The Future of Franchise

[sink4ever]

Preface

As with many others here, I'm a huge fan of franchise. I play offline franchise almost exclusively, although this year I definitely plan on checking out Diamond Dynasty as well. For the past year or two I've been thinking a lot about what kind of things I'd like to see in Franchise over the next several years.

I do want to make a few things clear. I'm not posting this to make "demands" about what I think "should" be added. I don't want it to devolve into a list of complaints, but rather a place where franchise fans can discuss their thoughts on what they feel is important. As much as I enjoy thinking about these things, I also enjoy hearing what others envision as a possible future for Franchise. Also, maybe if we hear what others view as important, we'll develop a greater appreciation for the fact that not everything can be tailor-made to our whims and wants.

I do apologize for the length, but like I said, this is the result of over a year of thinking about this mode. I’ve enjoyed MLB The Show more than any game in recent history, and I have a lot of respect for all the people at SCEA that really seem to care about creating a quality game. One thing to note is that I’ll sometimes say something “needs” to be a certain way. I don’t mean that it needs to be changed or else I’ll be unhappy, I simply mean that it “needs” to be that way for some of my ideas to “work”.

The last thing I want to say before I get into this is that I'm really focused on two main areas: the acquisition/development of talent and increased individuality for players and organizations. I do get into Ratings a bit, but that's mostly because I'm thinking of it from the perspective of evaluating players and a more comprehensive training system.

Anyway, I won't blame you if you don't want to read all of this, but I do hope others will chime in with their thoughts.


1) Franchise
A) Minor Leagues. In my dream world there exists at least five levels of minor leagues. Besides AAA and AA, there’s high-A, A, and short season rookie ball. Additionally, there is also Extended Spring Training/Instructs, which mostly serves to store extra players. It would be nice to have a place to put players while waiting for the short-season league to start, or to call up in case of trades/injuries.
Now, of course, all five levels don’t need to be playable. Maybe AA and AAA are still playable, but the others can only be simmed. That’s fine, the important things is that all levels have coaches (Head Coach, Hitting Coach, Pitching Coach), they have simmed stats and injuries, and you can adjust the lineups, rotation, etc. The main reason I’d like to see so many levels is so we can have guys come in through the draft at realistic starting points and advance at a fairly realistic pace. This brings me to my next point.

B) Draft and Scouting
i.) Amateur Draft. The amateur draft is one of my favorite times of the season. And darn it all, I’d love to be able to have a full 40 or 50 rounds (or at least 25-30) in the video game to reflect the real life event. Now this is connected to several other ideas, mainly the expanded levels of minor leagues, the post-draft signing/negotiation period, the dynamic draft class, and the attribute hard caps.

a) Draft Classes. So the idea goes like this: The first year of your franchise there would be a generated draft class with High School Seniors, College Freshmen, College Sophomores, College Juniors, and College Seniors. All could be scouted but only HS Sr’s, and College Jr’s and Sr’s would be draft-eligible. All unsigned College Sr’s become free agents, while unsigned College Jr’s and HS Sr’s go back into the draft pool. Then the following year they all advance a year and new group of HS Sr’s are added.

b) Signing Period. In real life, teams have a set amount of time after the draft to finalize agreements with their draftees. In the game, I’d propose maybe three or four weeks of time between the draft and the start of the short-season leagues. During this time you’d try to come to an agreement with the players that you’ve drafted. Maybe you’ve picked up a signability guy in a later round and you’re trying to balance offering him a nice amount of money with staying under your draft budget (signability is touched on in the scouting portion and draft budget in the budget portion).
A certain dynamic could really be added to the drafting/player development aspect when you really have the opportunity to acquire players that fit your style.

ii.) International Free Agents (IFA’s). This of course is the other side of talent acquisition. I think there could be a wider range in this realm of talent/readiness compared to the amateur draft. As with amateur players in the U.S., you would accumulate scouting reports for these players throughout the year. Then, on a certain day, you could begin bidding for their services.
There would be a number of players who are quite young and very raw. They may have quite a bit of potential but also a higher “bust” factor. On the other side of things, there would also be older players who are pretty much MLB-ready immediately. While safer, they may not offer the same ceiling. But those who are both talented and ready to play in the majors would demand quite a high price-tag.

