For those franchise users who missed this regarding progression/regression

[tessl]

https://youtu.be/ZkuSLCJCDSk?t=1043

17:20 of the video.


"There is a range of prime ages and a die roll determines the trajectory. Some players fall quicker than others. Performance has an impact but after the age of 31 Father time does start to creep in."


In never knew the part about a die roll which is interesting new information. What also plays an impact is potential. I've seen D potential players put up great numbers in milb and regress from day one.

I'd like to know the exact formula. Age, potential, die roll, performance.

One glitch is how they calculate progression/regression vs lhp. They calculate over the same time frame as vs rhp but don't take into account the smaller sample size. For that reason there are more dramatic changes vs lhp.

[brunopuntzjones]

I always figured there was a random element involved. I distinctly remember a franchise a few years ago where Mike Trout's ratings fell off a cliff out of nowhere and he'd sunk into the mid 70s by his early-mid 30s. I also once had a generated catcher who I picked up in a trade, rapidly developed into a stud with a 90 overall by age 22 or so, and then lost to free agency, only to see him down in the 50s just a few years later.

The thing is, I never thought it was necessarily age itself, since in the latter case the guy wasn't even in his 30s when he washed out. I had figured decline set in/accelerated when guys were around 10 years of service time, whether they hit it at 29 or 34 (even though, again, the second one was a wild exception).

[tessl]

Quote: Originally Posted by brunopuntzjones

I always figured there was a random element involved. I distinctly remember a franchise a few years ago where Mike Trout's ratings fell off a cliff out of nowhere and he'd sunk into the mid 70s by his early-mid 30s. I also once had a generated catcher who I picked up in a trade, rapidly developed into a stud with a 90 overall by age 22 or so, and then lost to free agency, only to see him down in the 50s just a few years later. The thing is, I never thought it was necessarily age itself, since in the latter case the guy wasn't even in his 30s when he washed out. I had figured decline set in/accelerated when guys were around 10 years of service time, whether they hit it at 29 or 34 (even though, again, the second one was a wild exception).

Now looking back some things make sense. I recently simmed my mlbts23 franchise to the end of 2035 and Sal Frelick at age 35 is 91 contact 97 power vs rhp. The problem is only 2 drafted players are 80 contact and 80 power which is a major problem. From 23 to 35 only 2 legit power hitters in all of mlb who were generated.

I'd say they need to take a look at the dice roll and retool it a bit.