Ridins Full Minors roster information

[imreal]

Quote: Originally Posted by Funkycorm

No one outside of the top 10 prospects (I will be nice and say 15 for this roster because of international prospects) should have an A potential. No one outside of the top 100 should have a B (of any level 80-89) and half of those B's should be less than 85. The remaining 700 or so should have a C potential.

What about guys who blow past their expectations? As a Mets fan, Mike Piazza was drafted in the 62nd round by the Dodgers way back in 1988. Also in the 2000's they had Lastings Milledge who was widely regarded as a "A - Potential." He performed like a low c-type though.

My memories foggy on this but. How does this game handle boom/bust players in this game? I realize the roster editors can only do so much (Editing potential).

Madden 21 has a feature in franchise mode where you can increase a players "Potential" by putting up certain stats for one game. I think its random though which players it chooses to potentially upgrade.

[Funkycorm]

Quote: Originally Posted by imreal

What about guys who blow past their expectations? As a Mets fan, Mike Piazza was drafted in the 62nd round by the Dodgers way back in 1988. Also in the 2000's they had Lastings Milledge who was widely regarded as a "A - Potential." He performed like a low c-type though. My memories foggy on this but. How does this game handle boom/bust players in this game? I realize the roster editors can only do so much (Editing potential). Madden 21 has a feature in franchise mode where you can increase a players "Potential" by putting up certain stats for one game. I think its random though which players it chooses to potentially upgrade.

There are undoubtedly exceptions to the rule.

The main thing here though is that we have 93 man limits on our rosters. We don't have an organization of 200 players where you get that diamond in the rough. With the few exceptions there are, you could pick one or two low grade players and give them A potential. I personally don't.

In real baseball, there are more than 10 A potential prospects but in the game it becomes dicey. We have to work with what we are given.

There are kind of busts in the game. Some players just grow slower and this is what you could consider a bust.

Players can play above thier potential and their ratings in a year then regress to the mean.

My reasons for editing potential are many.

I took the default roster and changed almost a thousand potentials and 6 years in by simming so far (going for 10) the issues that plague the FM roster are gone. All by just touching potentials and editing draft picks. No 80+ players in free agency in February and no overload of high overalls at positions are 2 examples. Roster balance is better. The 93 players also helps.

The other issue is what we as players view as an average player rating. I have said it before but will mention it again. If I asked 10 players what the average player rating was, most would tell me 81-84, right?

What if I told you based on what the devs said was an average attribute rating for most attributes (some exceptions apply and why it is a range) that the average is 75-77.

Big discrepancy right?

The player base in most sports games see any overall less than 80 as horrible and not a contributor in any way but according to the above, the average is 77.

Which in turn tells us that a bulk of the potentials in the game should be a C.

Sorry I went on a ramble and probably answered your question. Maybe...

[mlbtheshowgamer]

does ridin also know we can’t download rosters?

[sharkdaballer]

Quote: Originally Posted by Funkycorm

There are undoubtedly exceptions to the rule. The main thing here though is that we have 93 man limits on our rosters. We don't have an organization of 200 players where you get that diamond in the rough. With the few exceptions there are, you could pick one or two low grade players and give them A potential. I personally don't. In real baseball, there are more than 10 A potential prospects but in the game it becomes dicey. We have to work with what we are given. There are kind of busts in the game. Some players just grow slower and this is what you could consider a bust. Players can play above thier potential and their ratings in a year then regress to the mean. My reasons for editing potential are many. I took the default roster and changed almost a thousand potentials and 6 years in by simming so far (going for 10) the issues that plague the FM roster are gone. All by just touching potentials and editing draft picks. No 80+ players in free agency in February and no overload of high overalls at positions are 2 examples. Roster balance is better. The 93 players also helps. The other issue is what we as players view as an average player rating. I have said it before but will mention it again. If I asked 10 players what the average player rating was, most would tell me 81-84, right? What if I told you based on what the devs said was an average attribute rating for most attributes (some exceptions apply and why it is a range) that the average is 75-77. Big discrepancy right? The player base in most sports games see any overall less than 80 as horrible and not a contributor in any way but according to the above, the average is 77. Which in turn tells us that a bulk of the potentials in the game should be a C. Sorry I went on a ramble and probably answered your question. Maybe...

How'd you edit potential?

[Funkycorm]

Quote: Originally Posted by sharkdaballer

How'd you edit potential?

Had a nice answer written and it didn't save. Ughh.

All 450 fake A ball players were made D potential, max of 68, and overall changed to under 70 so they would never contribute.

I had to adjust for morale because that no longer has any impact on ratings.

Assuming 74-77 is the average. This would equate to a prospect grade based on MLB.com of 50. Individual tools also held weight and the potential was adjusted for that as well.

Then essentially extrapolate up from there based on 55, 60, 65, etc.

The top 10 prospects had a few extra points added to their potential to separate them as the future stars of the game.

Any prospect at potential of 80 or more had 2 points added to their potential to account for morale removed. All prospects with potential of 73-78 were upped by 1. I didn't touch 79 potential so it would not change the grade.

There is more to it. That is just a quick glimpse of my process. I have a process for young MLB players but that is for another day.

[knucklecutter]

Kinda wish the second version coming in June wasn't so far away, but that's just me talking out loud. Looking forward to using them in this years game. It's nice to have transparency on what and when to expect...

[lemarflacco]

Quote: Originally Posted by mlbtheshowgamer

does ridin also know we can’t download rosters?

Yea they mentioned it in the stream and they said sds is aware and that they’d fix it.

Inagine if they didnt tho? Who remembers nccaa football where you to had to purchase the memory cards with the rosters on them lmao

[eric7064]

Quote: Originally Posted by Funkycorm

I will chime in here. The top 30 prospects per team in the roster is a mixed bag. On one hand, it creates more realism for the user, on another, it creates more high end overalls down the road because potentials have always been inflated in this roster as well as the default the last 2 years. I give the FM team full props for their player creation, getting players in, rating players (outside of potential), equipment, international players and everything else I may have missed. But... all that becomes moot because of the potentials. Unless if they really truly reworked potential ratings in this roster, it will suffer from the same long term issues it has every other year. As an example, Indians pitching prospect Ethan Hankins has an overall scout grade of 50, with a plus grade of 60 for his fastball and 55 for his changeup. What would you give him potential wise? In the past, the FM roster had him at 90. Way too inflated for a just inside the top 10 prospect for the Indians. He is not in the 60-65 grade range. Even more when you consider that a plus fastball is averaged at 93mph. Again I am extrapolating back a bit because they haven't released yet and because of no minor leagues last year. And I see their dilemma. The FM team know that everyone wants their favorite prospect to be a future hall of famer even though they are the 20th ranked prospect in their organization who has a scout grade of 45 and is below average because the user shares some attachment to them. I see it. I get it. The problem is all of these prospects will likely end up with B potential grades which is way too inflated. No one outside of the top 10 prospects (I will be nice and say 15 for this roster because of international prospects) should have an A potential. No one outside of the top 100 should have a B (of any level 80-89) and half of those B's should be less than 85. The remaining 700 or so should have a C potential. The 93 man rosters and inflated draft classes in the game, make it worse as well. That has to be taken into account here. I am sure people are getting tired of me repeating this so I will stop here. Either way, I am curious to get my hands on it to run some tests.

Agreed. By the time you get 6-7 years in, nobody has anybody in their rotation under a 80. Same for the most part with lineup.

I disagree a bit on the top 10 list being the only A's.

Many 18-19 year olds arent atop the prospect lists because they have not shown much. Jasson Dominguez is #28 on MLB.COM with 60+ scouting grades in nearly everything.