iii.) Scouting. Scouting could be divided into several categories. During the budget process, you would decide how much you would want to invest in the different scouting options. More resources generally lead to more accurate and comprehensive scouting reports.

a) Amateur Scouting. This of course ties into the Amateur Draft. Say the U.S. is split into 4 or 6 regions and you would have to decide how to distribute your scouting resources between each region. Besides breaking it down by region, you could tell your scouts to focus on HS vs. College, pitchers vs. position players, etc. As time goes on, you would see the scouting reports for players change and gain more information. Your scouts would evaluate the player’s current skills, their projectability, and also their signability (whether a certain player is making it known that he is demanding a good amount of money to leave school, obviously HS Sr’s would have the most leverage while College Sr’s would have almost none).

b) International Scouting. This would be quite similar to Amateur Scouting. Again, it would be broken down by region, and you could focus your resources on certain areas. With younger prospects, your scouts would focus more on projectability while older players would be evaluated more on current talent.

c) Pro Scouting. These are the scouts that evaluate players currently on major or minor league teams. By putting more resources into this category, you would have more accurate info on the ratings of players on other teams (possibly helping in trades or picking up players through waivers).

d) Advance Scouting. This would be the scouting of other MLB teams that could be used in game situations. It also ties in a bit with Tendencies, which I’ll discuss later. Good advance scouting will clue you in on a hitter’s weak spots, a pitcher’s tendencies, etc. The more resources put into this area, the more prepared you will be when facing a team.


C) Training. One main thing I’ve been wishing for in sports game is the ability to have more control when it comes to training my players.
i.) Individual Training. Frequently, when I’m reading about prospect development, it seems as though they’re often focusing on one or two areas at a time. Maybe it’s a pitcher working on repeating his mechanics or refining his changeup. Or maybe it’s a hitter working on pitch recognition. Whatever it is, I’d love to have that same type of control. I understand that maybe it would be too much for the system to handle if you were constantly changing the training focus for 150 or so players on each team, so maybe training would be something you set once a year. Or maybe even have the choice to change it three times (Spring Training, Regular Season, Off-Season).
The way training would work is that each player would have 100% of training time to split between different areas. For example, a position player might spend 40% of his time working on plate discipline (increasing plate discipline, pitch recognition, patience), 30% on hitting mechanics (increasing bat control, consistency, and to a lesser extent, bat speed), and 30% on learning a new secondary position (increasing position familiarity and other fielding attributes associated with that position). The amount of progression would be based on training time, potential (including hard cap, which I’ll get to in a moment), work ethic rating, coach skill level in those areas, and training facilities.

ii.) Hard Caps. This could fall under several categories, but I’ll put it here. With a much larger amateur draft and many players coming in as international free agents, it’s of course important to have some balance to ensure that there is not an abundance of MLB-calibre players. By having different “hard caps” for certain ratings for players, you can ensure that a correct number of players fail to advance past certain levels. A certain percentage top out at A-ball, some at AA, and some at AAA. For example, maybe there’s a player with great power but can’t handle a breaking ball to save his life. With a sufficiently low hard cap for the Pitch Recognition rating, you could ensure that he flames out before reaching the majors.

iii.) Progression. I’ve touched on this a bit already, but I what I really want to get into here is different progression paths and tying ratings hard caps into player types. First, the progression paths. I’m not really sure how it’s currently done in the game, so maybe this is done already. Instead of having players progress in different ratings by a more-or-less equal amount each year, it would be nice to have different progression paths to really give the players some individuality. There could be players with a fairly steady progression path, while others progress quickly at the start before leveling off. Then there could be players who progress slowly for the first few years, until finally they “get it”. This could lead to reclamation projects, maybe a guy is cut after a few years of not making much progress, but is on the verge of really improving.
Secondly, to add more individuality to players, it would be kinda nice to see progress and hard caps tied to “player types”. For instance, a taller pitcher with some room to fill out could have a higher velocity cap than someone who is closer to their physical peak. Or a stocky player may have decent speed but not much room to improve. Or maybe a taller middle infielder may not have much room to grow in terms of speed or range, but could add strength and bat speed.

