise with players we were originally assigned.

i don't even have a problem with this: i think it's probably "better" for the game...but i'm just wondering whether there's something to this or not.

(and all sarcastic remarks are permitted...but only after somebody tells me i'm not crazy).

Don't feel left out my boy. I am also the same.

[Denny]

One final note regarding these bumps/drops: they're about to become a thing of the past. OOTP 9 will be changing the way minor leaguers develop. It will no longer be this radical situation where one minute you're looking at a potential star and the next minute you're looking at a scrub (or vice versa). Development will be more gradual and natural. As a result, the Development Report will be going bye-bye since there will no longer be major sudden talent shifts to report on.

I do like this feature, as it seems more realistic. Didn't I also read that they were going to keep a record of past ratings, so you can look back and see how a player has progressed/regressed over time? I think that would be great, as I often can't remember who was rated what previously. Actually, maybe it's better this way--the truth might be too depressing.

[John]

You're correct: there will be a historical record of every player's ratings. The only problem is I believe those ratings will be SISA's instead of your own scouts'. Makes sense from the perspective that other teams shouldn't be able to see your scouts' ratings, but of course SISA is notoriously inaccurate. It'd be nice to have more reliable ratings being recorded.

[John]

You're correct: there will be a historical record of every player's ratings. The only problem is I believe those ratings will be SISA's instead of your own scouts'. Makes sense from the perspective that other teams shouldn't be able to see your scouts' ratings, but of course SISA is notoriously inaccurate. It'd be nice to have more reliable ratings being recorded.

EDIT: Does this mean you've pre-ordered, Denny?

[Denny]

EDIT: Does this mean you've pre-ordered, Denny?

HOOOOOO boy I'm glad you reminded me! I just snuck over and pre-ordered; fortunately I still got the pre-release price, even though it was a couple hours past the official deadline Close call!

[Ghosts]

thanks for all of the replies.

and not a smart-aleck response in the bunch!? (i'm looking at you Palm Springs)