D) Injuries. There are two things I’d love to see concerning injuries: Rehab Assignments and Dynamic Injuries.
i.) Rehab Assignments. When a player has been injured for a while, you’ll often see them make several starts in the minors in order to get rid of the rust. It seems like something that could be incorporated into a game. Say a player sustains a fairly serious injury and is out for a couple months. When they are healthy enough to play, you get a message saying that they are healthy, but they need X number of rehab starts. They also have a new bar (that maybe can be seen on the injury/rehab screen) that is a “Readiness” meter. When the Readiness meter is full, the player can rejoin the major league team. During their rehab starts, they don’t count against your minor league team roster, so no moves need to be made. Also, the penalty for putting them straight in the majors is ratings hit that lasts for a certain amount of time.

ii.) Dynamic Injuries. Unfortunately, injuries derail a good number of promising careers. While I certainly don’t like seeing it happen, it could add a nice amount of realism to the game. Certain injuries could decrease a player’s rating or hard cap in certain categories. For instance, a pitcher’s shoulder injury could sap his top velocity, while an elbow injury may take some break off his curveball. A position player could lose speed from a major leg injury, or bat speed from a back injury.

E) Owners, GM’s, and Coaches. One way to really add some distinction and individuality to teams would be to have certain characteristics for Owners, GM’s and Coaches.
i.) Owner Goals. The owners of each team could have somewhat differing goals as to what they’re trying to accomplish in both the short and long term. Examples of possible goals could be Rebuilding for the Future, Maintain Budget and Replenish System, Maintain Budget and Show Steady Improvement, Compete Now Without Mortgaging the Future, Compete on a Reasonable Budget, Turn a Profit, Win Now At All Costs. They would evaluate success on the current year, but also as compared to the previous 3 and 5 years to see if you’re moving in the right direction. Besides W/L record and payroll, they could also look at revenue and the ranking of your minor league system.

ii). GM Philosophies. Obviously GM’s around the league have certain things in common, but they also have their own ideas about how to successfully construct a quality roster. I’d love to see GM’s using a myriad of strategies to build winning teams or to achieve their owner’s goals. Some GM’s may favor proven veterans and be focused on acquiring talent though trading prospects or signing free agents. Some may have the opposite approach, focusing on a strong farm system and trading aging veterans for prospects. Some may want to invest heavily in international talent, while others may not go down that road. Some may want to build a team of station-to-station sluggers, some may value speed and defense, while others may go after guys who can work the count and get on base. It would also be nice to see GM’s taking park factors into account (for instance, favoring ground ball pitchers in a hitter-friendly park, speedy outfielders for a spacious outfield, power left-handed hitters for a place with a short RF porch, etc).

iii.) Coach Personalities. So once the talent is acquired, how is it used? Coaching personalities could also help give each team a unique feel. From bullpen usage to left vs. right matchups, from small ball (bunting, hit-and-runs, small ball) to waiting for the long ball, there are a number of ways for each coach to bring a unique approach to the game. I could see there being a “Hook” tendency for each coach that determines how quick they are to pull a starter based on performance or pitch count, a matchup tendency that determines whether a coach relies more on numbers or looks for favorable “hand vs. hand” matchups (for example, pinch-hitting a left-handed batter vs. a right-handed pitcher, putting in a left-handed reliever vs. an opponenet’s left-handed batter), and even a lineup tendency that determines whether a coach sticks with certain players in their slots or makes lots of changes based on who’s hot and who’s cold.

F) Budget. And lastly, the budget. Besides of course the major and minor league payroll, funds are needed for all the coaches at the different levels, the training facilities, the scouting services, and of course for talent acquisition via the amateur draft or IFA’s. I think another element of strategy is needed when you have to determine how you want to allocate your resources. Will you invest heavily in training (coaches and facilities), aggressively pursue players in the draft or IFA’s, or focus mostly on getting talent that’s MLB-ready? I really like the idea of there being several ways to succeed and really giving the user the freedom to build the team as they wish (while still being rewarded for making smart decisions).

[sink4ever]

2) Ratings and Tendencies
A) Actual vs. Perceived. This is an idea that’s been talked about a bit already. One thing it kind of “solves” is the debate about whether or not stats should drive ratings. The idea here is that there are two sets of ratings. One is the real, or actual, set of ratings that acts just like the current set of ratings. The other set comes into effect mostly in Franchise-type modes. It’s a rating that’s “seen” by both the user and CPU, and the rating that is taken into account when making decisions. The rating of course is tied to actual ratings, but it’s also affected by the effectiveness of scouts and the player’s performance.
Also, this somewhat ties into having coaches at every level. I’d love to see “talent evaluation” as a rating for coaches. Having coaches with higher ratings would lead to a more accurate picture of actual ratings. This would apply internally, as they’re evaluating players on their own team, and possibly even externally, evaluating players they play against.

B) General Ratings. One addition/tweak that would be nice is a set of “general ratings” that impact everyone at a basic level. I can think of three off the top of my head: Strength, Athleticism, Speed. These would have an impact on player performance and progression. For example, strength would combine with bat speed for a hitter to determine power output. A pitcher who added strength could also see an uptick in velocity and an increase in stamina (keep their velocity deeper into the game). Speed is self-explanatory, it ties mainly into base-running/stealing and defensive range. Athleticism will help pitchers with their mechanics, improving command and consistency at a quicker rate. It helps fielders with reaction and base runners with getting good jumps.
Also, besides a potential rating, I’d love to see a “Work Ethic” rating. A higher Work Ethic rating would increase the player’s chances of reaching their ceiling.

C) Offensive Ratings & Tendencies. While I’m sure much more goes into the current set of ratings than I could ever imagine, I’ve been wondering about a different approach. Instead of having a ratings system that seems somewhat results driven (contact vs. L, power vs. R, etc), what would happen if it were more tools-oriented? Also, what kind of individual tendencies could be assigned to players to make them more unique?

i.) Ratings. Here I’d like to touch on a different ratings system for offense.
a) Bat Speed. This is pretty self-explanatory. This rating simply determines the speed of a batter’s swing. It impacts how hard a ball is hit when it’s squarely struck (combining with the strength rating to determine power and with the fly ball tendency to determine home run frequency). Also, a fast bat speed allows a batter to wait on pitches, giving a slight boost to pitch recognition (while slow bat speed requires a hitter to commit earlier, having a slight negative affect on pitch recognition). Lastly, it helps hitters handle inside pitches better.

b) Bat Control. Again, fairly self-explanatory. This rating determines how well a batter can control their swing, a higher rating leading to a better chance of contact (and solid contact). It also ties into how well the batter can check their swing.

c) Plate Discipline. This rating controls how well batters determine strikes vs. balls. A higher rating means a very good idea of the strike zone, and also that they are more likely to lay off tough pitches in hitter’s counts.

d) Pitch Recognition. This determines how well a batter can identify pitches. A batter with good recognition will do a better job of timing pitches, as well as a better job of laying off pitches that start in the strike zone but break out of it. On the other end of the spectrum, a batter with poor recognition will be off-balance on offspeed pitches and be more likely to chase pitches breaking out of the strike zone (or taking pitches that start out of strike zone but break into it).

e) Vs. L/R Modifier. Of course a way is needed to account for the L/R splits. Each batter could have a Vs. LHP rating a Vs. RHP rating. This would mainly act as a modifier on the Pitch Recognition rating, maybe also impacting Bat Control or even Bat Speed as increased/decreased confidence could lead to a more aggressive/timid swing.

f) Consistency (or Mechanics). This ties quite a bit into player development and would hopefully help differentiate the steady, reliable hitters from the streaky hitters. Those with a poor rating would be more likely to have their mechanics get out of whack, leading to prolonged slumps. Those with a higher rating would be more likely to consistently perform true to their ratings.

ii.) Tendencies. Tendencies are something that would help players gain more individuality, and make scouting reports even more valuable. These too can be adjusted through training. I kinda envisioned these as a scale between two opposite tendencies.
a) Patient vs. Aggressive. Whereas Plate Discipline determines how well a batter knows the strikezone, this tendency affects their overall odds of swinging. A very patient hitter is more likely to take both strikes and balls, while a very aggressive hitter is much more likely to swing. For example, a player who is very patient with poor discipline will take his fair share of pitches out of the zone, but also be more susceptible to taking strikes. An aggressive hitter with great plate discipline won’t chase bad pitches, but will be very likely to swing at hittable pitches.

b) Pull vs. Opposite Field. Yes, I know that’s poorly worded, but you get the idea. So say this scale has Pull on the left side and Opposite Field on the right side. Someone who is far to the left side of the scale will try to pull just about every pitch, being somewhat vulnerable to offspeed pitches away. On the other end of the spectrum is someone like Jeter, who makes a conscious effort to keep his hands in and “inside out” pitches on the inner half of the plate. Someone in the middle of the scale will hit the ball where it’s pitched (turning on inside pitches, going other way with outside pitches, hitting ball up the middle when it’s right over the plate).

c) Ground Ball vs. Fly Ball. This determines if a batter is more likely to hit grounders, line drives, or fly balls. On one end of the spectrum you have a player pounding the ball straight into the ground, while on the extreme other end you have a player skying the ball straight up. As they move toward the middle, those turn into sharp ground balls and well-hit fly balls. Someone right in the middle would be hitting line drives.

d) Put in Play vs. Swing for the Fences. I’m not sure if there’s already something in the game that determines if certain players use the contact or power swing more often. It would be nice to incorporate as a tendency for players to differentiate between those that are seeking just to put the ball in play vs. those who are swinging from their heels.

D) Pitcher Ratings & Tendencies. I have fewer ideas here that would result in any sort of overhaul. Mostly just a few tweaks add some variety and individuality for the pitchers.
i.) Ratings.
a) Consistency (or Mechanics). Just as described in the Offensive Ratings, this determines how well the player will pitch to their abilities. A lower rating leads to more unpredictable performance, as out-of-whack mechanics can cause pitches to flatten or a loss of accuracy.

b) Deception. Some pitchers may not have the best raw stuff, but it plays up because they deliver the ball in such a way as to make it more difficult for the batter. For example, a fastball might be sneaky fast or a pitcher may do a great job of having his arm speed be the same for his fastball and changeup. A pitcher with a high Deception rating would have a negative impact on the opposing batter’s Pitch Recognition abilities.

c) Pitch-Specific Ratings. What I mean by this is that I’d like to see the “Movement” rating divided into three subcategories: Amount, Lateness, Sharpness. The Amount of movement is simply a measurement of distance. All else equal, a curveball with a greater amount of movement will have a larger break. The Lateness of movement determines when the ball breaks. A pitch with later movement will be more likely to induce a swing-and-miss or weak contact. The Sharpness of movement determines the rate at which the pitch changes direction. The effectiveness of a pitch is obviously increased as these individual ratings are increased. Alternatively, there could just be “Lateness” and “Sharpness”, which would then determine the amount of movement.

ii.) Tendencies. Ideally this would tie in a bit to a pitcher’s strengths and his repertoire. Someone in the middle of the scale for these tendencies would use both strategies, mixing it up.
a) Aggressive vs. Nibbling. This would determine the pitcher’s tendency to either attack hitters or try to stay around the edge of the strikezone and attempt to get the batter to chase.

b) Fastball to get ahead vs. Pitching Backwards. Okay, this one really needs a new name. But different pitchers have different approaches. Some really like to use the fastball early and try to put the batter away with their strikeout pitch. Others pitch backwards, using offspeed pitches to get ahead.

c) Inside vs. Outside. This determines if the pitcher prefers to stay away or pound batters inside.

d) High vs. Low. This determines if the pitcher prefers to pound the lower part of the zone, keeping it at the batter’s knees, or if he likes to challenge hitters up around the letters.

e) Ground Balls vs. Fly Balls. This is something I keep going back and forth on. Ideally, I’d like this to be determined more by a pitcher’s repertoire and how good they are at pitching down in the zone. However, this is a very important distinction for pitchers, and if a tendency slider is needed to impact the gameplay, then so be it.

E) Defensive Ratings & Tendencies. I haven’t spent a ton of time thinking about this, but two things have come to mind.
i.) Ratings.
a) Receiving. A receiving rating for catchers would be nice. It would simply determine their ability to frame pitches and increase the odds of borderline pitches being called strikes.

b) Infield/Outfield Modifier. It would be nice to have a rating that determines infield vs. outfield defense. For instance, just because someone has great range and reaction in the infield doesn’t mean that those are perfectly translatable to the outfield. And if we add the ability to train players in secondary positions, it would make sense that a SS would pick up 2B a lot faster than RF.

[bigdaddykraven]

Hey I like your writeup there. First thing I'll say though is that I don't think we need 5-6 levels of minors and 50 rounds of draft simply because even though this is a simulation game, it still is a video game.

Maybe I'm saying that wrong. I wouldn't mind it being in there, but as an option that can be turned on and off. I love baseball and want the most realistic simulation possible but 90% of the guys you take and put in your system will never see MLB and only slightly more will ever make it to AA or AAA. Also with 50 rounds of draft I can see myself just telling the computer to finish for me after 10-20 rounds.

You were saying GM Tendencies and Coach Personalities, which are two things I've been looking at for a while. Also throw in player personalities and relationship (like these players like each other, these players hate each other, including coaches and GMs). This also helps determining where guys sign, how much it would take to get them and if a player absolutely hates a coach or player, unless theres no other offers for him, he won't sign there...or his production may suffer if he is there. Also theres the "clubhouse cancer" etc to consider.

One thing I'll add that I do every year, is expanded record books. I want team records, league records, all-time lists for each record (maybe top 10 or 50 or 100 or whatever). Tracking records in pretty much every recorded stat would be cool too but if we just had the basics that'd be fine too.

Anyway keep note of all these things you want and when the suggestion thread pops up we can put them in there.

[sink4ever]

Quote: Originally Posted by bigdaddykraven

Hey I like your writeup there. First thing I'll say though is that I don't think we need 5-6 levels of minors and 50 rounds of draft simply because even though this is a simulation game, it still is a video game. Maybe I'm saying that wrong. I wouldn't mind it being in there, but as an option that can be turned on and off. I love baseball and want the most realistic simulation possible but 90% of the guys you take and put in your system will never see MLB and only slightly more will ever make it to AA or AAA. Also with 50 rounds of draft I can see myself just telling the computer to finish for me after 10-20 rounds. You were saying GM Tendencies and Coach Personalities, which are two things I've been looking at for a while. Also throw in player personalities and relationship (like these players like each other, these players hate each other, including coaches and GMs). This also helps determining where guys sign, how much it would take to get them and if a player absolutely hates a coach or player, unless theres no other offers for him, he won't sign there...or his production may suffer if he is there. Also theres the "clubhouse cancer" etc to consider. One thing I'll add that I do every year, is expanded record books. I want team records, league records, all-time lists for each record (maybe top 10 or 50 or 100 or whatever). Tracking records in pretty much every recorded stat would be cool too but if we just had the basics that'd be fine too. Anyway keep note of all these things you want and when the suggestion thread pops up we can put them in there.

And this is a good example of how people have different priorities. One of the most fun things for me is to draft and develop prospects, but I certainly understand that most people are more interested in what's going on at the MLB level.

I really like your ideas about player personalities. And I totally agree about records, I'd love to be able to watch a player climb the team record books in some category. It would really add a level of attachment to players on your team.

[idrisguitar]

Sounds like you want to get Out of the Park Baseball.

I'm all for a deeper franchise, but some of your suggestions would move way to far towards the Management Sim, something that wouldn't gel with a large portion of the audience.

I'd rather they improved the gameplay and animations over some of this stuff. Because whenever i want to get that much control. I'll just load up OOTP.

All my opinion of course.

[Engine01]

Very well thought out in depth writeup. I too agree though that the length of the amateur draft is a bit long, i do totally agree that the scouting and potential talent needs to be addressed. For me, the draft they have now is just a big mash of all the same type of players. And rarely do they ever seem make the bigs or or have any impact unless you get like 8 seasons in, i would venture to guess that most dont. One thing you brought up that i always wondered about was the hitter/pitcher friendly parks. I wonder each park has some kind of rating for that or are the parks purely for asthetics? Just curious.

[Perfect Zero]

While I agree with some that there this goes way too deep, I also think that the game could use a deeper draft, better scouting, and deeper rookie leagues. If they worked on this a bit at a time (which they have been making subtle improvements on the mode for years), it could be a real success.

[Knight165]

While the SCOPE of what you are suggesting may be a bit much....
The IDEAS are great IMO.....and are things that I have in the past and will suggest to the team again!

M.K.
Knight165